Hi Parsec! Thanks a lot for throwing yourself into my problem, again.  I fully understand what you mean by language barriers. BUT why do they offer several languages on their support webpage anyway, if it's no good?! A*** and G******* offer German support by the way... What reaction I want? Isn't it courtesy to at least give a formal answer? On the other side a BIOS Update of course, which fixes the issues, at least the Turbo instability - reaching 5 GHz in Windows and benchmarks crashes them, with BIOS at default values! That's a major flaw! I don't know what or how long they have been testing the FX-9000 series on this board, but the second batch I have now makes no difference. Hence it becomes clear that it is a flaw in the whole series of 970 Performance. As for the AMP/XMP profile compatible AMD RAM, my concern with it is not that it doesn't work, actually it works with the right manual settings, but it does not work at Auto, which does not set anything else than I do! The reason why not much testing happens above 1600 MHz is not because of the allegedly medioce memory controller (I always use FX with 1866 or 2133), but because Intel does not support higher frequencies and AMD is not that present on the marked anymore. 1866 MHz is, however, officially supported. But enough of RAM, it works manually adjusted and became a minor matter to me. The Offset Voltage setting is automatically set by default to +50mV. To set it to 0mV manually is my only chance to confine VRM stress and temp, which most likely lead to the damage of my first board. What I ment by "not willing to experiement with unvervolting" is, whatever CPU it is, ASRock gave official support for this board and there shouldn't be user-intervention necessary, but it is. As I wrote, changing it does nothing for or against stability, but temperature. The name "Offset" speaks for itself, that it offsets the defaults. Each CPU has different Vcore values and reports the VID to the board which sets every C-state automatically right. I know of no board, that needs an offset to stabilize the given values (from AMD). About prime95/VRM/CPU power usage, as I said, BIOS is at defaults, APM is active and therefore the CPU does not overheat at full load or any state. The CPU itself is cool enough and never uses more than the specified 220W. It's about the VRM and surrounding components. Any minor voltage raise stresses the board more. I know your opinion/concern about AMD releasing such a CPU for AM3+ "without warning", but for me as a customer that isn't my problem! If a manufacturer deliberately declares a board to be FX-9000 compatible, I reckon with a proper VRM cooler onboard and usable default BIOS settings and it does not deliver what it promises, while others do! A decent CPU air-cooler like the NH-D1x is sufficient. Anyway, many users OC their CPU, deactivatie APM and so, these CPUs surely use more joice than a stock 9590. Let's make an imaginary comparison: Imagine you buy a car from ASRock, previously available with 125 hp, with a stock-tuned 220 hp engine from AMD. The cooling of the engine is difficult, but can be managed. The problems: .) gearbox overheats .) torque is lower than it should be .) and if final velocity is reached, a breakdown follows, where you have to stop and restart the car. I cannot imagine the car vendor telling the customer, this engine so overpowered, it should never have been offered to us for this chassis and it's up to you to tweak the right settings manually, enhance cooling of the gearbox in the workshop, and so on... What do you think? Do I really ask too much from ASRock here?
|