Mr. Fox

No, that is no longer present now. When I discovered the 1.435V cap I immediately went there to enable it and found it missing. The preview of the auto values in gray text is also missing. I presume because the SPD was damaged. Will know tomorrow for sure once the replacement memory arrives.

Yes, I always go into the BIOS and reset firmware defaults for everything before flashing after making sure I saved my old profile to USB in case I want to go back to the old firmware. I do not use that user-XMP thing either. I looked into it to see what is involved and it did not make any sense to me. With the ability to save complete BIOS profiles that cover everything, including things totally unrelated to overclocking, it seems more like a silly gimmick than a useful feature to me. I do set the memory XMP profile first and tune from that point, at least until I have it dialed in. Then I write down or screenshot everything and start over without using the memory XMP profile. I also start with the voltage higher than I expect and gradually go down until I get errors in testing or no boot, then go back up a bit. Not remarkably different the CPU or GPU overclocking other than all of the timings that take time to get dialed in. I got an update from UPS saying the Vengeance kit should be here for sure tomorrow, so we shall see if installing that solves the dilemma. These are what I ordered. I wanted to get them on Amazon, but delivery would have not happened until Sunday from Amazon for some reason, and the price was identical. CORSAIR Vengeance 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6400 (PC5 51200) Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX5M2X6400C38

Well, this is not the first time we saw that with the Unify-X. Remember my first one when the first mobo was brand new? I guess flashing MSI firmware is an unsually risky matter that should be avoided when possible. There was no error of any kind and the flashing process appeared to occur normally. I don't normally even consider firmware updates, but with DDR5 being new and evolving technology, the temptation exists where it normally would not.

I may do that. I will have to reinstall the original heat sinks and RGB diffusers and hope they don't have a problem with that (or hope that they not notice). Then I can sell the replacements (or hold onto them as backup parts) unless the Vengeance 6400 kit I ordered is inferior. Luumi seems to be a fan of them. I had actually ordered this kit once before and returned it unopened for a refund because I changed my mind about wasting $350+ for a potentially very modest (at best) performance improvement. Ditching the RGB crap will be a special bonus feature, LOL. I deliberated selected Vengeance versus Dominator because I do not want the RGB. (Price was about the same.) OK, that is good to know. Thank you for checking that. The erased XMP profiles, modified product name on one module, production date and other modified data that shows in AIDA64 and CPU-Z are definitely an issue and not the same on both memory sticks. That is what I originally discovered before trying to look at the SPD using Thaiphoon Burner, so there still seems to be an issue with memory firmware modification. Of course, this is subject to verification when I receive the replacement memory tomorrow. I am crossing my fingers and hoping it is not something that the flash caused to go haywire with the mobo. Yes, unfortunately. If it were not for that problem the memory would still function the same as it did before other than the information and labeling data being messed up and XMP profiles missing. But, the 1.435V limit is a huge impediment. I was running 6800 CL30 with 1.475V stable as a daily driver memory overclock and the 1.435V limit is capping me out at 6400 CL30. If I try to set anything manually higher than 1.435V is resets to Auto. The discovery of the issue was immediate after flashing. On the first boot after flashing A.60 I was greeted with an error message that said "memory has been changed" and I do not see that message after flashing. When I entered the BIOS after seeing that message to apply my custom settings is when I discovered the missing XMP profiles and 1.435V cap applied. When you look at the SPD in the BIOS, it is also different there for each memory module and the XMP info does not show in the SPD viewing it in the BIOS. In fact, you cannot find anything anywhere in the BIOS where XMP is mentioned.

Flashing was not an issue. There are no errors in flashing and it completes successfully. The problem is that BIOS vA.60 erased data from the memory SPD on both memory modules. The system boots using a DDR5 default memory profile that is part of the BIOS firmware and not using the firmware that used to be on the memory. I do not have any way of flashing a stock SPD or XMP profile onto the DDR5 sticks. I can overclock the memory and set manual timings but the voltage is limited to 1.435V which limits the overclock threshold to 6400 with some errors due to insufficient voltage. The BIOS default is 1.435V max and the memory SPD controls anything higher than that.

Yes. The motherboard has a dual BIOS. Moving the switch to the older BIOS position, the problem is the same. I also tried reflashing the new BIOS and previous BIOS twice on the BIOS switch position I use as the default and nothing changes. I am almost positive the BIOS flash corrupted the memory SPD firmware for that reason. The only other possibility is a hardware failure, and that is unlikely since everything was fine until I flashed the BIOS. I do not think doing that would affect hardware.

I just noticed that besides the data that is either erased or unreadable in the SPD that what remains doesn't even match. Hopefully will have the Vengeance DDR5-6400 modules tomorrow or Thursday. At least I am able to use the computer still. Very weird. @johnksss

Hopefully not worse memory latency than Ryzen already has. That will be interesting. Their DDR4 latency is nearly double what it is for the same generation Intel platform. If it gets any worse that will be ridiculously horrible.

The EK Quantux Velocity² is nice looking. It is made specifically for LGA-1700. I got this from Titan Rig open box for about $40 below retail. It works better than the OptimusPC Foundation block and has a MUCH higher liquid flow rate. The OptimusPC block is a lot more restrictive. Temps are close to the same, slightly better (3-5°C lower core max in Cinebench). The only downsides are the back of mobo installation and fixed position of inlet and outlet. It fills the empty space between the VRM heat sinks and memory.

Hmmm. It does work. Look... seems like it wiped out a ton of stuff on the modules. Not just the XMP.

There should never be any reason whatsoever for a motherboard BIOS flash to write anything to memory SPD. That is a big no-no. That said, I know one of the "features" of DDR5 is the ability to create your own XMP profiles and save them to the extra empty space. And, you do that within the BIOS. In this situation that part of my BIOS is non-existent now. There is NOTHING on any menus about XMP or custom user XMP profiles. It is totally gone now and AIDA64 doesn't see that on the memory modules either. I wish I knew someone with a DDR5 mobo that could insert these sticks for testing, but I don't know anyone nearby. If it did screw them up, I will keep them and use one of them for BIOS flashing so it doesn't ever happen to the new memory. My Strix Z690 is a DDR4 mobo, so I can't try swapping them. I will have to see if Thaiphoon Burner works with DDR5, but I don't think it does. If it does, then I can fix them.

I struggle with the same thing. I am not a negative person at all. I am always positive and a glass is half full kind of person. However, I'm not going to pretend things are peachy when they suck. It is very difficult to be positive about a lot of things right now. Tech is one of those things. We expect it to get better in time, not worse. In some ways it gets better, but it is like one step forward, two steps backward more often than it should be.

That's my assumption. I ordered new memory sticks that will be here Wednesday. As soon as I install them I will know for certain that is the case. Given that the issue affects the old (unflashed) BIOS in exactly the same way, I doubt that it is the motherboard firmware. If the new sticks also have no XMP profile, then it will be a mobo RMA. I am hoping it is the memory modules got written with rubbish and not a mobo swap. I think the product name and production date being changed is also an indication of SPD write during the BIOS flash. The release notes saying "fine-tuned memory compatibility" leads me to be suspicious as well. I'm not sure what approach they took to that. It is strange nomenclature, but sometimes Chinese to English translation is not very clean.

It would have to be unlocked, at least during the flashing process.

A60.

Well this is pretty sucky. The latest BIOS from MSI erased my memory XMP profiles and corrupted the SPD. The XMP profiles do not show in the BIOS or CPU-Z and manually overclocking the RAM is limited because it capped the voltage at 1.423V. The same condition is present on the second BIOS with older firmware and it definitely wrote/corrupted the firmware on the memory. I ordered replacement RAM. I am almost positive MSI will pull an ASUS and insist it's not their fault and refuse to take ownership of their own incompetence. I haven't contacted them yet. If the replacement memory has the same issues, then the board will need an RMA. I am almost positive it corrupted the memory firmware though. It worked flawlessly before I flashed the BIOS update for "fine tuned memory compatibility" and after rebooting it's messed up. I tested one stick at a time in each slot and what you see on AIDA64 data is what each stick show in each slot, so the messed up data follows the module. Flashing the previous firmware changes nothing. @johnksss if you haven't flashed tha firmware update, you might want to consider ignoring it. Not only is the XMP gone on both sticks, but also look how the device description, module part number and week/year data is different on the second stick.

Yes, absolutely. I do this all of the time, even if the CPU is not delidded. If the contact between the IHS and heat sink is good the liquid metal will produce much better results. If you travel with the laptop or move it around a lot, carry it in a backpack, etc. then you should consider building a barrier/dam around the perimeter of the CPU with some thin foam and use Kapton tape to bridge the space between the ILM (CPU retainer) and IHS. If you do not use an excessive amount of liquid metal and do not ragdoll the laptop it is not super dangerous, but the dam is cheap insurance to avoid a tragic mishap. The foam needs to be very thin and easily compressed to avoid causing contact interference. I used a few drops of SuperGlue on the Kapton tape to hold the thin outer foam dam in place while assembling things. The inner foam dam under the ILM is held in place by both the ILM and the Kapton tape. These photos are from the X170 cooling enhancements I did for zTecpc. I know that @electrosoftand @Clamibot are owners of that machine, but you can probably adopted some of this for your Alienware.

Yeah, Brother @JeanLegithat is pretty crazy. If it was proven to last as long as liquid metal (llasting years if applied in the proper conditions) and you were not frequently tinkering with things it might be worth it. For most that would be way too much money. As we all know, the problem with laptops is, what works good for desktop with parts that fit nice might be horrible for a laptop (because they are built so sloppy and parts don't fit nicely) and not last very long even if it works well at first application. And, what might do a nice job for a laptop might not be as good as something else in a desktop application. It can be very costly and time consuming playing the thermal paste lottery trying to find out what works best on a laptop. When you find it, even then you can only hope that it works as well on another laptop... it might not.

The problem I had with Gelid and NTH1 is that both were inadequate viscosity and not durable due to pump-out. Kryosnaut was marginally better. All worked close to the same when first applied, but didn't last long enough. NTH1 was the least durable. I have very good results with KPX on liquid cooled desktops, but not sure how durable it would be on a laptop. Someone should try Thermalright TF7. I used it for an experiment on one of my desktops to avoid wasting KPX and it worked quite well. Significantly better than I expected it to work. A tube of TF7 was included each of my 12th Gen Thermalright CPU frames. The TF7 was easy to apply, but I noticed when I removed it a couple of weeks later it had thickened a lot and was clay-like. It resisted wiping off the CPU and water block as easily as most thermal pastes do. It took at least twice as much effort to remove. It was not as thick as old IC Diamond, but impressively resistant to wiping off with an alcohol pad. My impression from that is that it might be very good on a laptop. Based on what I saw, I doubt it would be as susceptible to pump-out as most of the popular options.

The problem is the perceived importance of being energy efficient and consuming less electrical power to avert an imaginary cataclysmic event and the notion that disaster will follow if they do not. That irrational hoax guides more cockamamie ideas than we can imagine. It is remarkable how often claims of "science" are used to justify an agenda and even more incredible how so many sheeple blindly embrace heresy because somebody that seems smart told them it was based on science.

I can relate to that and I've done that more than a few times myself. When you want something and it's within your means to acquire it sometimes it just doesn't matter whether the price is reasonable or not. That has nothing to do with whether or not it is reasonably priced. Most important is what you expect to extract from it. When the price is high, the bar on minimum expectations goes up with it, as it should. Congrats on the beast GPU, bro.

That, plus their crappy GPU drivers and related software, no DLSS and lousy ray tracing. I am actually surprised that they released it. I think it was a very bad business decision. I think they should have known/understood that is was going to be an unattractive purchase for many, if not most, of the people that are willing to spend a massive wad of cash to own the best overclocking enthusiast GPU. The lack of a waterblock makes it totally out of the question and a product of zero interest to many of us. And, it would be an almost insane waste of money for anyone that already ponied up the cash for a 3090 KPE. NVIDIA releasing the 3090 Ti was a kick in the nuts to all 3090 owners and EVGA releasing the 3090 Ti KPE (and FTW3) was like a slap in the face to customers, and kicking themselves in the nuts.

I wonder if that would actually matter to a lot of people. Maybe it's just how brain works, but I know what I want and don't care about competing products. I will wait for what I want rather than settle for something different. So if, for example, I wanted a 4090 then I wouldn't care about what AMD was doing or when they were doing it, or whether 4090 came before or after 4080, etc

The best thing that could happen would be that millions of performance PC enthusiasts and gamers would be so disgusted with what is happening that they simply elect to not buy anything at all for 2 or 3 years and just continue using their existing products, not upgrade anything in terms of hardware as well as refuse to allow any of the latest Micro$lop OS cancer version and "feature" updates and remain in a semi-permanent holding pattern financially and physically so that the big tech Nazis can get a long, hard and painful look at how it feels to be patently rejected by an entire segment of a target market they thought the could rely on to continue bending over and taking it in the posterior orifice. I'd love to see them all squirming, soul-searching and reflecting on their recent crimes as they look for ways to earn back the trust, respect and admiration that they used to be worthy of, and used to make them filthy rich.

There was an MSI "980" that was a tiny bit longer than a 980M standard MXM that might work. Everything about the form factor is MXM and the fit of components should not be a problem. Heat sink fit is fine, etc. The 980M is also a normal MXM and should work with the form factor and heat sink because it is the same as any other "normal" MXM card. The big Clevo 980 shown in the photo won't fit in the chassis AFAIK. I do not remember if the die is in the same location, but the normal 980M heat sink won't fit.