Mr. Fox

26 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

Glad you said something, or else I would have bought some and tried it out for sure. Everyone has been going crazy over this stuff a little while back. I think this "Phase pad" has had its "Phase"

I think one reason it works well for laptops is they don't really have high TDP on anything. There is probably nothing more durable. You can't re-use it like you can Kryonaut or KPx, but if you do not disturb it the stuff will last for a super long time. Also a reason why it works great for laptops. If you had a low TDP desktop CPU and ran it stock it would probably do fine. The thermal conductivity is pretty low and I think that is why it worked poorly for me with my overclocked CPU pulling over 300W.

This is basically the same stuff that comes pre-applied on many heat sinks and AIO water blocks. If it has the clear film you peel off and bolt it down, it is this Honeywell pad.

4 hours ago, tps3443 said:

You guys think I’d see similar or better performance if using a ptm7950 thermal paste/pad on my cpu? 
 

Currently using Kryonaut Extreme. But I’d like to switch to something better for long term. 

Worse. I've already tested it. Three times, in fact. It will be worse than the Corsair paste you got from Walmart. It works good for turdbooks with crappy-fitting heat sinks because it doesn't pump out and it fills gaps, but it can say for certain it is the worst TIM that I have ever used on a desktop. Not anything crazy like 10-15°C hotter, but not nearly as effective as MX-4, MX-6 or KPx or TF7, etc. At least 5°C higher temps all three times.

If you want to try something new. maybe test the TF9 paste. I have never tried it before. 

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=TF9+thermal+paste&crid=NA6AQT8BS3U9

3 hours ago, tps3443 said:

I updated to 2503 Apex bios and the new 0x129 microcode, I did not get to mess with it that much. I did some basic testing on it. But I switched back to my other bios position on the Apex. And once you switch back to the other bios switch, it goes right back to the old microcode 0x123 lol. I thought it would keep and carry over the new microcode. But it keeps it where my bios position #1 9901 is 0x123, and bios position #2 is 2503 and 0x129. 
 

And I am going to keep it this way. I use one side for new updated microcode and testing new bios. And I have my other position for tried and true older bios older microcode. 😃

The new BIOS works identical for me on the Apex and the Apex Encore. All BIOS settings set exactly the same on old and new firmware. Cinebench and AIDA64 scores exactly the same. No loss of performance or stability that I can identify.

Just now, electrosoft said:

In those situations, depending on silicon quality, I almost always hope its the MB and not the CPU.

Yes, I absolutely would have preferred that it be the motherboard over the CPU. All three of my desktops have extra-good CPUs that would be terribly difficult to replace, and cost as much as the motherboard. I still have two spare CPUs but their bin quality is inferior to the three I am using.

OK, I flashed 2503 to the Apex (white) and had a bit of a scare. After flashing I got Q-code "00" (almost always dead CPU). I cut power and waited, then turned it back on. No lights turned on. I pressed the power button and it came back with "00" immediately displayed again (first and only code, no other codes). I thought, crap... ASUS killed another one. So, I held the clear CMOS button down on the rear I/O, said a quick prayer "Please Lord Jesus, don't let it be dead" and then it booted normally. *WHEW* 

Running like a top...

1 hour ago, tps3443 said:

Have you tried dropping IVR TX? This always had such a big impact for me on. Seems like there is a range that these chips seem to like much more compared to auto IVR TX. Using 1.270-1.320V. Lower is usually better, but too low might not post windows. And then I’d set “PLL termination” to 1.100V. You probably have to search for it in the bios, I always forget where the heck it’s at. But setting the 1.100V PLL Termination voltage would make my memory require much less VDD/VDDQ voltage. Now it seems like it’s a 50/50 if it will work or not. But when it does it is really cool. Like imagine needing 1.600V VDD, with the auto default 1.050V PLL Termination voltage. But setting 1.100V, and now you may only need 1.450V or something weird like that. My last R-Batch didn’t respond to PLL termination @1.100V. But my current chip does at higher frequencies.  I was able to drop 8800c38 from 1.560v to 1.520v. But, there’s more range I think, I just haven’t re-checked stability with a lower VDD. Anyways, these platforms are wild on DDR5 OC. All these chips acts so different in what they like. 

My IVR TX is set on Auto and that is usually around 1.330V. I will mess with setting it a little lower manually to see what happens. I use similar settings as far as the other ones go.

Voltage Monitor [Die Sense]
VRM Initialization Check [Disabled]
CPU Input Voltage Load-line Calibration [Level 3]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 7]
Synch ACDC Loadline with VRM Loadline [Disabled]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU Current Reporting [Auto]
Core Voltage Suspension [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Phase Control [Extreme]
CPU Power Thermal Control [125]
CPU Core/Cache Boot Voltage [1.05000]
CPU Input Boot Voltage [Auto]
PLL Termination Boot Voltage [1.15000]
CPU Standby Boot Voltage [1.15000]

IA VR Voltage Limit [1500]

BCLK Amplitude [900mV]
BCLK Slew Rate [Fast]
BCLK Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
PCIE/DMI Amplitude [900mV]
PCIE/DMI Slew Rate [Fast]
PCIE/DMI Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
SA PLL Frequency Override [3200 MHz]
FLL OC mode [Ratio OC]
UnderVolt Protection [Disabled]
Core PLL Voltage [1.05000]
PLL Termination Voltage [1.15000]
CPU Standby Voltage [1.15000]

10 hours ago, electrosoft said:

With the SA Bug now resolved, this is a perfect chip for my needs. I mean absolutely perfect. Next up is Intel APO testing in WoW, deeper memory testing and 320w limits testing.

Well, I forced myself into moving the excellent bin 14900KF with the SA bug into the Encore for testing. I am happy to report it is fixed for me as well. I set 1.300V on VCCSA in the BIOS and it runs perfectly fine now. I am going to leave it in the Apex Encore because it is just a little bit better than the 13900KS SP117 monster. That is running beautifully in the Z790i Edge now. Leaving it alone.

Here are the SP ratings and VF curve on the CPU that used to have the SA bug.

And, the same for the 13900KS SP117 monster now in the SFF system (for comparison). Very similar VF curve and MC SP.

The 13900KS runs as flawlessly in the Z790i Edge as it did in the Encore.

2 hours ago, tps3443 said:

That dude annoys me so bad. And he really does act like that lol. 

Yeah, I also find him extremely annoying. His arrogance and know-it-all potty mouth is over the top. Truly a legend in his own mind. It also annoys me that about 95% of the time I agree with him. He is right more often than not, but that gets lost in his caustic personality.

15 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

How does Kryonaut Extreme stack up against KPx?

Funny you should ask. I wondered the same. I have been wanting to test it for a long time, but haven't really made it a priority because I haven't identified a legitimate need to. Coincidentally, I have some arriving tomorrow to find out. I will share before/after temps on the Xeon in the Rampage IV Gene. It already runs cool with KPx. I have a huge tube of it. It will take forever to use it all. It had better be as good or better because only 4 grams of the Kryonaut Extreme is priced about the same as my 30 gram tube of KPx. Even if it is better, I think it is grossly overpriced. Maybe because it has Extreme in the name that makes it OK to carry that over to the price. The main reason I ordered it was to try it out on the 2080 Ti Xtreme when I install the air cooler.

12 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

Man this walmart paste is the WORST!!! 12-13c hotter package temp while incorporating a 0.5-0.6c warmer water temp as well. (chiller was just about to cycle when I started recording on the Walmart paste) but it’s like half of a degree, both water temps are 15c. This stuff absolutely sucks!!! 💀

 

PS: The Kryonaut paste was “Re-scraped and re-used as well. “I ran out of fresh” so it’s ABC paste, or “Already been chewed”

 

 

Thanks. Now I know not to test Corsair TM30. Did you remove the old Kryonaut Extreme and save it "just in case" the Corsair crap was no good?

Still using that waterblock I gave you? It's a great block, isn't it? It worked extremely well for me.

Looks like the Orwellian nighmare our brothers are dealing with in UK's government is angling toward overstepping jurisdictional authority and looking to work its wicked ways into American life. These creepy clowns are insane. I hope the people of UK can remove their facist government before it is too late.

So, now the DNC is using AI (among other equally deceptive tactics) to make things appear differently than they actually are. The Deep State is frightening enough without the AI-driven fabrication. This is something every American voter needs to be aware of regardless of what side they are on. If you don't like this guy, set aside the bias for a bit and pay attention to the information. AI definitely has the potential to destroy us all. Newer is always better, right @Papusan and @Raiderman?

They're even paying thousands of dollars to young people to post propaganda on YouTube, TikTok and Twitch. Listen to some of these young influencers talking about being bought by DNC PACs. Most of them are very upset by the effort to "buy them" (who wouldn't be).

5 hours ago, Papusan said:

I see you have popped into one of YouTubes biggest AMD fanboy'z channel... This YouTuber is useless to see or find proper content/info from.

LOL... totally agree. One of the most worthless PC tech YouTube channels. Not only because of his irrational fanboyish tendencies, but seems to promote some of the more outlandish rumors (like that one about the APU) and also leans toward exaggeration and pole vaulting over mouse turds. Other than what seems like an anti-NVIDIA and anti-Intel agenda, he seems like he might be a nice person otherwise. For the record, I tend to not value any of the YouTube channels that promote speculation and rumors, even when there is no brand bias or agenda. Graphically Challenged is another one that falls into that bucket, although not nearly as jaded as Gamer Meld. Seems like a nice guy, but spare me all of the what-if, maybe and some people are saying garbage. Don't care. Show me the real hardware and the real numbers, or hush up and go do something else.

3 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

SA Bug is fixed on Asrock. Initial testing SA Auto 8200, SA was at 1.301 and running TM5 no problem. Before, it was instant "SA Crash" on auto and anything >=1.20v + >=7800mhz .....w00t.

That's great news. 

2 hours ago, ryan said:

interesting, looks like the integrated solution might be the best buy for once. 0.4in thick 4070...they are really pushing thin and light these days.

That seems a bit far-fetched since it uses shared system memory and that would be much slower than the 4070 VRAM. I guess we shall see if/when it happens.

15 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

I am going to cook mine down for sure then! (Kidding I set a 1.550V limit) and it’s not too low for 6.5Ghz boost “Close though” while at work it’s pretty FAST! The top end on these chips is CRAZY.

Just a suggestion, but I would recommend moving away from the opportunistic boosting of the preferred cores and lock them all down to what is stable and adequate voltage for the "not-preferred" cores and then the better cores will be cruising on easy street. I think the preferred core boosting is part of what created the mess they are sorting out.

21 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

14600k wins but I mean I guess the argument could be platform longevity as Socket 1700 is almost at an end (sans Bartlett) so 9600x is more future proof?

Sometimes being future proof has the undesirable implication of holding onto status quo and a normalization of "meh" products. That is looking like what AMD is serving for dinner now. Socket longevity can be good or bad, depending on what happens (or doesn't happen). Sometimes moving onward and upward is better, but we see plenty of examples that newer is frequently not better. This just means that taking a "wait-and-see" approach is always the smartest way. Much smarter than listening to marketing propaganda (lies).

1 hour ago, tps3443 said:

I’m not sure if I will upgrade my microcode, but I can set a VR max of 1500mv in my bios which should resolve any potential issues. 

Yes, I agree. It should address it fine. If you go back to the early overclocking threads at oc.net and ASUS forums, Falkentyne and Robert Sampiro threads, they were saying setting IA VR Max to 1700mV to limit spikes, but that is too high even if it did come from Intel. You might even be able to set lower, like 1450mV or even 1400mV, depending on what core clocks you are setting.

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

That's promising all on its own it has bumped up your SA voltage capability. In unison with the BIOS itself, hopefully it takes care of all of it. I look forward to seeing how a partially helped chip with @Prema's work faires with the full BIOS and also tested in the Encore to give us three test scenarios.

It will be interesting. Now I just have to muster the desire to mess with it. I always love it after diving in, but as I get older I find I dread the idea of diving in before I do. Maybe because I know the rewards are smaller than they used to be. I'm defintely a reward ≥ effort and cost for something to be worth doing type person.

That is part of the reason I no longer have any interest whatsoever in making turdbooks less turdy. Huge effort with minimal reward. That sucks. In the end it is still a compromised pile of crap.

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

A bit higher than I expected actually but it makes sense considering many VIDs on some of these chips are hitting 1.523v which is lower than the 1.5v cap.

 

I think Intel did the best they could do with this and it not only caps out at 1.55v (I was thinking 1.45v), but allows OCers to go back to extremes if needed. This cap limit also makes total sense as it also lets turd chips continue to sell as the 1.523v max VID on some of them still fits comfortably under that limit. No way Intel is tossing 1.523v max vid chips as that seems to be a large swath of 14900KS chips.

I believe you are totally right. There are way too many 14th Gen silicon lottery losers to set the voltage limit lower. There would be too many that need more than 1.500V or need to be clocked under spec to use less than 1.500V.

Update: Gigabyte RTX 2080 Ti Xtreme Waterforce conversion to Xtreme (air)

Received the air cooler and backplate from AliExpress today. I do not have the 12-pin to 4-pin adapter cable they sent in a separate package yet. I will need to wait for that to swap out the fan wiring harness before installing it. These parts are brand new OEM, not used pulls. This will be a massive upgrade over the GTX Titan Black (Kepler) GPU in the legacy SFF build. They even included a package with all of the OEM screws and stock thermal paste.

30 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

 

Intel details microcode update that addresses instability and crashing errors — claims patch has negligible performance impacts, future processors not impacted

 

The patch reins in voltage, instituting a hard 1.55V limit as the company investigates potential mitigations for a related issue — a minimum voltage shift condition that can occur on impacted processors. The company will provide an update on the minimum voltage issue before the end of the month. We've asked for more details. Intel also says that all future processors will not be impacted. 

 

The 0x129 update will limit voltage requests above 1.55 volts to prevent chips that are still unaffected by the instability from getting damaged. Intel also said, "…based on extensive validation, all future products will not be affected by this issue." However, chips that are experiencing instability or have already failed will have to go through the RMA process, as there is no fix.

 

For unlocked Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen desktop processors, this latest microcode update (0x129) will not prevent users from overclocking if they so choose. Users can disable the eTVB setting in their BIOS if they wish to push above the 1.55V threshold.

 

 

 

Exactly. And, safety aside, using 1.500V to 1.550V on a water cooled CPU just isn't feasible. It will get too hot and thermal throttle with voltage levels that high, even with a delid and bare die. That just creates too much heat to remove through such a small die. Contrary to the modern myth, shrinking die size has some negative strings attached. Even using chilled water and bare die cooling a CPU running that much voltage in a workload like Cinebench is no small undertaking.

This should explain why performance is not being impacted. If someone owns a CPU that needs 1.500V to 1.550V to run stock or eTVB boost clocks it is a silicon lottery loser than needs to be RMA'd. It will never be a good CPU.

I am happy that, at least for now, Intel is going to leave the possibility of overrides in place for those playing with sub-zero extreme cooling. Otherwise, a 1.550V hard cap would ruin everything for them.

2 hours ago, Papusan said:

 

Meant to reduce overshoot/voltage spikes. And with this fix Asus could increase LLC to 5 iin the beta bios f I remember correct. Not fun seeing close to 1.7V😁

 

That makes good sense because they were also originally saying that you should cap your VR max to 1.700V, which used to be Intel's safe maximum. That's just way too high.

@electrosoft I will have to wait for a BIOS update for the Z790i Edge, but using the Windows MC that Brother @Prema provided I can increase the VCCSA to 1.225V now without a hard freeze, so it does look like it may at least improve the SA bug. Will need it in the BIOS probably to know for sure if the SA bug gets eliminated. This is up from 1.190V, so not a lot but still more. I did test 1.250V and it will pass Cinebench without a lockup, but not AIDA64 memory benchmark without locking up. Maybe if I feel motivated enough tomorrow I will yank that CPU from the Edge and see if the SA bug is gone when installed in the Encore. Hopefully the effort to find out will not prove to be a waste of time.

14 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Cinebench scores are the same?

14 hours ago, Talon said:

 

Honestly identical to my 11F microcode BIOS in CB23 with same power/current/undervolt. But of course 11F comes with the voltage issues. 

Same and confirmed. All the same settings as before. No change in performance, voltage or thermals. Can't tell any difference at all. Now I question if there actually is any. Seems there is nothing whatsoever, but may be because of how I manually overclock almost everything and remove all limits. I will check to see if it affects the SA bug now on the CPU that has it.
MSI has not released this for the Z790i Edge WiFi motherboard yet. So, I can't check for an SA bug fix using the Edge mobo until they do.

13 hours ago, Prema said:

In case anyone needs it, I've created a simple Windows microcode updater for v129. 

Works on all 13th & 14th gen Intel systems (Desktop and Notebook) without having to update your BIOS:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/eluktronics/s/wvXIQYgjoS

 

 

10 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Nice to see you brother. Hope all is well with you. So this microcode update can flash only the microcode without the ME if you want to omit the ME update? If that's the case, then I won't update any of my BIOS on any my four desktops. I will just test the microcode on one of them first before deciding whether or not to apply it to the other three.

Not need to reply. I checked it out and see it is two separate downloads. That's great.

Question: Does this change MC in Windows only? I flashed it, rebooted. BIOS still doesn't show 129. It shows whatever very is set. I use 11F, but there is a menu with other versions available. 129 is not in the list. But, when Windows loads AIDA64 shows 129.

Edit

7 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Question: Does this change MC in Windows only? I flashed it, rebooted. BIOS still doesn't show 129. It shows whatever very is set. I use 11F, but there is a menu with other versions available. 129 is not in the list. But, when Windows loads AIDA64 shows 129.

Answered my own question. Booting into another OS on the same system AIDA64 shows 11F, so it does appear to apply 129 to the OS only.

After applying the MC update in Windows it seems nothing is visibly different. Power draw, voltage, watts, amps... all exactly the same values in a Cinebench run.

7 hours ago, Talon said:

 

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. 

Micro$lop doesn't charge extra for Winduhz 11 being a sucky piece of crap. It is a free service they are happy to provide.

2 hours ago, Prema said:

 

The ME update is independent from the microcode update and is only for systems with 1.5MB Consumer Firmware (It won't flash if your system uses another version).

 

Here the changelog:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

16.1.32.2418- Fixed CSME (Converged Security and Manageability Engine) Data resiliency fail

16.1.30.2330- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.

16.1.30.2307- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.

16.1.30.2264- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.

16.1.27.2225- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.

16.1.27.2191- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk. 

16.1.27.2176- 1.Enhancement to address security vulnerability CVE-2022-36392, CVE-2022-38102, CVE-2022-29871). 2. Enhancement to address security vulnerability - CVE-2021-38578, CVE-2023-22612, CVE-2023-22614, CVE-2023-22615, CVE-2023-0286, CVSS:7.4, CVE-2022-4304, CVSS:5.9, CVE-2023-0215, CVSS:5.9, CVE-2022-4450, CVSS:5.9, CVE-2023-25600, CVE-2023-27373, CVE-2023-26090, CVE-2023-27471, CVE-2023-28468 3. Enhancement to address security vulnerability - LEN-127392
16.1.25.2124 - Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.
16.1.25.2020 -
16.1.25.1932 - Added CSME-detection-tool-console.exe for version detection - Updated FWCapUpdate tool to version 4.2 to support CSME detection exe tool - Fix issue wherein after enabling IntelR AMT by HECI command, DhcpDNSSuffix field is empty and RMCP ping does not work - Fix issue wherein LinkManager in IntelR AMT is waiting on RMCP component to process packets in LanLess system - Fix issue wherein the system may encounter black screen after S4 resume - Fix issue wherein BSOD occurerd after IntelR CSME driver update - Mitigated the following security vulnerabilities: CVE-2022-21181, CVE-2022-27497, CVE-2022-29893, CVE-2022-33159, CVE-2022-29515

 

[\SPOILER]

Nice to see you brother. Hope all is well with you. So this microcode update can flash only the microcode without the ME if you want to omit the ME update? If that's the case, then I won't update any of my BIOS on any my four desktops. I will just test the microcode on one of them first before deciding whether or not to apply it to the other three.

17 minutes ago, saturnotaku said:

I was hoping for much better from Zen 5. Guess I'll be holding on to my 5600X3D for a while longer. 

 

I also have to wonder if there will be microcode updates for Intel laptops. To Gigabyte's credit, their Aorus laptops have an advanced BIOS like MSI that lets you not only undervolt but also set a cap on the maximum voltage the system will ask for. Gigabyte Control Center still sucks as a software suite, but considering I didn't have to pay for the laptop, I can live with it.

If you need fan control for your laptop, see if Argus Monitor will work. It works excellent for my desktops and even includes RGB controls that work for GPUs and some motherboards. I have not tried it on my Dell Precision yet because I rarely ever have a reason to use a laptop, but I am planning to the next time I have a reason to use it.

I believe they have a trial version that you can test to see if it works before you buy. All of the motherboard control centers are the worst software imaginable. Armory Crate, MSI Dragon Center and Control Center, Gigabyte, ASROCK, Tong Feng, Alienware and Clevo all have universally horrible software support products. It seems like the laptop versions might be a little worse, but I won't allow any of their cancer garbage to be installed on my desktops.

31 minutes ago, Papusan said:

When will Intel release a hybrid chips with 3 different type E-cores for their mobile trash? This is just disgusting. 

 

Intel Arrow Lake-H CPUs For Laptops To Feature Core Architecture Trio: Lion Cove P-Cores, Skymont E-Cores, Crestmont LP-E Cores

 

Intel's Arrow Lake-H CPUs are now confirmed to include three different core architectures, Lion Cove P, Skymont E & Crestmont LP-E cores.

 

 

And here's a new problem Intel HQ need to handle. 

Intel hit with lawsuit over $32 billion loss, shareholders complain company hid problems

All turdbooks are disgusting. I cannot identify any circumstance where I would be willing to purchase a modern notebook. They are all loathsome rubbish and detestable objects that stand as examples of human stupidity. This just adds a new dimension to the already-unacceptable rubbish that further reinforces the already-unlikely possibility that I would consider wasting my money on any of these trashy products. 

19 minutes ago, Papusan said:

I expect Asus have kept the older MEI firmware v16.1.30.2307 with the new beta bios. That's good. MSI use the newer v16.1.30.2361 

4 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Unless something has changed, MSI still does it the right way and you have to deliberately download and flash the ME firmware if you want newer. They do not bundle the ME filth in their BIOS to form a cancer cocktail.

Yes, that remains the same. They make the newer ME available for any fool that wants to flash it, but it is not bundled in the BIOS. I have never updated the ME on the Edge and I would never update it on ASUS if they didn't bundle the filth. It really sucks that ASUS does this. I really do not like many things about ASUS firmware. The menus are nice, but they do a lot of idiotic things. The way their motherboard have to "re-flash" firmware to another area when you flip the switch on the motherboard is absolutely idiotic. Dual BIOS should actually mean dual BIOS, not their hybrid abortion version of that. EVGA was the only motherboard manufacturer that has done everything right for a very long time.

55 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

 

Promising start! I'll have to wait for Asrock to release an updated BIOS in the next week or so before giving it a whirl. I've logged so much data at 5.6-5.9 profiles on the 14900KS that it will be nice to compare the profiles.

 

 

Agreed. With my setup and end game goals, the SA Bug is not an issue. I ended up doing a full TM5 run at 8400 but the timings and voltage settings are better at 8200 especially temps atm.

 

 

This. Would be a nice bonus for my 14900KS, but honestly the chip is firing on all cylinders for my needs which is why I kept it versus returning it (plus the seller was super honest and nice).

 

More proof the MC update has resolved the SA Bug at least on Asus boards:

 

 

If that fixes it, I might move the CPU in the Edge over to the Encore and put the 13900KS in the Edge. Their VF curves are almost the same, very close, but the 14900KF in the Edge with the SA bug has slightly better E-core and lower Cache voltage needs. If I remember correctly it can run the E-cores at 49x stable and the 13900KS caps out at 48x on E-cores. I only moved it to the Edge since the memory is air cooled and running it above 8200 is thermally not ideal.

14 minutes ago, Papusan said:

 

I expect Asus have kept the older MEI firmware v16.1.30.2307 with the new beta bios. That's good. MSI use the newer v16.1.30.2361 

Unless something has changed, MSI still does it the right way and you have to deliberately download and flash the ME firmware if you want newer. They do not bundle the ME filth in their BIOS to form a cancer cocktail. Hopefully, that has not changed. ASUS really needs to stop doing that and add a BIOS menu option to disable the ME, because it is utterly worthless and contributes zero value to anything from a consumer perspective. If nothing else, it impairs security and never has anything to contribute in terms of improving performance. It should no longer even exist.