|
X370 Chipset / Memory |
Post Reply 
|
Page <12 |
| Author | ||||
wardog 
Moderator Group 
Joined: 15 Jul 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6447 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 4:59am |
|||
|
Considering I know what's happening behind the curtains just as soon as you flash 1.54 there'll be a new non-BETA production BIOS released as fast as you can say Rumpelstiltskin.
You accept the risks involved in daily flashing. Me, I'd hold on a day or three. |
||||
 |
||||
|
twf85
Newbie 
Joined: 08 Mar 2017 Location: Tucson, AZ Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 6:07am |
|||
|
Fair enough. Part of me wanted to test it to "do my part" and provide feedback, but I can't risk a dead board right now. Too much work to do..
When do you figure MS will get around to fixing the SMT/Event Timers issue that's been reported? It seems like the longer I've left Windows running, the slower programs are to load or respond.
|
||||
|
||||
|
wardog
Moderator Group
Joined: 15 Jul 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6447 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 8:41am |
|||
Teething issues aren't good. When? I don't have a clue other than to say you can bet MS is coding 24/7 at it. Same with devs of the programs that view/account for the cache discrepancies being reported to. re: chasing that elusive and magical BIOS revision AM4/Ryzen BIOSes are being updated seemingly hourly, regardless of MB manufacturer. "Ryzen' upended a lot of complacency in terms of how it's addressed  Right now isn't the best time in terms of new learning curves at the BIOS engineer level to be flashing each and every BIOS release. They too are working their fannies off addressing this and that. Look at the current situation with your board. 1.50 is the ONLY rev being offered at d/l. Were the previous rev's defective or otherwise unstable? Only two days separate 1.50 and 1.54. If I were you and needing a working computer, as Ryzen just entered "The Wild' , I'd rather hold off and pass some time doing something productive other than recovering my computer. Let the BIOS chasers be the guinea pigs until the dust settles some |
||||
|
||||
|
twf85
Newbie
Joined: 08 Mar 2017 Location: Tucson, AZ Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 9:24am |
|||
I don't know.. They've known about the issues with the Windows Search service for approximately one year now, yet they still (to my knowledge) have not fixed it: https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/b72c763e-d029-4e65-a2dc-885a5aabf643/problem-creatingrenaming-a-folder-on-a-network-share-with-win10-anniversary-update-error?forum=win10itpronetworking Also, throughout the course of researching Zen, I read numerous comments of people who said that MS waited about a year until they enabled full support for Athlon 64 back in the day. Some even suggested that the delay was intended to give Intel time to catch up. As cutthroat as AMD is making the new playing field with their RYZEN pricing.. History could be due to repeat itself here. Even if they weren't going to delay any updates to benefit Intel, they have really sh1t the bed in terms of their updates since the W10 launch. Every new update comes with a substantial risk that it will break something new. I have a maintenance script running on all the computers I look after that runs SFC and DISM weekly to attempt to mitigate update related issues. Where possible I've deferred the feature updates, but you don't get that functionality unless you have a Pro license (most low-to-mid range store-bought PCs come with Home) or want to muck about in the registry. It's a sorry state of affairs, and it is really pissing a lot of people off. TL:DR; I'm not holding my breath for an immediate fix from Microsoft, but I would be pleasantly surprised if they too felt motivated to help foster the introduction of some much needed competition into the marketplace. Motivated enough to release an update that fixes the RYZEN compatibility issues within the next 30-60 days. After all, new computers mean new licenses, so I would think they would want to help smooth things over. Only time will tell.
I updated to 1.5 when I discovered I couldn't push the RAM very far, and I liked that 1.5 would take me away from the USB-Drive based updating. I now see that ASRock has changed the verbiage on the page. It used to say something like, "If you update, and it breaks, you may need to send the board in for service." Now it's very clear. Updating is completely the responsibility of the user. Honestly, the system seems to be very stable. I appreciate the "insider" info though, it's good to know that ASRock is embracing the new platform and is working diligently to improve the performance / user experience!
|
||||
|
||||
|
wardog
Moderator Group
Joined: 15 Jul 2015 Status: Offline Points: 6447 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 10:17am |
|||
|
Agree, somewhat. The change from 32bit to 64bit was an exciting time, Wild Wild West style. Yet it did take some time, not a year, for everyone to catch up. x64 driver incompatibilities come immediately to mind. Which of course left many first x64 adopters high and dry when the device manufacturers drug their feet and took their sweet time pushing out x64 supported drivers.<cough>HP<cough>
Leaving a lot of stubborn first adopters wanting/needing x64 drivers for their printer and scanners. Me! In looking at Ryzen in terms of life span, hell, they haven't yet severed its umbilical cord from birth yet. It'll mature over time sure as the sun comes up in the east and sets in the west. Patience Grasshopper. Patience. Edited by wardog - 10 Mar 2017 at 10:19am |
||||
|
||||
|
parsec
Moderator Group
Joined: 04 May 2015 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 4996 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 10 Mar 2017 at 11:33am |
|||
Sorry, I don't follow your line of thought in the underlined above. In what way do the Ryzen board specs not show the overclock potential? This is from the Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming specifications on their information page on ASRock's website, and a link to that specifications page: Supports DDR4 3200+(OC)/2933(OC)/2667/2400/2133 ECC & non-ECC, un-buffered memory http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty%20X370%20Professional%20Gaming/index.asp#Specification Here are the specification for the X370 Taichi: http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X370%20Taichi/index.asp#Specification The Intel specs I am referring to is the maximum memory speed guaranteed to be supported by a processor. As with the Ryzen spec above, that is the maximum memory speed that does not have "(OC)" next to it. There is no difference in the format between the Ryzen memory spec, and the way it is shown in the specifications for Intel boards. Your board's manual also has the memory specifications in the format shown above: http://asrock.pc.cdn.bitgravity.com/Manual/Fatal1ty%20X370%20Professional%20Gaming.pdf Otherwise, what are you referring to? |
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
twf85
Newbie
Joined: 08 Mar 2017 Location: Tucson, AZ Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Mar 2017 at 1:02am |
|||
I was a broke teenager when all of that was going on, and was more concerned with getting laid than getting better FPS or load times  It has been interesting reading more about the history of the rivalry from the "survivors".. Seems like old wounds are all too eager to surface now that the competition is heating up again.
Well, that's embarrassing. Is that new? I don't remember that info being there at launch, and the product listing on Newegg still only shows 2667 as the max supported. Also, just below where you're referencing, there is still the table that shows the SR/DR info, and max freqs supported (2667). This is exactly the sort of conflicting information that will cause confusion. It's not letting me copy paste the table from the page, but it does say 2667 and max supported currently. I see in bullet points at the top of the page, there is now 3200+(OC). Again, I might have missed that before, but I don't think so. ASRock has been updating the info, which is great, and is probably in response to what I can only assume was numerous customer inquiries. In any case, I am glad the info is there, and now maybe people who are on the fence because of a perceived shortcoming can hop aboard the AM4/RYZEN train. I apologize if I spoke out of turn and simply did not see the info, but again, I wasn't the only person who was unsure or confused. Plenty of others were confused, and may still be, given the currently conflicting information. EDIT: This is my third try trying to post this, I thought it didn't like that I was "quoting" a non-existent user, but now I think it was because I was trying to post a table. Edited by twf85 - 11 Mar 2017 at 1:10am |
||||
|
||||
|
twf85
Newbie
Joined: 08 Mar 2017 Location: Tucson, AZ Status: Offline Points: 144 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 11 Mar 2017 at 1:18am |
|||
I'm almost positive that info was not there at launch. Here are pics from my box/manual for the board:    EDIT: Pics were hard to read, and I couldn't figure out how to resize them, so I just added links to them instead.
Edited by twf85 - 11 Mar 2017 at 1:28am |
||||
|
||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <12 |
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
twf85 wrote: