Printable View
Aye, that's what I do. 1.368 idle / 1.416 load @ 4.0 GHz on an 1100T. As long as the voltages are accurate and controlled (i.e. LLC doesn't introduce some instantaneous spike that it shouldn't), I'm curious as to why it's a bad thing. Lower voltage most of the time seems good to me. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Realy guys you don't have to believe me......... Read the white papers for intel or AMD.......Quote:
Originally Posted by NEOAethyr
LLC option is out of spec end of story. They obviously have there reasons.
Use it with caution.
I merely suggest 50% for air, obviously if your on ln2 you really have no concerns for the cpu so blast away...also even at 100% at the top end on ln2 there is still a tad droop which is good.
In the end its your chip however, fell free to blast it with 100% LLC on air ;)
a little droop is not a bad thing, no droop is bad.
Nothing wrong with not using LLC but it will be harder to get higher clocks stable without using excessive volts at least with the majority of asus boards I have used.
Take into consideration I am the one that requested these options, I am very familiar how they will effect the board or cpu ;)
Chew*, I think I am confused now, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
So 100% LLC equals on or off?
I am running Air at the moment and am curious what your trying to say. Sorry if I am cinfused, I just been reading the post from you and others and now I think i have no idea what it does now.:p:
100% equals on and then you get a nice overvoltage az load. Asus still can't develop a PWM which gives stable voltages to your CPU.:shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
Ah thanks chew.
Now I think I understand.
Nice to see these new options.
I don't really need the ocp option but it's cool to see it there.
The pwm freq I think is a really nice option.
Even if the effects aren't that great, it's very nice to have.
And better control over llc, kinda wished they had these to begin with but maybe from now on there new boards will :).
OK LLC off = lots of droop in reference to set voltageQuote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
50% llc = moderate droop in reference to set voltage
100% llc = no droop on air water + tends to overshoot/spike in reference to set voltage, possible damage to cpu.
Fine for ln2 because at ln2 voltages and load it still droops.
C4E came with it at release, likely due to my complaining about C4F.
chew*, are you saying its dangerous because it will supply a much higher voltage at load than people expect, or are you going by what the whitepapers say or your own experience with the CPU's...
I feel much more comfortable running 1.465v set idle and 1.49 load for 4.2 Ghz than having to run 1.525v+ with LLC off...but (in my situation, at these volts) it's gonna hurt the CPU? I'd like to know.
think about what its doing and then ask yourself that question.
Its sitting at 1.475 idle and then as soon as you load it it shoots to 1.525-1.55......thats a spike.
Always better for it to drop voltage a little then shoot up especially when it happens on demand and under load.
Thanks, I was thinking that's what you ment. Just need some reasurance :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
ok, 50% for me :)
Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Looks like LLC off and 4 Ghz / 1.465v for me.
I wish this board had 50% LLC, I doubt it will ever be implimented :down:
was there any other bios release this week, other than the crosshair?Quote:
Originally Posted by bingo13
Maybe its me just being dense or just a severe lack of knowledge in the subject, but why does it make a difference whether it drops or not first? Either way its still going to spike. Or am I just not understanding what your saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
Also, after all this debate, I still can't tell whats better for the M4A89GTD Pro, Enabled or Disabled.
With the LLC on full and the vcore on 1.425v with turbo enabled it peaks to around 1.54v, but with LLC on 50% I had to increase the vcore to 1.475v to get it stable and with the turbo on it peaks around 1.59v, with the turbo off it droops to 1.44v. Any thoughts on this? :shrug:
Actually, taking inspiration from the last post...Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
What about the Turbo VID and it's HUGE spike? That would happen as often or more often than the spike from LLC...
I don't use turbo so can't comment. Its all cores maxxed all the time or nothing for me.
Voltage spikes in my opinion are bad. Spike a few components vga's and cpu's with volt mods and watch them die and then you will feel the way I do about the subject.
I don't normally use turbo I just enabled it to see what difference it made. The 50% LLC certainly seems to bear out what you said Chew.
update - Sorry about the delays, feel free to lash me. :)
I am trying to get the balance of the M4 series out of qualification before the Chinese Holiday week starting on Monday. Also, still working with AMD and OCZ to clear the Revo issues in BIOS without stepping out of bounds on the PCIe bus requirements. I have two systems setup to replicate some dual mixed card issues and will respond on those shortly.
ive been trying to keep up, just spent the last hour reading though it (briefly)
for the M4A88TD-V, are there plans for LLC options other than on/off?
Hi bingo13, thanks for the latest BIOS release.
During recent overclocking attempts – using saved OC Profiles both with 1606 and 1703 BIOS – I have noticed inconsistencies when validating overclocks using Linpack. My experiences lead me to query the way the BIOS is handling saved OC Profiles. I’m not in any way an expert when it comes to BIOSes (beyond everyday setup associated with overclocking) so you’ll have to forgive any apparent ignorance.
Currently, one of my 1055T processors is running at just over 4 GHz. I believe this overclock to be stable, this owing to the fact that the PC has successfully completed several lengthy Linpack tests, notably a 38 minute run with a 3GB+ data set. Problems arise, however, when the PC is powered down for a period by way of a ‘hard off’, i.e. turning the power off at the wall socket and/or the PSU – the PC and BIOS being otherwise untouched. When the PC is rebooted it invariably fails to complete even a short, undemanding Linpack test, even though the BIOS values are displayed correctly. In order for the PC to again become stable at a given overclock, following a ‘hard-off’, it is necessary to reload the desired OC profile (overwriting the existing settings). Booting into Windows, the PC is again able to complete basic and lengthy Linpack runs. This same issue has been observed on another PC with a very similar specification.
I am reasonably confident that the problem doesn’t lie with the Linpack frontend benchmarking software as I have compared results between the two options available.
As an aside, achieving a given overclock using the 1703 BIOS, as opposed to the 1606 BIOS, required a great deal more voltage for both the CPU and CPU/NB. I take it this was intentional, perhaps in the interests of ‘improved stability’? Ultimately, I ended up going back to the 1606 BIOS. The abovementioned overclocking issue was apparent whilst using the 1703 BIOS before successfully flashing back to the 1606 BIOS.
Any insight into the problem, and advice on how I can address it, would be much appreciated.
ASUS M4A89GTD Pro/USB3; AMD Phenom II X6 1055T 125W/95W; 4GB OCZ Platinum DDR3 1600 7-7-7-24; 2 x 1TB Western Digital WD1002FAEX SATA 6Gbps Caviar Black, RAID 0; 1TB Samsung F3 HD103SJ; Lite-On iHAS124; Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD; Noctua NH-D14; 1 x Arctic F12 PWM, 2 x Arctic F9 PWM; 4GB Corsair Flash Voyager GT (ReadyBoost); Corsair HX450; Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit.
@Oo88oO, thanks for that info ;).
I should have my mem by the end of the week or by next week.
If my system is stable, I will dump the cmos and compare them from diff types of bootup.
It won't contain all of the values, since some are stored in a custom chip on the smbus, but it will get me at lest half of them to compare with.
I'll beable to check some of this for ya when the time comes :).
If it is true, then we'll have to re-think our methodology for posting this board :\.
Either that or mod the board and add a cap to the cmos chip...
Edit:
Mem will be here next mon, IF I'm stable, then it'll take me a while to get re-situated.
I'll have the cmos comparison data by the 8th, tue I think, that's if I'm stable.
You have a different board that what I have, it's the same gen of chipset though so it's worth double checking.
I power off my psu often enough to have something like this effect me.
Bingo, Anything further on the M3A79-T Deluxe bios and its reported turbo isssues with the Phenom II X6s? The last bios update was back in October.Quote:
Originally Posted by bingo13
Thanks.
M4A89GTD PRO/USB3
Strange going on's ran for 5 weeks 1055t@4ghz then random blue screens, primed for 2 hrs ok, 4hr memtest 200% windows memtest all fine, still random bsod. It then refused to boot with anything other than 1 stick of memory in the first blue slot. This was on 1606, flashed to 1703 still the same issues, back to 1606, overnight cmos clear, 3 sets of memory team lv2000/corsair xms 3 1600/geil 1600, would occasional boot with 2 sticks, but the random bsod. I could boot with 1 stick prime/blend with no problems.
So I am thinking cpu, pull the 1055t slip in a 5200 dual unlocked to quad and whadda you know no problem booting with any mem config, runs for a week at 11.5x287. Slip back in the 1055t today and whadda you know boots with 2 sticks no problem, currently running 14x286/ht 2295/nb2295/mem765 8-8-8-24-27-1t on aqua@home
What gives with this board?
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...eluxe-3702.zip
M4A79 Deluxe - 3702
Any changelog?
[ 3702 ]Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesrb
----------------------
Support new CPUs. Please refer to our website at: http://support.asus.com/cpusupport/cpusupport.aspx
No newer RAID Option ROM :(
looks like 3706 might be on the horizon too yippee
Found another not fixed bug on M4A89GTD PRO/USB3: with bios 1703, as with all other, Primary Video Controller option doesn't work at all, videocard in lower pci-e slot is always Primary...
Was having the upper slot as the primary ever a design choice for this board? I thought the bottom slot was always supposed to be the primary...Quote:
Originally Posted by -Px-
I can confirm though that the mixed board arrangement (ATI & Nvidia) does not work with ATI in the primary and Nvidia in the secondary. The board ignores the Nvidia card as before.
Then for what reasons "Primary Video Controller" option was added to BIOS?Quote:
Originally Posted by taz2
I had the same happen when I had the HD5750/8800GT-physx combo. No matter what I tried, the bios/cpu-z and windows, read the 8800 as if it were my primary/gpu-0.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Px-
Has anyone tried upping cpu-vdda to compensate for the vcore increase that you'de need to go from 100% llc to 50% llc?
The idea, increase vdda so you don't have to increase vcore.
Then you can use 50% llc and prevent spikes (less fluctuation overall).
I just noticed that decreasing vdda to 2.2v, I failed prime and had some issues in opera that I attribute to a low vcore, even though it's the same level that just pased 14hrs of it.
So I increases to 2.3v, and all seems well.
I'm thinking, instead of running another 12hrs run at vdda 2.3v, I should be focusing on decreasing the vcore back to it's min (which isn't to far...) and increasing the vdda to compensate for the loss of 100% llc.
Gaining back my lower vcore advantage that I had with 100% llc.
Sound feasible?
I'm gonna try in 10mins...
Edit:
Tried, I'll mess with it more later, maybe with more vdda I can go down a step or 2 in vcore but it needs more testing.
So far notta, only diff is the cpu is slightly faster (after 2.675v the speed diff dropped).
Same goes for the nb 1.8v voltage, so far increasing it a notch hasn't allowed me to lower the nb voltage or keep the pcie bus stable (which upping the nb voltage one step is doing so far).
I know this probably isn't the right thread to ask but, what's the vddr voltage setting that's around 1.2v stock?
Where does it go to?
And am I right to "assume" :\ that the chipset nb 1.8v setting is a pll voltage setting thing ?, just like vdda is to the vcore...
Forgive me but I don't wanna take out my board and use a resistance meter with a 2nd pc running to map out stuff...
did any1 test 1102 for the m4a89td pro, any chance that it fixes the ram clocking with micron kits
I've got a set of ballistix 1600 C8 here, would you like me to test them?Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
I've got the Pro/USB3 board, but I'm on bios 1101.
I really dont feel comfortable pushing 2.2-2.3v through my 1100T after what chew* has said about Thuban and memory voltage. :confused:
what did chew say, i run 1.8-1.9 but my kit dose nit like volts as much as the gtr as i have gts. i just knew that they did not clock well and i want to make sure i run a board that will clock them properly before i try and rma as i currently cannot go over about 1530mhz and be stable but back on 775 i could get over 2ghz with cas7 and i think it was also with pl7 or 8 (im not sure it was a few years ago now)Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
anyways is the bios stable.
My sticks are GTS, I've also got a kit with a bad stick from chew that doesn't like to go over 1.8 or it errors in memtest (subsequently BSOD's). ...so I've got 4 GTS sticks here and that's why I offered to help. We run similar boards, and I'm running a bios dated from December.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
GTS take 1.8-2.3 fine imo, GTR likes 2.0-2.4 to get results.
chew said Thuban IMC gets screwy close to 1.8 I believe, he didnt want to run sticks above 1.7. I'd be happy to throw in the 965 or 565 with the good set and attempt to overclock them, I know I had 1M at 7-6-6 the first day I played with DDR3 when him, simon, and chispy donated me some things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesrb
Its too old to be anything important. The date of the bios was 08/2010 (wonder why it took so long to get it up)
Hope there will be something new soon, something with the fixes / tweaks that bingo13 promised us years... um I mean month ago :yepp:
I understand it's a different model but fundamentally the same. As far as I know from what chew stated in the "Best ram for AMD" thread, the 2x2 GB (dual sided) D9 sticks dont clock as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
thats some rather good clocks compaired to what i can pull. and the td pro and td pro usb3 are the same boards the usb3 just has the extra chip plugged in, they also had the same bios checksums in the past and numbers so i assumed the same bios.
i updated and still get no clocks and crashes/no boot if i try so time to rma the ram (and not feel bad about it since i did not over volt it, and it was alot of money)
Well, let me hunt up chew*'s thoughts on dual sided D9 modules...it's gonna take a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by zanzabar
with the new bios i can clock them in single channel (and surprisingly not raising the timings but uping the clocks from 1:3 to 1:4 gave the same aida results even though i changed to single channel mode.)
so right now im doing 1644 with 1.825V on the ram and 7-7-7-18-30 1T (what they are rated for +44mhz)
1 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by chew*
The cpu-nb llc, are there any oddities with using a 100% value for that?
Obviously there are issues with 100% on the cpu, but I'm wondering if it has a negative effect on the cpu-nb as well.
So far I haven't need any extra voltage on my cpu-nb at all going from 100% to 50%.
But I still haven't went back and checked to see if I can lower the voltage.
I'm curious to know if using a 100% llc setting for cpu-nb will help anything or just make things worse.
I should probably stick with 50% anyways since I don't seem to need the 100%.
I guess it depends on if it lowers the req's for the voltage a shiz load like the cpu llc setting does.
Rather not mess with it if it's gonna cause probs like the 100% llc on the cpu.
I have half a mind to think that the 100% llc cpu setting was killing my stability...
That and the bad ram didn't help either that's for sure.
It's nice to have a system that seems reliable :).
Perhaps asus can add a 35% and 75% setting...
Something a bit better that still doesn't have the wider fluctuations/spikes.
double post, sorry...
I was priming the other day for a 24/7 safe config.
I got above 44hrs of prime, not exactly sure how close to 48hrs, I just know I was passed 44hrs.
The pc just hard locked out of the blue.
I have a suspicion that I got a cpu-nb voltage spike and I was wondering if anyone has noticed any voltage fluctuation/spiking issues on the cpu-nb.
The same hardlock happens if I go past 1.4v on the cpu-nb, noticed this when testing for 3250mhz.
I am able to get 3.1ghz stable on the cpu-nb but I can't get the mem to clock much past 2040mhz so it's pointless.
When I was testing the cpu-nb limits I was getting the exact same hardlocks.
I have this fealing that if I goto use my system as is from now on, non stop, that once every 2-3 days it'll hardlock out of the blue for no reason.
I suppose all the BIOS's will need updating now for the Phenom 975BE.
Any recent M498TD EVO BIOS love? I sure would like to see some further adjustability to compensate for vdroop.
So no EFI bios for CHIV ?
The Sound Blaster X-Fi Utility needs updating too , since it contains bugs . (last update 5/11/2009)
IMHO we won't see any major (and minor?) update for CHIV. It was a fairly big disappointment for me. I'll drop this mobo as soon as any decent MSI AM3+ mobo become available.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrimInalA
Why do you think that we won't see any major and / or minor BIOS updates for our Crosshair IV Formula in future?
That pessimistic point of view (not only on CIVF) came from simple conclusions: two month after SB release we don't see any updates, this and next one or two month will be spend on upcoming Bulldozer mobos, and june/july/august is Ivy Bridge time. And very sarcastic pessimist also remembers about Llano in Q2...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonzo
Sad but true ...
I officially feel screwed over by ASUS bios wise.
Two months ago we get Beta BIOS'es for two boards with promises most boards will be updated, and these BIOS'es are called "release candidates". Fast forward those two months, were here now, and no updates on both USA/Global websites of BIOS'es, no response from Gary.
I understand the P67 fiasco, but we seriously can't turn a release candidate BIOS into a released BIOS in a two month span?
and this is why I won't be buying another Asus board.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
but from other side, example C4E shocked me in OC...and maybe the ebst AMD board for 2000 MHz RAM stable.
Last ASUS board I buy.
Hmm, that's sorta harsh.
I would like a new bios for my board, but it's solid as is except for a few minor things.
Yeh, Ive found no reason to turn my back on them...customers can't always get everything they want.
If the 1304 is the last release - the CIVF is the last Asus for me, too :(
I dunno, this Asus CHIV has been a great board, OCing etc. RAM is easier to tweak and the CPU OCing is better then on any board I own. I don't feel let down at all.
"Tropicana better bring me an orange juice update or I won't buy tropicana anymore...it tastes perfect but I think the the orange juice should be 0.001% denser."Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
Little tiny tweaks are all that would be needed on these boards, if that. I'm happy even though I'd like an update for the sake of my ram compatibility.
anyone want to explain to me why the M4A79 got a bios in 2011, but the ddr3 version the M4A79T has been neglected
that's a pretty bad analogy, and waiting 3-5 months for trivial bugs to be fixed is awkward not to mention the price of the boards being around 200$ make it even more frustrating to receive this level of support.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
don't get me wrong I understand they need to put some time towards fixing up the sandyvag boards and other toys they release, but the sub par level of dedication they show towards somewhat older highend boards is really quite sad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
more than 1000 MHz stable OC ;), its not good reason? Look to my last thread. I tested the same piece of my 1100T BE on this board and big diference:up:
This would make any car analogy look good.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Who cares if you can't stabilize the CPU voltages to acceptable level?:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
At XS most of all ,-)....And 1.488V is not so high...
There is no "2011" bios for the M4A79 either ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
The one they released this year is an old one from 08/2010, so it seems to be the AM2+ version of the bios they released for the M4A79T on 09/2010.
yes there is, check the ftp site.Quote:
Originally Posted by diddi35
3702
it was released 2nd half of january
No there isn't :PQuote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
They might have uploaded that bios this year, but its from 2010! ;)
http://www.abload.de/img/clipboard012o6i.jpg
as you can see 3702 isn't newer than the latest bios for the M4A79T
Is there something wrong with the bios?Quote:
Originally Posted by diddi35
If there is nothing major needed for it, then why waste resources on it.:shrug:
Maybe to keep the promises that bingo13 made for almost 9 month already?Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
The changes for voltage stabilization etc?
At least he could just say that they won't keep what they've promised instead of telling us again and again that there will be something very soon ;)
But maybe they really just wait until they can say
"Sorry that board is too old, we won't support it anymore" :shrug:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
WTF?:confused:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
just because it says august doesn't somebody didn't edit it in 2011Quote:
Originally Posted by diddi35
and since it was released in 2011 it is a 2011 BIOS
I believe those dates are dates the BIOS was validated(?), maybe it is an early beta or something that hasn't been validated since. For example the most recent BIOS for the M4A89TD Pro/USB is 1101 released sometime in January this year and dated December in CPU-Z :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
Oh, u mean this overvoltage....Its not good, but still is not so horrible for me, 1.488V BIOS and idle, load about 1.512V. With good cooling is not a problem for temps.
yes, but in fact it is the "same" bios that the M4A79T already got in 09/2010, it just took them longer to release it for the M4A79.Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
The M4A79 didn't have a bios in 09/2010 and the previous one was released in 06/2010.
Both are still waiting for the bios that fixes some issues with Thuban and give more voltage stability
if you think voltage stability with thuban is bad, plop an athlon 2 X2 in the and see a .06-.1 over volt compared to a .03-.04 on thubanQuote:
Originally Posted by diddi35
I never said that the voltage stabilization that bingo13 promised are thuban related only. I know very well that the M4A79 / M4A79T boards have issues with all cpu types ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by stangracin3
if they fix one, it should atleast help the othersQuote:
Originally Posted by diddi35
once you hit 1.5+ volts with an Athlon II its voltage gets shoved up its ass
I don't have any big issues with the ch4 bios, other then...
Aida64 still says my cpu cache ecc is disabled.
I have to sit down and look for myself to see if it's still disabled or not (it's either pci reg's or msr's, I'll figuer it out).
If it is disabled still, then the bios settings for cpu ecc don't work.
That's the only thing that concerns me now.
The board does ok as is otherwise.
4ghz+ is enough for now...
I still have my issues though.
Mem got replaced, most stability probs are now gone.
Board 99% of the time doesn't pass s&m's memtest though (got it to pass once since I got the new mem).
I still need to take the board out, redo the tim for the chipsets correctly this time instead of just squirting some on top of the old stuff.
Hopefully that will do the trick.
I don't have any major probs, I can game, download, etc.
But I definitely need to figure out what the s&m prob is caused from :\.
It's not as near as a problem as it used to be lol :).
It still bums me out though, so I downclocked everything after a 48hr prime run at 4ghz.
Apparently prime isn't everything :\.
Well it crashed around 45hrs in the taskmgr, it probably ran more then 48hrs... (old prime, 6 instances at 4096k fft's)
Still 48hrs to see a prob when I can run s&m for a few secs and see the same, well lol... :rolleyes:
I just gotta figuer it out sooner or later, if I can't then rma the board before the time is up... oh crap, how long have I had this thing now...
Anyways I have no probs with asus, they update bios's just as much as any other brand :).
you trying to kill the board?Quote:
Originally Posted by NEOAethyr
Motherboard companies don't design them for people to prime for more than ~6 hours. Hell when we were on DDR2 board with AM2+(and the original phenom) 2 hours of prime could blow a mosfet
Well it better run 48hrs lol :D.
I would do at least an 8hr or 12hr run though.
That's just me though I guess.
I wish I had my dual chan 280 run pic still... (this was poor old me trying to get a toaster sig with my os not supporting 3dmark 01 :( )
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/4...5x8p2dc.th.png
That was a laid back setting..., incase of overheating... :rolleyes: (that and my 22a psu couldn't handle both oc'ing the vga card and the cpu at the same time without dropping a drive or fan to doit)
But yeah I expect 48hrs lol...
I pay $200 for a board it better run 48hrs of prime :up:.
Just checked Asus's FTP site, and theres a new C4F bios available!
0312, released on 03/15/11...
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...ir_IV_Formula/
It's way past my bedtime, but I DL'd it...
I'll be sure to do some testing tommorow night! :up:
Nice find Dave, I will check it out later today. Been at work since 5am setting up PCs. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Daveburt714
Nice, it's labled 3012 btw...
It's not listed on the support page yet though so I don't know the changes, wish I did.
I'm gonna flash it in a min...
Edit:
It'll del all your cmos saves so write down your voltage settings and your mem timings if you need to.
The dram interleaving setting was dumbed down, not sure if that was for the best or not because there was one value that was way better then the rest previously...
Might be fine...
ECC settings were dumbed down, you can only mess with the dram ecc now and nothing else, I don't like that one but the other ecc values didn't work before anyways :|.
That one was a bad trade off but hey if it didn't work before then ohwell for the "sec" :\...
However...
Cpu ecc is now working, l1, l2 and l3 cache ecc's are now working...
Or at least aida64 is saying so...
It wasn't like that in the previous bios.
Seems they fixed the cpu ecc support, but it's no longer adjustable.
If there was one more bios to show up after this, I would ask for that support back along with it working like it is now please (just incase) :).
Under the cpu config page there was a new option.
CPB mode I think it was, not sure.
Core performance boost I think...
Also the module version on that same page said OrichiPI..., I don't remember that being there...
I'm not sure if the logo thing was fixed.
Don't care though either lol.
Numlock is always on by default, I don't like that...
Amd raid rom is the same, but whatever.
I have to find out what my cpu and cpu-nb voltages were and my mem timings, along with what I needed to get higher pcie speeds stable just so I can set them up, I'll leave the pcie speed alone for now anyways but I want the voltage right...
And set my nb and ht bus speeds up to 3ghz.
And my mem to 2ghz.
Then bench, I hope it's better, I'll be checking it at 3.25ghz cpu so I won't know for absolute sure if it's better though.
Should be neat to have my ecc working for my cpu lol.
And this bios might be tuned a bit for bandwith for the avg user(dram interleaving value) and it might have alot more then that too...
Thats funny, I see a bios for several boards also labeled 3012 and released the 15th. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by NEOAethyr
M4A89GTD Pro/USB3
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...-ASUS-3012.zip
M4A89TD Pro/USB3
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...-ASUS-3012.zip
Crosshair IV Formula
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...-ASUS-3012.zip
Yeah. :)
I think the bios date on the ch4f was 03/14/11, that's what the internal bios flasher said if I remember correct.
Yesterday :).
Edit:
Forgot to mention tRC min is now 12t instead of 11t.
I forgot my cpu voltage lol.
And my pcie voltage and whatever the other one was.
Maybe I posted my recent's sometime here on the forum I don't know (edit: crap I didn't).
So don't go make the same mistake I made hehe.
Write down your more important hard to remember settings.
Mem read speed bench in aida64 seems higher, not 100% sure though since I'm benching at some of my timings on auto and cpu at 3.25ghz (put mem back to 2ghz and nb/ht to 3ghz).
But it's saying well over 12k, I thaught it had a hard time reaching much above that before...
I could be thinking of 14/15k though.
I should of benched it before I flashed lol.
What´s new in this bios version?Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
M4A89GTD Pro/USB3
ftp://ftp.asus.com.tw/pub/ASUS/mb/so...-ASUS-3012.zip
;) Maybe this is the AM3+ supported bios releases....
You can't put AM3+ CPU into an AM3 socket because AM3+ packaged CPUs have one more pin.Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
So an AM3+ supported BIOS would be useless.
I am just saying, that is, if this is true here...Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
It would be nice to know my CHIV would have entended life;)
heres wishing so!!!!!!!
We just need JF AMD to come and pee on our dreams lol ;)
:):):)
Interesting :)Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
That site have a pretty good relationship with Asus, so could very well be true..
So I guess BD simply has no pin in the location that would make it not fit in a AM3 socket, no one never really thought of that I guess :)
It's probably to update the CPU support for the 975BE, anyway thanks for the heads up I'll try it later.
Cant you look for cpu name strings in it? Is the BIOS encrypted?
There's no CPU Patch microcode like in the previous bios (maybe it's somewhere else). The date is 14.03 (yesterday). I'm not a bios expert/modder, so I can't say much more.
Phenom II-720
Phenom II-740
Phenom II-910
Phenom II-925
Phenom II-945
Phenom II-955
Phenom II-965
Phenom II-1055T
Phenom II-1075T
Phenom II-1090T
Phenom II-3.1G
Phenom II-3.2G
Phenom II-3.3G
Phenom II-3.4G
Phenom II-3.5G
Phenom II-3.6G
Phenom II-3.7G
Phenom II-3.8G
Phenom II-3.9G
Same as before.
thank you - so, no buldozer yet
poo! :) - Ah well
Please let us know if anyone finds a change log for the new CHIV BIOS. Wonder if they've sorted the annoying power up bug which causes gfx card fans to spin up to full power (really annoying now I have CFX :( )
After the quick look the only new option I see in bios is Advanced -> CPU Configuration -> CPB Mode (Auto/Disabled). However I've not updated yet.
CPB mode appears to be a core performance boost, it throttles the multi and voltage of idle cores on X6 CPU's, it drops the cores to 800mhz and lower voltage a sort of power saving feature I suppose, that's as far as I have got so far I'm probably wrong lol, no notable difference in performance so far.