ASRock.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Technical Support > AMD Motherboards
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - AGESA 1.0.0.6
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search Search  Events   Register Register  Login Login

AGESA 1.0.0.6

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 21>
Author
Message
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2017 at 9:54pm
Awwww ...... Now you've gone and done it. Did you just use "end user" and "learning curve" in the same sentence?Embarrassed

But I believe that is hitting the nail on its head. Most Users are either plug-n-play. Then the nits that attempt to copy someones settings off a forum thread and then scratch their head and whine.

Here in what we are discussing, it has to work for both.
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 12:06am
Originally posted by TooQik TooQik wrote:

Granted this is not ideal for people who are not overly computer literate, but it does bring better RAM compatibility.


I should add. After "playing' for hours on end with two Hynix kits I ran them through the wringer finding speed and timings that played nice I (re-)(over-)wrote their SPD programming with these findings onto their SPD chips using Thaiphoon Burner with mixed success.

Now. Were the numbers I programmed in a total success? No, yet doing so did provide some not previously "discovered' by Ryzens mem training routine speeds and timings that weren't available before re-programming the SPD chip.

Though, that/those results could have been anecdotal too. YMMV
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 12:24am
Originally posted by wardog wardog wrote:

Though, that/those results could have been anecdotal too. YMMV


Clarification:

To my specific system and maybe more so the memory kits used the results may be anecdotal that is. Hence YMMV


Edited by wardog - 03 Jun 2017 at 12:31am
Back to Top
BenRichards View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 03 Jun 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BenRichards Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 1:06am
After finally getting a chance to test 2.36 on my Pro Gaming board I echo wardog's sentiments regarding the BIOS. Once flashed I was able to get 3600 (3600CL16 TridentZ kit) to post using the XMP profile, but it quickly went down hill from there. I tried all of the higher dividers with 20-20-20-2T timings, 1.45v, and 1.2v SOC with no luck. 3600 no longer posted after reverting back to default values and then loading the XMP profile. I could get 3200 to post and boot into windows but when I applied my 4GHz OC, the computer would hang on a boot code I didn't recognize. I had to flash back to 2.3 to be functional again at 4GHz 1.42v and 3200 14-14-14-1T 1.4v, 1.2SOC.
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 1:37am
Originally posted by BenRichards BenRichards wrote:

After finally getting a chance to test 2.36 on my Pro Gaming board I echo wardog's sentiments regarding the BIOS. Once flashed I was able to get 3600 (3600CL16 TridentZ kit) to post using the XMP profile, but it quickly went down hill from there. I tried all of the higher dividers with 20-20-20-2T timings, 1.45v, and 1.2v SOC with no luck. 3600 no longer posted after reverting back to default values and then loading the XMP profile. I could get 3200 to post and boot into windows but when I applied my 4GHz OC, the computer would hang on a boot code I didn't recognize. I had to flash back to 2.3 to be functional again at 4GHz 1.42v and 3200 14-14-14-1T 1.4v, 1.2SOC.


For my curiosity Ben, do you remember that error code?

And Welcome to the forum.
Back to Top
BenRichards View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 03 Jun 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BenRichards Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 2:07am
Originally posted by wardog wardog wrote:

Originally posted by BenRichards BenRichards wrote:

After finally getting a chance to test 2.36 on my Pro Gaming board I echo wardog's sentiments regarding the BIOS. Once flashed I was able to get 3600 (3600CL16 TridentZ kit) to post using the XMP profile, but it quickly went down hill from there. I tried all of the higher dividers with 20-20-20-2T timings, 1.45v, and 1.2v SOC with no luck. 3600 no longer posted after reverting back to default values and then loading the XMP profile. I could get 3200 to post and boot into windows but when I applied my 4GHz OC, the computer would hang on a boot code I didn't recognize. I had to flash back to 2.3 to be functional again at 4GHz 1.42v and 3200 14-14-14-1T 1.4v, 1.2SOC.


For my curiosity Ben, do you remember that error code?

And Welcome to the forum.

Thanks! I plan on flashing again tonight and tinkering around now that the work week is coming to an end; I'll follow up with the code. It was strange though since the board didn't try to cycle itself after a failed attempt, it was just indefinitely frozen. For the most part I would get F9 and be able to get back into the BIOS to change settings. However this required clearing CMOS and doing a reboot.
Back to Top
BenRichards View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 03 Jun 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BenRichards Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 11:28am
The codes seem to be whatever one it lands on when it freezes when initializing. So far it's been 03, 1F, and 11. I did however get 3466 stable at 14-14-14-2T with Geardown disabled, so I got that going for me at least.
Back to Top
wardog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group


Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 6447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wardog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 12:32pm
Originally posted by BenRichards BenRichards wrote:

The codes seem to be whatever one it lands on when it freezes when initializing. So far it's been 03, 1F, and 11. I did however get 3466 stable at 14-14-14-2T with Geardown disabled, so I got that going for me at least.


Yea. All three of those are mem related:
http://www.asrock.com/support/faq.asp?id=334


I started testing 1T and 2T differences but as always the Honey Do list got in the way. I'll have to find my notes/results and get back to finishing that.


Thanks for replying back. It's appreciated.





Edited by wardog - 03 Jun 2017 at 12:33pm
Back to Top
oile View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 10
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oile Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 4:09pm
Actually happy to find here someone to share my experience with!
I've gone trough a lot of phases testing 2.34 before and 2.36 after on my X370 TAICHI with my 1600 and CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 CL15-17-17 v5.30 Hynix M single. Spent A LOT of time on these bioses. Time wasted.

First times I booted at 3066 cl16 or even 3200 I was tasting the victory.

I was wrong.

2.34 noticeably had problems syncing dram timings in OC page with Dram timing configuration in AMD submenu in advanced. Manual timings couldn't even being applied correctly, it was basically trash, but let forsee some potential.

2.36 better, no sync problems. But his behaviour is "not scientific". I cannot reproduce same results everytime.

I've pleayed with almost every new settings, including CLDO_VDDP, Geardown and powerdown modes, command rates and ProcODT . Simply not getting a clear scheme.

My best case with my sticks was 3200 CL 18-18-18-38 with timings borrowed from Asus Crosshair VI timings with the help of some guys with same stick as mine who was running 3200 CL16 flawlessy on his Crosshair agesa 1.0.0.6 beta (enough said..) but that with SoC 1.2v, dram at 1.43 (1.5v in windows) so waaaay more than what was needed IMHO. 
ProcODT working better were 48ohms and 53.3 ohms but never had full stability (problems sometimes in memtest DOS, sometimes in HCI, sometimes in GSAT, sometimes powerdowns).
I have experienced too a lot of new error codes, wich found to be PCH and Memory related. Also some 00 codes at stock frequencies or OC that I know my CPU is capable of.
I have even tried to input manually every (I mean Every single!) timing totally avoiding XMP reading.

The most important facts that made me SAD :
Not only I gained pratically nothing in AIDA and Maxmemm test going from 2933 to 3200 but most importantly GENERAL PERFORMANCES OF 1.0.0.6 BETAS ARE A COMPLETE MESS. 
Take for example BATTLEFIELD 1, with 2.34-2.36 @ default 2933 there is lag everywhere. It's like data are not properly transmitted among Cpu-Ram-PCIEX (same conditions, gpu utilization down from 85-90% to 72% almost fixed WTF? ) something not right.
And it is clearly visible in Firestrike Physics score too. Not able to get over 55 fps on the physics only.

Regarding SPD, I was beginning to think about buying Thaiphoon to do the same you thought. Writing proper manual timings on a separate profile.
The point is that I don't have an Intel platform to actually verify what the sticks are capable of to be sure the custom-xmp would work properly on the best case scenario, but most importantly, based on what I've seen in these betas, It would have been simply not worth the hassle.

I'm back to stable 2.34 STRONGLY HOPING that asrock engineers have some hynix M chips and got the same feedback as mine.

If any of you here are reading this, please report to asrock engineers . Something is not right in communication between CCXs, RAM and PCIEX .  I don't know what. But I am losing performance at the exact same settings as 2.30 agesa 1.0.0.4 bios.




Edited by oile - 03 Jun 2017 at 4:11pm
Back to Top
Heuvanek View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 10 Apr 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 19
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Heuvanek Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 4:51pm
Hi guys

For the X370 Killer SLI Asrcok lunch the 2.4 bios. I tested it, he is working, but strictly no différence with 2.4 bios. While i was secretly expecting the Agesa 1.0.0.6 in this bios. (in the secret goal to make my ram works in the XMP Profile)

as you said it, the agesa make the system unstable, so do you think we will see this agesa one day or they stop working on better bios now ?


Edited by Heuvanek - 03 Jun 2017 at 4:54pm
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 21>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.