Gigabyte Z490 XOC BIOS/Tools

[sergmann]

Who says that X5 Bios will help you when it is not even officially  released ?

have you tried last official Bios or do you need one for Extreme-OC?

 

[Falkentyne]

5 hours ago, sergmann said:

Who says that X5 Bios will help you when it is not even officially  released ?

have you tried last official Bios or do you need one for Extreme-OC?

 

A gigabyte rep told me that the 1T bug with dual rank dimms should be fixed in X5.

I was not aware that no one had it yet.

The bug is: on both 2018 (october sticker) and 2020 year (February sticker) Gskill 3200 CL14 2x16 GB Trident Z RGB (F4-3200C14-32GTZR) sticks, 1T command rate does not work at XMP on either set. (basic 3200 CL14, all auto timings).   it just boot loops and resets after repeated fails at training.  The 2020 sticks are much better clockers than the 2018 sticks at 2T.

[sergmann]

X-BIOS-Versions are for Extreme-OC and XP Support.

Have you tried the last original Version from Giga Homepage?

[Falkentyne]

20 minutes ago, sergmann said:

X-BIOS-Versions are for Extreme-OC and XP Support.

Have you tried the last original Version from Giga Homepage?

As I said I've tried every bios version that gets released or leaked.  I don't remember if I tried F3 but those old obsolete bioses didn't have working VF points.

The person who told me this bug was fixed in X5 is a Gigabyte engineer but I don't know if he's with the BIOS team.

He's the same person who sent me test bioses when I was helping gigabyte fix the very serious DVID overvoltage bugs on Z390 when switching to fixed mode (T0d and t1D from Z390 Master came from him).

Edited August 11, 2020 by Falkentyne

[Mr. Fox]

@Sparky's__Adventure and @Hicookie - thanks much. I just flashed X4 on my Aorus Master.

Do you guys, or anyone else, have any suggestions on how to control the idle voltage. On my 10900KF the BIOS has voltage set a 1.452 (Fixed) but at idle in Windows it is well above 1.600V. What am I doing wrong?

[Falkentyne]

8 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

@Sparky's__Adventure and @Hicookie - thanks much. I just flashed X4 on my Aorus Master.

Do you guys, or anyone else, have any suggestions on how to control the idle voltage. On my 10900KF the BIOS has voltage set a 1.452 (Fixed) but at idle in Windows it is well above 1.600V. What am I doing wrong?

The Great Mr Fox.

Please use "Fixed" mode, not "override" mode.

Override mode changes the VID to the override value.  This is identical to "override mode" on your Clevo laptop, oddly enough.  If AC/DC Loadline are not set to "1" (0.01 mOhm)  or a low mOhm value, that will cause vcore to rise substantially at load, even more so if LLC calibration is higher than "Standard".

Fixed mode is the "override" you were used to on Z390 desktops.  That's actually what you want to use.

[Mr. Fox]

9 minutes ago, Falkentyne said:

The Great Mr Fox.

Please use "Fixed" mode, not "override" mode.

Override mode changes the VID to the override value.  This is identical to "override mode" on your Clevo laptop, oddly enough.  If AC/DC Loadline are not set to "1" (0.01 mOhm)  or a low mOhm value, that will cause vcore to rise substantially at load, even more so if LLC calibration is higher than "Standard".

Fixed mode is the "override" you were used to on Z390 desktops.  That's actually what you want to use.

Sweet. Thanks, Brother @Falkentyne. I will investigate that further. I was about ready to send this board back to Amazon and try something different, so here's hoping I can get it under control. Great post of yours over at the Asus forums on Z390 tinkering. I was reading it around 3:00 AM trying to figure out what the heck is going wrong. It was running great and I lost my BIOS settings and now I am struggling to get the behavior back under control again at 5.5GHz. It's working perfect at 5.3, but I want my 5.5GHz "daily driver" settings back again.

How is the Asus board you're using? Their BIOS has to be better than this. Does it have the ability to disable SVID? I am not finding that option on the Gigabyte board.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[Mr. Fox]

@Falkentyne - this is with the BIOS using fixed voltage set at 1.375V. I am almost thinking the voltage values reported are wrong. Look at how low the temps are. CPU-Z shows a reasonable value similar to what I have set in the BIOS, but HWiNFO and Core Temp both show an insane value. I'd like to ignore the HWiNFO info, but I don't want to kill this CPU if the information is accurate. I am wondering if the SVID is being reported erroneously (which I would normally disable, but don't see an option for that in this BIOS). The behavior is the same with stock BIOS F3, F5 and F6b and now with X4. How could my temps be this good if the voltage was really as high as what Core Temp and HWiNFO say it is? (I seriously doubt the voltage can be that high with the temps this low.)

Here's what it shows in the BIOS.

And, here is what HWiNFO and Core Temp are telling me.

Edit: @Falkentyne - another discovery and question. It is normal for SpeedShift (not SpeedStep) to cause TurboBoost to be disabled if SpeedShift is disabled? Is that something new, or do I need to just return this motherboard and buy something different that actually functions correctly? This was my first-ever Gigabyte product and so far I'm extremely unimpressed with the firmware. I'm used to Asus and EVGA firmware, but I don't know if this nonsense I am seeing affects all Z490 or just this Aorus Master motherboard's firmware.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[Falkentyne]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

@Falkentyne - this is with the BIOS using fixed voltage set at 1.375V. I am almost thinking the voltage values reported are wrong. Look at how low the temps are. CPU-Z shows a reasonable value similar to what I have set in the BIOS, but HWiNFO and Core Temp both show an insane value. I'd like to ignore the HWiNFO info, but I don't want to kill this CPU if the information is accurate. I am wondering if the SVID is being reported erroneously (which I would normally disable, but don't see an option for that in this BIOS). The behavior is the same with stock BIOS F3, F5 and F6b and now with X4. How could my temps be this good if the voltage was really as high as what Core Temp and HWiNFO say it is? (I seriously doubt the voltage can be that high with the temps this low.)

Here's what it shows in the BIOS.

And, here is what HWiNFO and Core Temp are telling me.

Edit: @Falkentyne - another discovery and question. It is normal for SpeedShift (not SpeedStep) to cause TurboBoost to be disabled if SpeedShift is disabled? Is that something new, or do I need to just return this motherboard and buy something different that actually functions correctly? This was my first-ever Gigabyte product and so far I'm extremely unimpressed with the firmware. I'm used to Asus and EVGA firmware, but I don't know if this nonsense I am seeing affects all Z490 or just this Aorus Master motherboard's firmware.

With that board, please use HWinfo64 and use the VR VOUT field in the VRM section for accurate voltage monitoring.  This is the "die-sense" voltage that you may have heard of, and it is extremely accurate.  it is the VRM ADC controller value.

**YOU MUST** be using the most current version of hwinfo64.  Older versions will not support VR VOUT.  VR VOUT only got added because I asked Martin to add support for it, but he had some difficulty accessing the VRM.  Shamino (Asus), believe it or not, helped him get it working on a *gigabyte* board.  yeah, Ironic, I know.

The vcore you see in CPU-Z is the old typical "Super I/O" voltage reading which is always going to be above or way above what the real vcore is.

In fact, in HWInfo64, there are going to be three vcores:

1) Super I/O reading (ITE 8688E).

2) Socket MLCC reading (ITE 8792E).

3) Die-sense reading (direct from VRM) - Intersil 96269 (I think).

The die-sense reading is the reading you want to use.

Unfortunately, no other programs know about accessing the VRM directly, just hwinfo64.

------

I also do not use speedshift or speedstep.  I disable all of that stuff like you told us to do on NBR long ago.

I just disable all power saving and set a multiplier randomly.

Also, one thing I noticed on Gigabyte boards is that the "Turbo velocity boost" multiplier boost seems to be enabled by default regardless of cpu temps.  For example, at "stock" operation, the gigabyte boards will turbo to 4.9 ghz at all times, instead of it being 4.9 ghz < 70C and 4.8 ghz at 70C+.  I'm not sure if this affects the "2 core" 5.3 ghz boost however.  

Edited August 30, 2020 by Falkentyne

[Mr. Fox]

8 minutes ago, Falkentyne said:

With that board, please use HWinfo64 and use the VR VOUT field in the VRM section for accurate voltage monitoring.  This is the "die-sense" voltage that you may have heard of, and it is extremely accurate.  it is the VRM ADC controller value.

The vcore you see in CPU-Z is the old typical "Super I/O" voltage reading which is always going to be above or way above what the real vcore is.

In fact, in HWInfo64, there are going to be three vcores:

1) Super I/O reading (ITE 8688E).

2) Socket MLCC reading (ITE 8792E).

3) Die-sense reading (direct from VRM) - Intersil 96269 (I think).

The die-sense reading is the reading you want to use.

Unfortunately, no other programs know about accessing the VRM directly, just hwinfo64.

------

I also do not use speedshift or speedstep.  I disable all of that stuff like you told us to do on NBR long ago.

I just disable all power saving and set a multiplier randomly.

Also, one thing I noticed on Gigabyte boards is that the "Turbo velocity boost" multiplier boost seems to be enabled by default regardless of cpu temps.  For example, at "stock" operation, the gigabyte boards will turbo to 4.9 ghz at all times, instead of it being 4.9 ghz < 70C and 4.8 ghz at 70C+.  I'm not sure if this affects the "2 core" 5.3 ghz boost however.  

Thank you. Great info, as usual. So, what you're saying if I understand correctly, just ignore (even hide) all of the HWiNFO sensors mentioned above because they are meaningless except for  "3) Die-sense reading (direct from VRM)" is that correct?

If I disable SpeedStep my multipliers are ignored and the CPU runs at non-turbo only. Not sure if that is user error or what.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[Falkentyne]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

Thank you. Great info, as usual. So, what you're saying if I understand correctly, just ignore (even hide) all of the HWiNFO sensors mentioned above because they are meaningless except for  "3) Die-sense reading (direct from VRM)" is that correct?

If I disable SpeedStep my multipliers are ignored and the CPU runs at non-turbo only. Not sure if that is user error or what.

Well the other two vcore readings are useless.  VR VOUT (and Current IOUT and Power POUT) are the readings you want.  You also obviously need Dram, VCCSA, IO and those others.

I have no idea about your speedstep problem.  I disable speedstep on every gigabyte bios and I never had an issue like this.  I tested X4 briefly and some others.

Maybe you need to enable Turbo boost ratios manually and keep those at auto.

[Mr. Fox]

12 minutes ago, Falkentyne said:

Well the other two vcore readings are useless.  VR VOUT (and Current IOUT and Power POUT) are the readings you want.  You also obviously need Dram, VCCSA, IO and those others.

I have no idea about your speedstep problem.  I disable speedstep on every gigabyte bios and I never had an issue like this.  I tested X4 briefly and some others.

Maybe you need to enable Turbo boost ratios manually and keep those at auto.

OK, if that is how you are defeating SpeedStep that is exactly how I always do it. If I disable SpeedStep on the menu option to do so, then TurboBoost no longer functions and the CPU runs 3.7GHz regardless of what the multipliers are set at.

Edited August 30, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[Mr. Fox]

10 hours ago, Falkentyne said:

Maybe you need to enable Turbo boost ratios manually and keep those at auto.

Yeah, basically Gigabyte's firmware sucks. I am going to RMA this. I've ordered an Apex board to replace it that should arrive on Wednesday. At least with the firmware on ASUS Maximum and Rampage series and the EVGA X299 Dark motherboards all of my commands are carried out explicitly as I enter them in the firmware.

With the Gigabyte board, I essentially have to leave everything on "Auto" as far as advanced settings and pretend they do not exist, because using them causes malfunction. It makes no difference what BIOS version I use, the outcome is the same. One of the few settings that actually does what it is supposed to do is the gamer-boy multiplier field near the top of the Tweaker page. If I change anything with EIST, SpeedShift, core ratios, core ratio limits everything turns to crap and the CPU falls to 5.1GHz on all cores regardless what the multis are set to.

Anyhow, this would be a really decent motherboard if I were a gamer, but I am not. Benching is my "game" LOL. So, I did get the voltage under control again using the KISS method and ignoring all of the BIOS options I would normally use. I just set LLC to "1" and set Fixed voltage to 1.400V get what you see in the screenshot. Nothing resembles what I set in the BIOS and none of my "commands" are followed. But, it's cool, stable and doesn't fall down to 5.1GHz under load. This will do until Wednesday.

FYI - anyone using Windows 7 (I am multi-booting) and seeing the CPU stuck at 3.7GHz, use ThrottleStop to apply your BIOS settings. The "Set Multiplier" option should force the CPU to do what the BIOS is telling it to. (It sure sucks the way everything is geared for Windows 10 now. I understand why, but it doesn't make it suck any less. It is unfortunate that Windows 10 is such a pile of crap OS.)

 

 

Edited August 31, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[str8_an94baller]

On 8/30/2020 at 9:12 PM, Mr. Fox said:

Yeah, basically Gigabyte's firmware sucks. I am going to RMA this. I've ordered an Apex board to replace it that should arrive on Wednesday. At least with the firmware on ASUS Maximum and Rampage series and the EVGA X299 Dark motherboards all of my commands are carried out explicitly as I enter them in the firmware.

With the Gigabyte board, I essentially have to leave everything on "Auto" as far as advanced settings and pretend they do not exist, because using them causes malfunction. It makes no difference what BIOS version I use, the outcome is the same. One of the few settings that actually does what it is supposed to do is the gamer-boy multiplier field near the top of the Tweaker page. If I change anything with EIST, SpeedShift, core ratios, core ratio limits everything turns to crap and the CPU falls to 5.1GHz on all cores regardless what the multis are set to.

Anyhow, this would be a really decent motherboard if I were a gamer, but I am not. Benching is my "game" LOL. So, I did get the voltage under control again using the KISS method and ignoring all of the BIOS options I would normally use. I just set LLC to "1" and set Fixed voltage to 1.400V get what you see in the screenshot. Nothing resembles what I set in the BIOS and none of my "commands" are followed. But, it's cool, stable and doesn't fall down to 5.1GHz under load. This will do until Wednesday.

FYI - anyone using Windows 7 (I am multi-booting) and seeing the CPU stuck at 3.7GHz, use ThrottleStop to apply your BIOS settings. The "Set Multiplier" option should force the CPU to do what the BIOS is telling it to. (It sure sucks the way everything is geared for Windows 10 now. I understand why, but it doesn't make it suck any less. It is unfortunate that Windows 10 is such a pile of crap OS.)

 

 

anything other than apex should be called a Minimus

 

 

 

thing about that crash you experience, I suppose it has to do with the cpu internal power management?

 

If I do 5GHz on the 10900K and set any one of these: CPU temp limit, CPU current limit (amps), CPU power limit 1/2 (incl TAU time) it's fine

 

But I set 5.1GHz, with any amount of voltage, the system will immediately die if those limits are applied (not even hit/trigger)

Edited September 1, 2020 by str8_an94baller

[Mr. Fox]

@Falkentyne - Oddly enough, I didn't change anything that I can identify and now the Aorus Master has started working correctly again (not falling to 5.1GHz under load). Very weird. Makes me think there is something wrong with it, like a component that is glitching. Anyhoo, I flashed back to the stock BIOS. The Apex board should be arriving tomorrow to replace it. Here's a last hurrah for the Aorus Master.

https://hwbot.org/submission/4538181_mr._fox_cinebench___r20_core_i9_10900kf_7195_marks

https://hwbot.org/submission/4538175_mr._fox_cinebench___r15_core_i9_10900kf_2957_cb/

Profile attached for F5 BIOS in case anyone with this board wants to examine it.

F5-55-49-4300

Edited September 1, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[str8_an94baller]

On 9/1/2020 at 5:48 AM, Mr. Fox said:

@Falkentyne - Oddly enough, I didn't change anything that I can identify and now the Aorus Master has started working correctly again (not falling to 5.1GHz under load). Very weird. Makes me think there is something wrong with it, like a component that is glitching. Anyhoo, I flashed back to the stock BIOS. The Apex board should be arriving tomorrow to replace it. Here's a last hurrah for the Aorus Master.

https://hwbot.org/submission/4538181_mr._fox_cinebench___r20_core_i9_10900kf_7195_marks

https://hwbot.org/submission/4538175_mr._fox_cinebench___r15_core_i9_10900kf_2957_cb/

Profile attached for F5 BIOS in case anyone with this board wants to examine it.

F5-55-49-4300 9.3 kB · 0 downloads

curious to as why you got a 2dpc board instead of 1dpc to start with

[Mr. Fox]

On 9/3/2020 at 1:35 AM, str8_an94baller said:

curious to as why you got a 2dpc board instead of 1dpc to start with

I had a couple of 32GB 4000MHz quad channel kits from my X299 Dark that I wanted to use, but I should have known better. Wishful thinking I suppose. So, I'm living with 16GB at 4600 instead.

Edited September 6, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[str8_an94baller]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

I had a couple of 32GB 4000MHz quad channel kits from my X299 Dark that I wanted to use, but I should have known better. Wishful thinking I suppose. So, I'm living with 16GB at 4600 instead.

going to get the 4400C17 gskill kit?

[Mr. Fox]

7 minutes ago, str8_an94baller said:

going to get the 4400C17 gskill kit?

I may if I can get it in 16GB x 2. This 8GB x 2 kit is doing well for me at the moment running at 4600, but I'd like to be back at 32GB again.

Edited September 6, 2020 by Mr. Fox
fixed typo

[str8_an94baller]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

I may if I can get it in 16GB x 2. This 8GB x 2 kit is doing well for me at the moment running at 4600, but I'd like to be back at 32GB again.

I really wonder what the SP on your 10900KF is, mine is 68 and can barely clock 5.1 without overwhelming a 360mm AIO.

 

Also on M12A be careful with SA/IO voltage when loading XMP, with retail bios it pushed them to 1.58v under load.

[Mr. Fox]

16 minutes ago, str8_an94baller said:

I really wonder what the SP on your 10900KF is, mine is 68 and can barely clock 5.1 without overwhelming a 360mm AIO.

 

Also on M12A be careful with SA/IO voltage when loading XMP, with retail bios it pushed them to 1.58v under load.

I am not sure what "SP" means.

[str8_an94baller]

7 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

I am not sure what "SP" means.

silicon prediction, assus bios assigns a score depending on how low the voltage points are on the CPU's default v/f curve

[Mr. Fox]

59 minutes ago, str8_an94baller said:

silicon prediction, assus bios assigns a score depending on how low the voltage points are on the CPU's default v/f curve

Mine is 63

Edit: Seems that 63 is the norm. Yours being slightly better that the run-of-the-mill 10900K/KF.

Edited September 6, 2020 by Mr. Fox

[str8_an94baller]

3 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Mine is 63

Edit: Seems that 63 is the norm. Yours being slightly better that the run-of-the-mill 10900K/KF.

chiller doing all the work I presume?

 

 

I feel so stupid not picking up an SP104 chip back on reddit a few months back

[Mr. Fox]

4 hours ago, str8_an94baller said:

chiller doing all the work I presume?

 

 

I feel so stupid not picking up an SP104 chip back on reddit a few months back

The chiller cools this 10900KF like nobody's business. But, I don't actually need it except when I am pushing the CPU to the edge. Even running Cinebench R20 at 5.3GHz and no AVX offset and more than 1.500V the core max is around 75°C. But, I also have an exceptional cooling system without counting the chiller, so I doubt the temps would be even close to what they are if I were using a common 240/360 AIO like many people are using.