Mr. Fox

9 hours ago, electrosoft said:

 

Hmmmm, I think I remember someone basically saying the same thing. Lemme see if I can find it...ah yes....here it is....

 

 

🤣

Nobody here disagreed with you that I know of. You are correct. I don't think it will ever work well. It will always have flaws because the entire concept is flawed and was invented by goofballs.

AMD started the abomination with their cobbled together mini CPUs and Infinity Fabric crap. People bought it and were excited about the mess, so Intel jumped on the bandwagon with their smartphone core crap. Now we all have to deal with messy doo-doo on both sides of the fence. The moral to the story is this: If it is what the sheeple want and believe in, there is at least a 50% chance that it is trash. It doesn't matter which school they attend, newer is always better newer. Computer technology is circling the drain, regressing rather than progressing. And, the demons that want to drag us into their pit don't care whether we are wearing red or blue pants. Seems to mirror other facets of life beyond technology to a great degree. The world we live in is pretty screwed up.

8 hours ago, tps3443 said:

This SP103 is toast! I feel bad for the guy who bought it. I went straight to direct die, didn’t even test it before hand. But the chip needs like 1.225v just to run 5.6P at 48c package temp. Someone smoked the chip. 5.7/5.8/5.9 are all completely unstable. Launching anything other than a browser will BSOD. Turning off or reducing the E-Cores helps a lot. So, all I could get “Kinda useable” was 5.6P/4.3E/4.5R on direct die+ chilled water. 😂 Wonder if that’s why it was only $400 bucks for a 14900KS. 🤔 Anyways, I tried everything I could with the CPU. It just can't run at all without failing it seems. 

The chip refuses to launch R23 under any circumstances. Any light games are closing to desktop. This chip is defective, or it was cooked with so much voltage that it is so degraded it can barely run anymore at all. Since it needed about 1.225V for 5.6P and still would fail to run R24 consistently this makes me think it has been degraded or abused. But, I do not really know. I have never dealt with a CPU like this. I spent a lot of time with it. Not sure what it may be. 🤷‍♂️

Are the SP ratings deceptively good and not matching nasty details the VF curve, or is all of the information, including what it shows on the VF curve and SP ratings, not the reality of how it behaves? That is pretty sad, but it may have been that way new. The 14900K/KF CPUs I returned to Amazon, NewEgg and the 14900KS returned to Central Computer were the absolute worst silicon samples I have ever had in my possession before. Bad enough there was no way I would try to use them or sell them to someone else at a loss, so I insisted on refunds and got my money back. The KS needed like 1.550V to run Cinebench on BIOS defaults and stock turbo with no ASUS enhancements. I think I remember seeing posts by the guy selling it that he was struggling to get it to behave acceptable. I might have him mistaken for someone else and can't swear to it, but that's why I did not reply to your post if it was the same CPU that you were commenting about how good the predictions looked.

This is why I have stocked up on 13th and 14th Gen CPUs of good bin quality. AMD brought nothing worth buying and I expect Intel will have nothing worth buying in their next gen. All the focus is on wrong things. Quality, integrity and customer experience are no longer main points of focus. The focus is developing AI to further the tech syndicate's theft of information and crimes against humanity, a resource for governments to rule by manipulation and fiat, with funding sourced by selling grossly overpriced broken crap to silly people that are addicted to electronics feces and believe everything they see, read and hear on TV and social media.

Nice. Makes me want to do more SMD soldering. No reason in particular, but it's just a cool hot talent.

I wondered how she was going to pay for it. Now we know.

A "secure" system (actually a myth) that doesn't do what you want it to do is worthless. Function and performance always trump security as far as I am concerned. All the patches and security fixes in the world won't fix the DIMM-wit using the keyboard. (Yeah, you saw what I did there, LOL.)

The biggest security risk with any computer is a stupid user.

Simple fix... for unwanted updates, not for stupid users or stupid employees working on the Windoze Support Team (can't fix stupid)... just tweak the registry and hit "Advanced options" on the Windoze Updates page in settings and delay them for 10 years. Hint: You'll need to scroll a LOOOONG way down to reach the 10 year mark.

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsUpdate\UX\Settings]
"ActiveHoursEnd"=dword:00000011
"ActiveHoursStart"=dword:00000008
"AllowAutoWindowsUpdateDownloadOverMeteredNetwork"=dword:00000000
"ExcludeWUDriversInQualityUpdate"=dword:00000001
"FlightCommitted"=dword:00000000
"IsExpedited"=dword:00000000
"LastToastAction"=dword:00000000
"UxOption"=dword:00000004
"InsiderProgramEnabled"=dword:00000000
"SvDismissedState"=dword:00000001
"SmartActiveHoursSuggestionState"=dword:00000001
"SmartActiveHoursTimestamp"=hex(b):b9,80,63,7c,b6,73,da,01
"HideMCTLink"=dword:00000001
"RestartNotificationsAllowed2"=dword:00000000
"SmartActiveHoursStart"=dword:00000007
"SmartActiveHoursEnd"=dword:00000010
"FlightSettingsMaxPauseDays"=dword:00000e42

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsUpdate\UX\Settings\ModelState]
"SignalRegistered"="::2F1AAFCACF"

No need to worry about stupid crap like this (below) ruining your day when you're calling all of the shots and keeping the numbskulls at Micro$lop out of your business.

3 hours ago, Papusan said:

 

Yup. And this apply also for the OS. 

An update made to fix a vulnerability broke dual-boot Windows-Linux PCs

neowin.com · 7 hours ago

A Windows Patch Tuesday update that was supposed to fix a vulnerability has caused a number of dual-boot Windows-Linus PCs to no longer boot up in Linux. Microsoft has yet to fix this problem.

2 hours ago, tps3443 said:

You do not want to use CMO files from other bios. You will have to make a new profile from scratch on the new bios always for best results. Sucks but, that’s just how it is.

I do not do use CMO files across BIOS versions. That is why I save a text file for the profiles I use. Then I can recreate them manually for a newer or older BIOS version.

2 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Edit: I think I am going to try the BIOS Flashback recovery and then retest my saved profile with XMP Tweaked. BIOS flashback forces flashing of regions and allows some BIOS mods to be flashed that are blocked through a normal flash update.

That fixed it. Something from 9933 did not revert back to what it was with 1503 using the in-BIOS flash tool. If you run into weirdness after an in-BIOS update, or going back to a better older version, run BIOS flashback from USB using the button on the rear I/O. Now I can use XMP Tweaked again and no lockups and confirmed no SA bug. It flashed everything doing it that way instead of keeping crap in some regions with a newer timestamp. It takes over twice as long to flash that way, but it does a better job.

Back to normal... all settings that worked before still work after BIOS flashback. No SA bug with MC 0x129.

It did nothing to help my 81°F (27°C) ambient  temperatures in my office. 🤣 Water in my loop is 28°C. 😡

1 hour ago, Papusan said:

Intel ME Firmware Update v16.1.32.2473

30 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

Yup. And this apply also for the OS. 

An update made to fix a vulnerability broke dual-boot Windows-Linux PCs

neowin.com · 7 hours ago

A Windows Patch Tuesday update that was supposed to fix a vulnerability has caused a number of dual-boot Windows-Linus PCs to no longer boot up in Linux. Microsoft has yet to fix this problem.

They'll deny it, but I would not be surprised if it was a deliberate act of sabotage rather than a mistake. They are losing market share to older versions of Windows and Linux due to their filthy new cancer OS and what better way to block it than preventing users from booting into Linux when they don't want to deal with Micro$haft's garbage. They are not an honorable company and their lack of integrity is evident to anyone paying attention.

17 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

I really like good news @Mr. Fox🙂

Google Faces A Revived Class Action Lawsuit For Accessing User Information Without Consent

Awesome. I hope they get finanically raped by the litigation and left for dead. Then we can hope the same for lots of their evil accomplices in the tech space to suffer similar tragedies. We need to see some fortunes lost, empires ruined and some key decision-making people criminially prosecuted in order for a lot of this nonsense to get smashed for good.

25 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

You ever have any retrain stability problems? I did with my r-batch with 8400/8533. I could get it absolutely stable 100%, try a different bios, switch back to old bios, load exact setting and profile to a T. And it would not be stable anymore. So I’d have to “Re-gain stability again” It’s always what Buildzoid talks about with these Intel memory controllers.

That is EXACTLY what happened when I went from 1503 to the 9933 XOC BIOS that Safedisk provided last week. I did not try to use an old CMO file. I saved the text and set everything manually. It seemed stable at first but then started locking up in AIDA64 and TM5. I went back to 1503 and applied the stable profile and it was no longer stable like it was before 9933.

I still have to do more messing with it to confirm, but I think the XMP Tweaked menu option is causing it now. It did not cause it before, which is weird.

ASUS does some nice things with their BIOS, but they do some stupid things as well. When you flash firmware there are certain regions that are protected and never go back to what they were before when you flash the older firmware. That is why I generally think it is best to avoid firmware updates unless I am expecting something I need to happen. MSI and EVGA BIOS updates erase and re-write everything, in all regions. That is how it should be and ASUS needs to get a clue on this. If you pay close attention during an ASUS BIOS update and read the text at the bottom of the screen, sometimes it skips over certain regions and it never flashes some of them.

They also need to stop insisting on Intel ME updates and bundling it with the BIOS. Intel ME updates are totally unnecessary. No Intel system requires the Intel ME to fully function. They need to provide the option to disable it. It serves no useful purpose for consumers and having it creates extra security risks that some people get wigged out about. No ME means no vulnerabilities associated with ME.

Edit: I think I am going to try the BIOS Flashback recovery and then retest my saved profile with XMP Tweaked. BIOS flashback forces flashing of regions and allows some BIOS mods to be flashed that are blocked through a normal flash update.

26 minutes ago, D2ultima said:

I got curious and went and checked after I mentioned it haha

 

What was the SA bug?

Yeah, older BIOS is almost always better than newer. There was an exception as DDR5 technology was needing work, but we are way past that now.

SA Bug: If your CPU has it, if you set System Agent voltage (VCCSA) above a certain value, usually a very low value, the system will start freezing. It would lock up in the BIOS or in Windows. This one 14900KF has it and if I left it set on Auto it would go too high and freeze with the CPU under load. I had to manually set it at 1.190V, which was fine up to 8200 CL38, but any higher memory clock than that was not stable because it needed more system agent voltage. I set 1.250V for 8400 CL38 and tight timings. That "no workey" with the SA bug.

If you don't want to overclock the memory that high it is not a big deal, but it might lead one to believe something else is wrong if the freezing happens with the BIOS left on Auto and you don't know you have to manually decrease it from default. Using as little as you need is always good as long as you are not limited by the bug.

18 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

I have a SP103 14900KS that I will be delidding and running on direct die. Will be testing the IMC as well. I want to see what something like this does at 5.8Ghz all core on direct die.

Welcome back to bare die paradise. I thought you had lost your marbles there for a bit. I hate having an IHS on my CPUs. It sucks, LOL.

2 hours ago, Papusan said:

So even with the MC 0x129 with the new Asus XOC beta bios you got back the SA bug.... Hmmmm. 

 

Your reply. I tested the ASUS XOC BIOS that @safedisk posted (v9933) and the SA bug returned to that CPU even with 0x129 MC.

 

What a disgusting soap opera this has become with the different motherboard manufacturers. 1.6V when loading up the OS with the new so called fixed bios (MC 0x129). Could be a detective board but who knows.

It may be  another setting and not the SA bug. I went back to 1503 and applied my old profile and it was freezing in AIDA64 the same as 9933. Not sure why, so I applied XMP and manually set VCCSA to 1.350V and no freezing. So, something did change. I switched to XMP I (instead of XMP Tweaked) and applied my settings and now no more freezing. So, I may go back and test 9933 again with different settings to see for sure. It's weird that it was working fine and then suddenly XMP Tweaked would cause it to start freezing.

1 hour ago, D2ultima said:

You all getting so many problems with the new BIOSes I'm just not even wanting to update mine. I don't know what BIOS I'm on but I haven't updated it since I got the system and the CPU does about 1.1 to 1.2v under load and I've never seen it higher than 1.24v at all, so I suppose I'll count my luck.

 

If I could update the microcode alone without touching anything else I could probably consider it but I doubt that's how this works for a lower end ASUS board

The only reason I even considered updating the BIOS at all was to see if it fixed the SA bug on this one CPU. Otherwise, no need for BIOS updates. Waste of time and often brings less desirable performance, especially if "security" mitigations are part of the cancer payload. I was pleasantly surprised that it fixed that. Applying the microcode in Windows does NOT fix the SA bug. (I tried the Windows MC Prema shared and it did not correct the issue.) We  are also only assuming it was the microcode update. Logical assumption, but it could be something else. I say logical because the SA bug was motherboard agnostic. Was the same on my MSI board as the ASUS and the BIOS update corrected it.

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

Intel can push the new MC, but it still comes down to MB makers responsibly enforcing it while also allowing advanced users to disable it if they see fit. I am sure we will see a few more BIOS updates fleshing it out.

 

As for the SA Bug, when all is said and done, I am still setting my SA back to 1.18 for 8200 because it works and no need to feed more voltage than required. Of course for benching and testing, I let it run free. 🙂

If I had left this CPU in the MSI Z790I Edge ITX board it would have continued to be perfectly fine with the SA bug for the same reason you mention. Air cooled in a small chassis and poor circulation, 8200 is the edge of stability due to temperatures anyhow. Having low VCCSA because you can and because you want to is good. It's only an issue if you wanted to push it further and can't because of a flaw preventing it. Inconsequential  otherwise. But, nobody like knowing there is a fly in the ointment.

So, it is working without issue again. Will play with tightening up the timings again now that I am using the XMP I instead of XMP Tweaked option. Interesting change that makes no sense. The Intel ME was not updated, so I cannot blame it on that.

2 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Just tested the new XOC BIOS for the Apex Encore and will apply it to the white Apex as well. It has the new 0x129 MC, but retains the ability to drop back to 11F. I tested it on the Encore first since the CPU with the SA bug that got fixed by 0x129 is installed in the Encore. Later today I am going to change to MC 11F and see if the SA bug rears its head again, or if that did something permanent to solve the bug.

 

In other news, there is a ROG theme available in the latest HWiNFO64. It in typical ASUS fashion, it is the most tacky-looking theme one could ever imagines. It looks effing AWFUL, especially in dark mode. What is wrong with these nutjobs and their tacky and over-the-top garish aesthetic preferences? I am going to have to PM Martin over at HWiNFO forum and ask if the style of the theme was specified by ASUS or if he created it while taking drugs.

1 hour ago, Papusan said:

 

Not sure if Sergmann have been damn lucky with all his chips with the Gigabyte board.... Not sure how many processors he have tested. But none with the SA bug https://community.hwbot.org/topic/210084-gigabyte-z690-tachyon/?do=findComment&comment=673591

I spoke too soon. BIOS 9933 brought back the SA bug. Going back to 1503 and hoping it goes away again.

Just tested the new XOC BIOS for the Apex Encore and will apply it to the white Apex as well. It has the new 0x129 MC, but retains the ability to drop back to 11F. I tested it on the Encore first since the CPU with the SA bug that got fixed by 0x129 is installed in the Encore. Later today I am going to change to MC 11F and see if the SA bug rears its head again, or if that did something permanent to solve the bug.

In other news, there is a ROG theme available in the latest HWiNFO64. It in typical ASUS fashion, it is the most tacky-looking theme one could ever imagines. It looks effing AWFUL, especially in dark mode. What is wrong with these nutjobs and their tacky and over-the-top garish aesthetic preferences? I am going to have to PM Martin over at HWiNFO forum and ask if the style of the theme was specified by ASUS or if he created it while taking drugs.

14 hours ago, tps3443 said:

I’d personally rather run DLSS2 at a lower percentage scale without FG, than FG+FSR at a higher percentage scale. The AMD FSR is not very good in my opinion.  It does that shimmer effect that immediately gives away the fact we are using scaling. 
 

The 2080Ti is still a great GPU though. I would give Battlefield 2042 a test with that combination on a 128 multiplayer server. That would really interesting to see. Also, Death Stranding is another game that loves CPU cores! (no matter how many you have lol) It was the only title to push a 7980XE to 100% on all 36 threads long before games were all using 8/16 with my 3090 Kingpin and 2560x1440P lol. Those Sony ports are always the best when it comes to using hardware properly and optimization. 

I find it very hard to see any visual difference in the benchmark no matter what settings are used. The issue using DLSS on 2080 Ti and 3090 Ti is there is no frame generation, and the benchmark does not have options for performance vs quality. It was interesting seeing how the different settings affected the different GPUs.

I agree. I don't like FSR and generally don't use it. On a GPU with no DLSS+frame generation, at least in this benchmark, it provides a better framerate with the FSR frame generation. Unless something unusual changes my mind, I have no intention of buying the game though (I seldom ever enjoy playing RPG) so it's all just for benching fun and won't matter in the grand scheme of things.

14 hours ago, D2ultima said:

Hey y'all. If any of you are still into notebooks at all, I made a post in the components section you may be interested in. Just giving a bit of a heads up in here =D

 

 

This is probably because this game is always raytraced. When you turn off RT, you're turning off hardware raytracing which is accelerated, and swapping it with an inferior software raytracing called Lumen, which probably explains why the GPU is suddenly working harder.

 

There is a nexus mods mod which allows you to turn on FSR 3's frame gen while using DLSS, because FSR 3.1 FG is naturally capable of being decoupled from actually using FSR as an upscaler. You could try that. I don't know if it works perfectly or not, though, but I know it exists (and actually the mod exists for a few other games, so you could always look it up for them too)

 

Howdy stranger. Nice seeing you. Hope you can stay for a spell.

14 hours ago, ryan said:

I tried the nexus mod. Works well aka looks good, as for gains it's decent. I can't run black myth at 4k unless I use like 25 percent scaling, I guess it's mainly for the heavy hitters and their 4090s. I can't see a 4070 or 4060 running this game even at 1440p unless everything is turned off.. either way I will say it's a better benchmark than steel nomad

I think Steel Nomad is a joke. 3DMark Suite in general has become a bloated piece of garbage benchmark. The more they add to it, the trashier it seems to get. Things started circling the drain with Port Royal and have gotten progressively worse. The best benchmarks in the suite are those with CPU and combined scores, and the very best (Sky Diver) is "no longer supported" because UL is run by idiots. Of course, these are my personal biases, so I know not everyone will agree with them.

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

I tested Wukong on the 2080 Ti and it is interesting. It works better than I expected it to and it appears the old Xeon has plenty of juice to not be a bottleneck to the GPU.  The CPU was generally 25~35% utilization and the GPU at or close to 100%. And, the graphics look good no matter what level of detail or quality preset. Hard for me to see any difference except with ray tracing disabled. Then it does lose some quality, but still looks very good. Hardly any difference between FSR and TSR that I can see.

Things start getting sketchy and the 2080 Ti starts showing its age with Super Resolution at 100%, which is tough even for the 4090. Basically nothing can produce a smooth experience cranks up like that. Even so, with everything maxed out it still performs stronger than I expected it to. It would not be a good gaming experience (slideshow)... but still... just saying...

One thing I did not expect is that with RT turned off the GPU power increased by about 50W. Because there was not a pronounced difference in the image quality, I am assuming this is because 100% of the workload shifts to the rendering cores and the tensor cores take a nap. If that is the correct explanation it makes sense, but I would have assumed that ray tracing enabled would increase the power utilization.. It seems to balance it out and relieve some stress on the GPU core.

I tested Wukong on the 2080 Ti and it is interesting. It works better than I expected it to and it appears the old Xeon has plenty of juice to not be a bottleneck to the GPU.  The CPU was generally 25~35% utilization and the GPU at or close to 100%. And, the graphics look good no matter what level of detail or quality preset. Hard for me to see any difference except with ray tracing disabled. Then it does lose some quality, but still looks very good. Hardly any difference between FSR and TSR that I can see.

44 minutes ago, ryan said:

Benching first gaming second lol..paps where's that funny pic..honestly I don't see anything wrong with gaming or going as far as to say gaming is for losers..pretty much everyone with a computer has gamed at one point, I think it's true things have changed so much it kinda does cater to the fringe but once every 10 years a game comes out worth playing. For me that will be gta 6..going on killing sprees then fleeing the police never gets old...but honestly the new kids playing roblox and Pokémon. I get why you'd think that when an adult does the same thing that they are either well u know..

I view gaming as an extended form of benching. I pay as much attention to my system as I do the game. I own games that I do not like and having no interest in playing simply for the included benchmark. I love it when a game dev releases a free standalone benchmark tool like the one we are playing with because then I have no reason to purchase the game. It looks beautiful, but I can say with a fair level of confidence that I would not like playing the actual game. This applies also to the Final Fantasy benchmarks. You could not even pay me to play those games. On top of being subscription-based I think they are icky, (based on genre and gameplay style,) but the free standalone benchmarks are fun to run.

1 hour ago, tps3443 said:

I had to put a paper towel on mine to cover that backplate cutout. Otherwise it blast my ram with hot air and makes them sweat. it doesn’t seem to make the card any warmer. 
 

 

You should put something like this on it to allow air flow but direct it away from the system, either toward the ceiling or forward (into the room) and away from the bench. You could attach it with double-sided rubber tape or even use adhesive magnets if the backplate is not aluminum. It would look nice and probably be better for cooling. You could also attach it with a bead of T-7000 adhesive, which would be strong enough to hold it forever, but not so permanent that you could not remove it later if you wanted to.

https://www.amazon.com/ORLANG-Marine-Louvered-Mounting-Suitable/dp/B0CS61SZ9K?th=1

42 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

I hope my 4090 holds up. It is under warranty at least. But who wants to deal with that. Anyways, that one in the video has the old PCI-e slot tail hook which was definitely a big no no on these.. It's like 16ft long.

 

Both of us have the updated PCB design without that weakened hook area.

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

Ugh, MSI is supposed to be right up there by Asus in regards to BIOS controls. One thing I can say about Asus is they really do give you the kitchen sink and then some. EVGA was up there too. I always considered MSI next but watching BZ flip around in Gigabyte's BIOS, it seems pretty competent these days too.

 

Asrock is missing a lot of fine/granular controls and I find their FIVR controls a bit lacking. So far, it is Asus and Gigabyte with the ultimate cut off valve for vrout max settings.

I gritted my teeth and flashed the new BIOS again and found that DTPF setting present where expected. No idea why it is not visible in the January BIOS. So, I was able to test this benchmark with the Intel Optimizer and found it provided no benefit. FPS were the same as without it and it made it feel like the FPS was lower due to some stuttering.  I hope I don't have the same issues with the M.2 port dropping out and the BIOS loading menus incorrectly. If that happens even once then it is back to the January BIOS. Crossing my fingers. So far, so good.

I do like that MSI does not interfere with flashing older firmware and does not bundle the ME firmware cancer with their BIOS updates. I love that it is my decision and not theirs and I hate that ASUS doesn't leave that decision entirely up to my own discretion. So, each brand has its pros and cons. ASUS gives a lot of options, but neglects a couple of things I consider super important. EVGA was the best.

If I were the king of the world and could do things my way, I would pick and choose the best each brand had to offer and reject their crap. There would be no restrictions on the choice of firmware versions that could be flashed, and no firmware signature crap. The BIOS would also include the ability to control the RGB/ARGB within the UEFI and eliminate the cancer software trash installed in the OS. Boards like the Apex wouldn't even have any RGB crap on them. I'd also shut down Micro$lop Store and ban the development of UWP smartphone app for PC filth.

12 hours ago, ryan said:

@tps3443 has matched you guys...his numbers are close to yours, been following thread for two years and its suprising such a small forum houses the elite overclockers of the world..now all we need is for someone to hand out elite samples like what biso biso gets..

That would be nice. Although, I am pretty sure that is never going to happen. You have to be part of the right clique and none of us are. Our results don't matter except to the extent that they become a threat to the Chosen Ones. I am pretty sure that CENS pursued the golden sample CPU that @tps3443 had because he wasn't "supposed to have it" and not because CENS actually wanted or needed it. Someone at Intel must have let it make its way into the retail channel by mistake. And, when he bought it from our Brother here it would not surprise me if it was with someone else's money.

Well, this benchmark runs nice enough on 3090 Ti FTW3 if you don't go too crazy on the settings. There is no NVIDIA frame generation or DLSS 3.0 on pre-40 series RTX, so cranking the settings will crush it just as it does the 4090 with frame generation disabled. UE5 has its own though, and works fairly well. This system is connected to two 1440p displays for work.

4 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

@electrosoft just FYI. I went back to the old (January) BIOS on the Z790I Edge motherboard. The new BIOS with 0x129 MC was causing one of my M.2 slots to randomly stop working. I noticed it because one of my SN770 SSDs that I use for data/file storage at work was randomly disappearing. I could tell when it was going to not work because it would go through a couple of boot cycles like memory training. Sometimes it would come back after a reboot, but I also noticed when the M.2 port would go AWOL in the BIOS was showing me menus for MSI Developer mode. So something buggy with their BIOS. After going back to the old BIOS I have had no more issues with that M.2 port vanishing. I doubt it is the MC change. Probably something else MSI buggered up with the firmware modifications to appease those that want Intel defaults.

I would not even be able to test the Intel Application Optimizer on the Z790I Edge if I wanted to. I was going to see if it made any difference with the 3090 Ti but the menu option for Intel DTPF is missing from where it is supposed to be according to MSI documentaion (right below the setting for CFG Lock). I wish I knew what the key combo is for MSI desktop firmware developer mode to access all menus. The old key combo that worked on laptops does not work on the desktop motherboard. It is stupid that MSI also hides the IA VR Limit menu. So, you cannot set a cap on the VRM voltage output (and therefore can't limit VCore properly) in their firmware. Super dumb.

11 minutes ago, ryan said:

Consistent here also..buttery smooth 4fps maxed..I prefer this cinematic experience. Goes to show what alot of advances in tech and obscene amounts of time can accomplish..all kidding aside it is actually a very consistent and accurate benchmark with great visuals. Not much difference from timespys accuracy.

The nice thing about 4 FPS is if you blink while watching you only miss one or two frames.

20 hours ago, tps3443 said:

These settings are how I will play the game. 4K/DLSS@66%=Quality DLSS/ Ray Tracing=ON/ Frame Gen=ON




During the shader compile my CPU peaked at a thirtsy 297.7 watts of juice at 5.9P/4.8E/5.0R DDR5 8600C36-49. Not sure why the font turned this color. But yeah, we all know some of these modern game shader compiles can use as much power as Cinebench lol.





Happy Birthday @Papusan 🎊

17 hours ago, electrosoft said:

And yeah, the shader compiles are brutal. I'm fishing through various setups on my 14900KS on the AIO to find what works best....7950X3D just shrugged it off and said, "and what?" 🤣

3 hours ago, electrosoft said:

Max everything out and set Super Resolution to 66 to see how it stacks up to @tps3443 and my scores at the same settings.

3 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

OK, I have to lead an operations meeting in a few minutes, but I will try that later.

OK this benchmark draws insane amounts of power for some reason if run on Windows 11. And, it is not only during shader compiling. It's from start to finish. Just for giggles I wanted to see if the FPS got better or worse, so I booted into Windows 11. I tripped my circuit breaker twice and had to leave my work computer turned off when testing on Windows 11 for some reason. I almost never use Windows 11 and now I find myself wondering if that (Windows 11) has something to do with the Intel CPU degradation being complained about. This did not happen on Windows 10 (circuit breaker tripping thing). It seems like the power utilization spirals out of control on Windows 11, but does not when I am running the benchmark on Windows 10.

On Windows 11, my framerates are higher by about 5 FPS, but the power draw increases by more than the minor increase in FPS. The WireView meter on the 4090 Suprim shows up to 490W (almost 100W more than Windows 10 does) and almost 100W more on the CPU on Windows 11. My Kill-A-Watt showed up to 790W being pulled from the wall, almost the entire duration of the benchmark the GPU is above 400W and over 700W from the wall the entire time while the benchmark is running.

3 hours ago, electrosoft said:

It's 66. I don't know why it kept showing 65, but when I went back in and manually set it to 66, it would show 65. I actually did the run *3* times trying to get it to show the 66 I selected! 🙂

That is a bug in the game, not unique to you. I experienced exactly the same thing. To get the scale to 66 in the benchmark I have to set it to 67 or the benchmark runs at 65%. But the scores are identical with 65 or 66. No measurable difference. This benchmark is also very consistent. Back-to-back runs stay the same in terms of FPS and vary by zero to 1 FPS between runs.

65 (settings show 66)

66 (settings show 67)

2 hours ago, tps3443 said:

It’s almost a double cheeseburger! But not quite. Still impressive for your laptop though. If we could force DLSS OFF, we’d gain much more FPS at native 100% scaling. This is essentially DLAA. 
 

So, I ran this on the Apex and it fell in the middle between your results and the Encore results previously submitted. I think this is all within a margin of error. When framerates are too low to be playable they no longer matter if it is 1 or 2 FPS difference.

17 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

Max everything out and set Super Resolution to 66 to see how it stacks up to @tps3443 and my scores at the same settings.

OK, I have to lead an operations meeting in a few minutes, but I will try that later.

@electrosoft just FYI. I went back to the old (January) BIOS on the Z790I Edge motherboard. The new BIOS with 0x129 MC was causing one of my M.2 slots to randomly stop working. I noticed it because one of my SN770 SSDs that I use for data/file storage at work was randomly disappearing. I could tell when it was going to not work because it would go through a couple of boot cycles like memory training. Sometimes it would come back after a reboot, but I also noticed when the M.2 port would go AWOL in the BIOS was showing me menus for MSI Developer mode. So something buggy with their BIOS. After going back to the old BIOS I have had no more issues with that M.2 port vanishing. I doubt it is the MC change. Probably something else MSI buggered up with the firmware modifications to appease those that want Intel defaults.