|
X370 Taichi with Beta L4.64 |
Post Reply 
|
Page 123> |
| Author | |
Xaltar 
Moderator Group 
Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25028 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: X370 Taichi with Beta L4.64Posted: 23 May 2018 at 10:59pm |
|
So I finally decided it was time to update my BIOS. I have held off because my system has been running stable but my curiosity finally got the better of me.
My RAM is now clocked to 3466 stable at CL18 with no more effort put in than enabling XMP and setting it from 3600 to 3466. Everything seems stable so far and has passed all my stress tests etc so after a few more days of testing I will get into the overclocking side of things and see how far I can push the CPU on this BIOS as well as my RAM. Any Taichi owners wondering if the Beta is any good, it seems to be the most stable version I have tested, even allowing higher RAM speeds than previous versions on my Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3600 kit. RAM: CMKGX4M2B3600C18R (R denotes Red for the color, it is identical to modules of the same number ending in other letters) GPU: Gigabyte GTX 960 G1 Gaming 2gb CPU: Ryzen 1600x That should be all the hardware that can make a difference to stability. My drives are all SATA and none of my M.2 slots are populated presently. I will update once I have done more testing and overclocking
 Edited by Xaltar - 23 May 2018 at 11:06pm |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Xaltar
Moderator Group
Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25028 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 May 2018 at 11:22pm |
|
One thing worth noting, my CPU temps in UEFI report as 65.5c, this is clearly an error as I am running an 240mm AIO that keeps my system below 60c even under full load with P95 at stock settings.
My idle temps in OS are sub 30c so it isn't anything to be concerned about. The UEFI usually shows higher than idle temps, typically in my case around 50c which I would consider normal due to the load the UEFI puts on the CPU. 65.5c however can't be accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kerberos_20
Senior Member 
Joined: 06 Dec 2017 Location: czech republic Status: Offline Points: 3672 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 12:15am |
|
|
|
Cuba1hr
Newbie 
Joined: 24 May 2018 Location: Croatia Status: Offline Points: 35 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 12:59am |
|
I wouldn't agree that this 4.64 version is more stable and allowing higher RAM speeds than previous, at least in my case.
I am having so much trouble with Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000 (CMK16GX4M1B3000C15), Hynix, two 16GB sticks. I finally got it stable at 2933 MHz(13 days without BSOD) with my 1700X on v4.40 X370 Taichi. So I saw few YT reviews that new Ryzens are better with RAM so I sold my 1700X and got 2700X. THERE IS NO WAY TO MAKE IT STABLE AT 2933 - including 4.60, 4.70 or 4.64. Constant BSODs with MEMORY_MANAGEMENT most of the time. Even tried it with exact same settings that worked on v 4.40. Ryzen DRAM Calculator - useless in my case. Even with looser timings 16-18-18-38 or 18-20-20-40...and other settings that I won't write all here now. The new CPU was cheaper than 32GB kit of QVL RAM is now, I am not sure even if there is 16GB module faster than 3200MHz at the moment, they are all dual rank. Currently I am running at 2800MHz with 14-16-16-34 DRAMV 1.37V, SOC LLC 3, stable for two days now. Usually I get BSOD after 3 days on 2933, interesting always on work days, at 1-2 or 4 A.M., never on weekends and during the day (not counting AIDA memory stability test for an hour or more if able, because usually I get BSOD within 5 minutes during test). Last time it ran for 100 minutes OK, thought I got settings right, moved cursor and got BSOD, so frustrating. Fighting with this RAM over an year now. |
|
|
|
|
Xaltar
Moderator Group
Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25028 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 5:56am |
|
Kerberos, thanks, I will check with Aida64 after some more testing
Cuba1hr, sadly that seems to be the trend with AM4, it is extremely dependent on hardware configurations. Something as simple as different RAM chips can make a huge difference. My kit is Samsung B die. If my tests follow the same pattern as Kerberos then I may not be as lucky as it seems, those scores are worse than my kit ran at 2800 on the launch BIOS my board came with. I have only updated my BIOS about 12 hours ago, much testing still to do. I can say that it is more stable (without needing to tweak the UEFI first) than the 3.0 version I was running. I needed to alter quite a few settings with that to get my RAM stable at 3200 and the rest of my system bug free. 4.64 appears to contain the newest AGESA available for the Taichi. I decided to give it a go and see where I land with my config. Still have a lot of fine tuning to do and then I will get onto benchmarks etc to compare to my previous settings/BIOS version. If I find any interesting workarounds/fixes I will post them here. Sadly it does look like AMD have left us in the cold with the 4xx chipsets being an improvement over 3xx and no real improvements to be had with newer UEFI/AGESA versions. I guess they need to sell the new boards/chipsets. I hope I am wrong but so far, I have not seen any evidence to prove me wrong. Some reviews even show first gen Ryzen performing better and achieving higher RAM frequencies on the X470 chipset. It does at least seem RAM dependent but even if it is only a few cases, it is a little disheartening. I will have more for you all in the next few days. So far, I am not dissapointed but that all depends on my benchmark results. Out of the box stability at the cost of performance is not worth it, I would rather have to tweak things a little and have better performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinvented
Newbie
Joined: 22 Jun 2017 Status: Offline Points: 113 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 10:03am |
|
I'm still waiting for a fix for sound cut outs in BF1 and PUBG crashing when even overclocked slightly. It's becoming a bit unacceptable that Summit Ridge is getting left out from updates and what not when the newest AGESA provides vulnerability fixes and what not. According to James Prior from AMD, the AGESA's are supposed to be a unified BIOS for all 3 product lines. Really hoping they fix this soon, otherwise I might have to jump ship to another manufacturer.
|
|
|
|
|
Cuba1hr
Newbie
Joined: 24 May 2018 Location: Croatia Status: Offline Points: 35 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 3:13pm |
|
I am losing my hope in running memory at rated (mean 2933) speeds with next stable bios.
Once again, I will let it run on 2800 up to 3-4 day without BSOD and I will let you know how it goes. I haven't compared or benchmarked 2800 vs 2933, but in AIDA64 and Cinebench. I have to see what is gain/loss in benchmark and games. My latencies improved over the ones with 1700X, on both of those frequencies. Beta with newer AGESA push my core frequencies further than on 4.70. I also have weird numbers considering temps and fan rpm jumps, I think in both 4.70 and 4.64. For example - MBO minimum temp in HWInfo can get to 0 deg. C, CPU Package (I think, not die or tctl) over 100c (VRMs, are about up to 65), and pwm fan with about 2000rpms max is shown with rpms reach about 45000. I haven't OC my CPU yet but read about sound problems in games in few earlier versions too. And what's with the naming politics - v4.70 earlier stable, v4.64 newer beta??? Edited by Cuba1hr - 24 May 2018 at 3:16pm |
|
|
ASRock Taichi X370 UEFI v4.81; AMD Ryzen R7 2700X; Noctua NH-U12S x2 fans; Corsair Vengenace LPX 3000 2x16GB (CMK16GX4M1B3000C15); EVGA GeForce GTX1070 FTW; Corsair RM750i PSU
|
|
|
|
|
Xaltar
Moderator Group
Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25028 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 5:18pm |
|
The naming is probably (I don't know for sure) something to do with version branching. 4.64 was most likely based on 4.6 with the AGESA version updated. 4.7 was probably created along side 4.64 (at the same time).
With beta BIOS names I do know that if a version is L1.43 then it is based on P1.40. Sometimes an earlier branch was found to be more compatible with intended changes. Again, this is just my own speculation based on some rather limited understanding of software development but it does seem to fit the BIOS naming. As for overclocking, so far as all the reviews seem to be discovering, overclocking the new 2000 series CPUs is pointless. AMD's boost clock system works incredibly well and allows for much higher frequencies on 1 - 3 cores than you can achieve across all cores. This means that for gaming, you are actually far better off leaving things stock as you will get better per core performance with the boost. If you are running highly threaded productivity tasks then it is more worth overclocking but even then, the gains are not all that great, particularly at the cost of higher thermals and power consumption. In short, the new Ryzen+ CPUs are very good right out of the box, great for more casual users but a little disappointing for those of us that like to fine tune things. That said, you can still tweak all the different performance states and get more out of the system that way.....
Edited by Xaltar - 24 May 2018 at 5:24pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaltar
Moderator Group
Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 25028 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2018 at 5:31pm |
The beta includes an AGESA update. Ryzen first gen has been both a train-wreck and a resounding success. It does seem that a lot of the issues faced with Ryzen 1k are hardware rooted (chipset, IMC etc) so many of the fixes in the 400 series boards will likely never come to 300 series boards, at least, they won't work the same way. While the AGESA is meant to be common across all AM4 platforms it can't correct hardware level issues. All of us on Ryzen first gen are in the same boat. The issues are not specific to ASRock, from what I have seen all manufacturers have struggled with getting AM4 stable, some with better and some with worse success. Worse still is that which boards work best change from one BIOS update to the next. This is why I recommend that if you find a board and BIOS that works as you need, stick with it. I can only hope that we at least see a stable BIOS for every 300 series board, even if there are still quirks (RAM speeds etc). I haven't got much time today for more testing but I will be going through 4.64 over the next few weeks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andrey_Z
Newbie
Joined: 25 May 2018 Status: Offline Points: 1 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 25 May 2018 at 5:28pm |
|
Help me! I need dump BIOS X370 Gaming X.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page 123> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Reinvented wrote: