Talon

Honestly don't doubt it does, the game looks incredible. I played the closed alpha a couple days ago and damn, I was shocked at how good it looked and ran. Also I know ARL is getting a lot of hate, but I'm still going to try it. Why not. If it sucks, I still have my Z790 Apex and 14900KS to tide me over till something good comes along. Honestly still holding out hope we do eventually see an 12P core Bartlett Lake next year. Power pig delight lol.

I was super curious too. I am curious how high you could overclock the cores, if you reduced some of them, say down to 12-16P cores. You'd still have all that cache too which could be super useful for gaming. 6800 in quad channel would also be epic. https://www.provantage.com/intel-bx807132565x~7ITEP9FM.htm -- Provantage has the boxed version in stock for $1423 The "War Box" lol.

I've had a complete build in my cart before, and again recently when they dropped the "refresh" lol. I can't pull the trigger though, it won't be faster for gaming and consumes a hilarious amount of power lol. It would be hella fun, but I don't have any practical need for such a beast. I was looking at the 2595X with this board. https://www.newegg.com/asrock-w790-ws-extended-atx-intel-w790-lga-4677/p/N82E16813162113

And those are just place holders. This is the real deal price of the new Hero X870E https://www.microcenter.com/product/684468/asus-x870e-rog-crosshair-hero-amd-am5-atx-motherboard#tab-reviews-bm Absolutely stupid.

My only issue with Asrock boards is the lack of features in the BIOS. EVGA was the same way, but I found most of EVGAs menu to have exactly what you needed at the same time. Also they leave their BIOS unlocked and you can easily modify and unhide all menus in literally minutes using online tools. But I still think I'm going to go Asrock Taichi OC Formula if I pick up a Z890. The OCF boards are usually always great and if they can manage godlike DDR5 OC like they have with the Z790i Lightning at a reasonable price they'll have a winner. Asus is just getting too expensive for what they have. Will see on launch day or as it gets closer to launch. Maybe Asus will have some killer new feature with the Apex that I want.

Wow I had no idea that board could BCLK OC! They don't advertise the hyperblck engine on that board.

Yes you can use XMP if you have a non-K chip. But Non-K chips on 12th and 13th gen are VCCSA locked. I believe you're limited to .95v on VCCSA which greatly limited DDR4 OC, but not such much DDR5. 14th gen has VCCSA unlocked and full tuning available for non-K. To BCLK a 12th gen chip (only 12th gen can do this) you have to have a board with an external clock gen and it will force an earlier unlocked microcode the moment it detects you want to BCLK OC. It will like boot, then reboot the proper microcode to prevent a non-boot situation that typically happens when you attempt to push BCLK above 103Mhz or so. Honestly 12th gen BCLK is fun, taking that locked down chip to well above 5Ghz all cores is a blast and reminds me of when OC was great. I'm keeping my BCLK boards for this reason. Will eventually be able to get the chips dirt cheap and can punch them hard when they are cheap and don't care if they fry lol.

For the price you paid, it's probably going to be what you expect. Memory OC was unfortunately about what you'd expect from a 4 dimm Z690. I'd say expect to max out 2x16gb around 6400-6800MTs if lucky. If you have some 2x32gb A-Dies around, those will give you the best results easily. Dual Rank 2x32 A-Dies are the way to go with a 4 dimm board. But at the same time, I don't think I ever tested this board with a 13900K or newer with better IMC. I also didn't test with later BIOS revisions that might have improved it a tad. I'd say it probably is about where I said though. The board supported BCLK OC on non-K 12th gen, so it can be a bit of fun. I no longer have the board as I gave it away to a cousin who was still rocking a Z370 and 9900K. He is still using the board with a 13900K and is very happy.

NIce! Where did you pick the 13900KS up from?

Edit: Nevermind found your post. Good to hear they took care of it quickly. I've personally never had an issue with Asus service. Always a quick/painless RMA with them.

Intel is not going to sell their most profitable sector of their company. Qualcomm doesn't have the money to buy it anyways. Intel will sell off their fabs or other sectors long before they sold client CPU. But I do agree Intel will change, I think ultimately they will end up fabless just like AMD and Nvidia. Once that happens, the floodgates will open and silicon prices are going to skyrocket. Samsung, and GF won't be offering leading edge nodes. TSMC will be able to set whatever market price they want.

I think Intel is going to end up going the way of AMD. They're going to be forced to sell their fabs. Taiwan is giving TSMC huge government subsidies, far bigger than the US CHIPS Act that has to my knowledge delivered $0 to Intel thus far. Apparently Intel is asking for the money as they are building fabs, but the government isn't releasing it. In the end, I think Intel will sell their fabs to TSMC or other company. Intel and AMD will be using TSMC for their chips, and just imagine what CPUs will cost us then. But I guess that is what people want, everything I read is negative Intel, and almost cheerleading for their demise. I wonder how they're going to feel when their CPU is 2 or 3x more expensive than it is today.

I knew there was a bug with TimeSpy CPU. Exactly why I've given up on TimeSpy. One run will be good, next run crap. I have noticed that with 1591, the entire OS feels smoother/snappier. It could be totally placebo though.

I won't attempt to compare the two OS and I'm aware you can strip down the OS with custom ISOs to get better performance but I can't bring myself to use them for my daily rig. I tested a stripped down OS on my laptop and saw good gains in some tests. But for me, I can't use that and trust the sources. This new 24H2 does seem to be somewhat lighter weight than 23H2 which did seem to have a lot more going on in the background. Although my install was pretty old and bloated, and had gone through a couple boards (I know, I know..) Task manager shows 0-1% load at idle which is great to see.

I've been testing 24H2 ever since news of the performance uplift for AMD and some for Intel. I put it on an external USBC drive/install. No issues were noted and I picked a tad bit of performance in some apps and games. Gears 5 was the only one that showed major improvements for me so far. But overall the OS just felt snappier, smoother animations/transitions. It just felt less laggy compared to 23H2. I just installed it on my internal drive, did a long needed OS wipe this afternoon. Getting everything up and running now.

You know I have vacation in Oct for a couple weeks. I’ll be at Microcenter on launch morning lol. But honestly I’m not so sure this is going to be as great as I had hoped after seeing the leaks. My 14900KS at stock and undervolted with good dual ranked memory is almost as good or better than the result we saw. I know it’s just Geekbench and gaming could be great but meh. That won’t stop me from wanting to get one and tune for max perf.

Just downloaded it myself. With my 14900KS with latest 0x129 Microcode BIOS, default performance 253w profile, and -110mV Core and -50mV L2 it compiled without as much as a hiccup. Unfortunately too many are using the old BIOS and are either scared of a BIOS update, or think they're on the newest BIOS because they put out so many that said "Intel defaults". Intel really needs to do a better job with a public campaign that sends out emails to consumers via their retailer.

He hasn't updated his microcode. The comments on Steam show that after users updated their BIOS, the crashing stops and they can compile. Unfortunately so many don't know how or won't update their BIOS.

It's hilarious to hear people scream about Intel power consumption for their flagship high core count CPU, then you look at the latest Ryzen flagship on a cutting edge 4nm node pulling the more or less the same power and producing less FPS.

This is why I say, for most people the 4070 Super with it's paltry 12gb is more than enough. It drives my 4K 120hz OLED TV in the living room for some couch gaming and it's no slouch. The performance and efficiency of that card is unreal. The 4070 Super at $599 for the FE is the best value card of 40 series. The next closest IMO is the 4080 Super FE at $999. The 4070 vanilla isn't worth it, the 4080 OG was a joke in price, and the 4090, while stupid powerful is out of reach for many people. I say this as a day 1 4090 Strix OC owner lol. And I know I'll likely buy the next Titan or 5090 around launch even though I absolutely do not need it. Ugh the sickness. My 4070 Super FE also overclocked like crazy. I still hold the #2 spot on Steel Nomad DX12. Got knocked out by 8 points and I can't bring myself to sit down and clock it up again, maybe this winter I'll punch it hard for funzies to take back #1. https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=sw DX&cpuId=&gpuId=1614&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&showRamDisks=false&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock= https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=spy P&cpuId=&gpuId=1614&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&showRamDisks=false&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock= #7 in TS only because my CPU is hella underperforming. Otherwise I have the highest GPU score out of 100K+ results which is wild. https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=pr P&cpuId=&gpuId=1614&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&showRamDisks=false&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock= Still hold #1 Port Royal, but that is harder to cheat so less interested in it maybe? https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=sw P&cpuId=&gpuId=1614&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&showRamDisks=false&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock= #1 in Speedway

Speaking of APO, maybe you can answer this for Intel 13900HX chips. I have a Lenovo laptop with 13900HX that will not connect to APO services even with latest drivers and Intel DTT turned on in BIOS. I know XMG had to do a BIOS update to get 13th and 14th gen HX laptops working. Do you know what or why that is? Is there some service or option that must be enabled in the hidden BIOS I can enable to make it work?

Disregard! It looks to be an AMD only issue. I finally found the difference. For some reason it was only applying RTX HDR to one login and not the other and that comes with some overhead. Disabling both results in identical performance.

Oddly enough I just tested this on my Intel system and there is something here from my initial testing. I am seeing pretty large uplift in Cyberpunk 2077 Bench. I did some sanity testing and re did the tests multiple times, reboot, reset settings and they are repeatable and large uplifts with this stupid admin account. I am now testing more stuff to see if this is more than just one game, or something I've missed. But so far it's possible AMD just found more performance for Intel LOL.

Tech Yes City? More like Tech Non Senscity CPU VDD2/CPU VDD is a freaking external voltage rail that neither the CPU nor the DRAM see at all. . Also Intel does not set 1.4v, the motherboard BIOS does this based upon the memory speed and density. He is using an XMP Kit rated for 6000 CL32 in a 2x32gb DUAL RANK config. That is a very high density and high speed XMP kit for a 4x DIMM board. No wonder Asrock sets 1.4v CPU VDD2 and CPU IMC.

Personally don't trust TimeSpy CPU test at all on Windows 11. It's bugged AF for me. I get weird run to run variations in the CPU test. Sometimes a reboot completely fixes it. I'm convinced it's some sort of scheduling issue. That said, in normal TimeSpy CPU test I just ran with 0129, scored same as I did previously at 26.5K CPU with same power settings/tune as old microcode. So I don't trust his results personally.