*Official Benchmark Thread* - Post it here or it didn't happen :D

[Prema]

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

 

 

[tps3443]

14 minutes 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

 

 

What exactly does this ME do? Does it limit our max voltage? I’m almost afraid to mess with it. 

[Prema]

8 minutes ago, tps3443 said:

What exactly does this ME do? Does it limit our max voltage? I’m almost afraid to mess with it. 

 

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:

 

 

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]

[Papusan]

6 minutes 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]

 

Hello bro. Nice to see you pop up here. Hope all is well. Everything well here up in the North. The usual. Rain and rain, LOOL

 

As expected... No need for the ME update. Any changelog for v16.1.30.2361 ? MSI offer it on their driver support page. Thanks. 

[Prema]

Hi Bro, all good here as well!

 

v16.1.30.2361 is from back in March:

 

16.1.30.2361- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.

[Papusan]

1 hour ago, tps3443 said:

What exactly does this ME do? Does it limit our max voltage? I’m almost afraid to mess with it. 

 

Want to be the guinea pig. Here's the last MEI driver https://mega.nz/file/ANsFELYA#nqKdMeYcHPInYW2wLGlFd5Ci-Ax2fVUPToSs44Ji5wM

 

Launch "Install.cmd" by right-click Run as admin > Automatic restart when install is done.

 

Me... IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT🙂

 

1 hour ago, Prema said:

Hi Bro, all good here as well!

 

v16.1.30.2361 is from back in March:

 

16.1.30.2361- Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.

 

That's nice to hear. HeHe, I expected you had the answers on that one🙂 Asus should have followed EVGA. A kill switch for ME in bios. @Mr. Fox love it. 

 

PS. Why do we need ME for consumers/gamer boy machines? Nothing will be 100% secure anyway. This only open a door for the governments and their partners. As well hackers.

[electrosoft]

8 hours ago, tps3443 said:

This retail sp108 USA made 14900KS is a true mad dog. The IMC is beyond anything I have ever owned or tested, and so is the ring. You can bench with 5.5Ghz ring on this chip if you want. I do not feel the need to really overclock the P/E cores much if at all. Since 5.9Ghz is fantastic. With no delid, the load vcore is 1.208v with the ring at 5.3Ghz. This CPU is not delidded either. It runs so good right out of the box. 

This below is DDR5 8800c38 with only 1.540V vdd. I am going to keep pushing the voltages and improve even further. But this works totally fine as a daily setup. 

Really a cool CPU though. One of the most well rounded I have owned besides my old 11900K. This is a reincarnation of that it seems. I really love this chip, and I had to say it! I may just skip next gen Intel. 🙂

 

Totally Agree!

 

As I keep testing and using this SP109 on an AIO I am just blown away at the fact I can do 59x/45x/50x on an AIO....Ayyyy Eyeeeee Ohhhhh!!! at 8200. That I can dial it in at full auto on an AIO and have it hitting 6.2 and down and temps are fantastic relatively speaking and vcore under load rocks. My SP115 13900KS couldn't get anywhere near this and realistically topped out at 57x/44x/48x 8000 before heat and voltage took over. 8200 was flaky on it but this could have also been the G.skill sticks. I always wondered if it was maybe the motherboard, but @Mr. Fox hitting 8400 and 8600 on the same board puts that to rest. as for the SP109 14900KS, 8200 is rock solid TM5 90 min run on this one as is 8400 even with the SA Bug but I prefer 8200 with tighter timings with temps being about the same between both.

 

Just like you, I won't pop the tops and keep them stock.

 

I'm going to run 0x129 MC for safety and if, according to @Talon, our OCs aren't really affected,  if this wipes out the SA Bug that is icing on the cake.

 

The major icing on top that icing is having a 0.969 V/F point at 4300mhz just completes the near perfection of this chip for potential future NH55. I was actually fishing/looking/asking for V/F curves from sellers with decent silicon to see if they had a good 4300 point. If I'm going to buy binned silicon, why not try to check all the boxes, right? I was really interested in your R batch then ya went and popped the damn top. 😞 It had the mythical 0.969 point I wanted at 4300.

 

For example, I would turn down your chip if offered because of the poor 4300 point. I'm not sure what was your 5600/5900 points.  I was contemplating an SP112, but it's 4300 (0.984), 5600 (1.319) and 5900 (1.393) points were all higher than my SP109. Same as when I saw an SP111, poor 4300, slightly better 5600, equal 5900. I previously turned down an SP108 for $800 because the 4300 point was poor and in the end  the SP109 I ended up with had superior points across all three.

 

This one? $630 shipped total after all was said and done and it satisfies ALL my criteria both high and low. All I knew was it was an SP109 at a killer price and pulled the trigger. I didn't know I was going to get great V/F points across my main three criteria (especially 43x and 56x which are most important to me) and crazy good under load voltages for AIO use un-delidded.

 

Killer chip.

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Talon said:

 

 

 

 

He did say something was wrong with the power reading for the 9700x as it read 88w across everything incorrectly which was strange but that really isn't the point as the 14700k wasn't drawing a metric ton of power either.

 

With that being said, the logical gaming answer was and continues to be the 7800X3D. In their quest to beat Intel , AMD....well they AMD'd themselves with their own CPU.  🫢

 

I still have this suspicion that 15th gen is going to come out on top again.....hope I'm right.

 

5 hours 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.

 

Lots of hype but I still think the key take away here is basically the same power, smaller node, small uplift in IPC  at much lower power consumption. The lower power consumption is a big deal going forward on many levels especially APUs and mobile platforms. If you weren't compelled to upgrade from your AM4 platform to 7000 series, so far 9000 isn't doing it either. 😞

 

I did not know that Gigabyte gave you MSI like levels of control in their BIOS. I might have to add them to my "maybe" list.

 

3 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

 

 

 

You are awesome @Prema, thanks! This will make it easy for me to deploy and test on my two 13th gen laptops and Asrock board if I want to test it independently.

 

You rock bro!

Another case of 0x129 fixing the SA Bug on Asus Encore....

 

 

[Talon]

2 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

 

 

 

Awesome! I'll test that out on my Lenovo Legion 7i Pro with 13900HX eventually. No time today. This might work as a work around to use on EVGA Z690 Dark since it doesn't have any official or unofficial BIOS since EVGA is donezo. 

[Papusan]

34 minutes ago, electrosoft said:

You are awesome @Prema, thanks! This will make it easy for me to deploy and test on my two 13th gen laptops and Asrock board if I want to test it independently.

 

Maybe start with 3Dmark Time Spy Extreme (Cpu score). The biggest drop in performance of all tests. Not sure I trust Jayz. Neither do I know if MSI did some own changes in bios.

 

[Mr. Fox]

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.

[tps3443]

1 hour ago, electrosoft said:

 

Totally Agree!

 

As I keep testing and using this SP109 on an AIO I am just blown away at the fact I can do 59x/45x/50x on an AIO....Ayyyy Eyeeeee Ohhhhh!!! at 8200. That I can dial it in at full auto on an AIO and have it hitting 6.2 and down and temps are fantastic relatively speaking and vcore under load rocks. My SP115 13900KS couldn't get anywhere near this and realistically topped out at 57x/44x/48x 8000 before heat and voltage took over. 8200 was flaky on it but this could have also been the G.skill sticks. I always wondered if it was maybe the motherboard, but @Mr. Fox hitting 8400 and 8600 on the same board puts that to rest. as for the SP109 14900KS, 8200 is rock solid TM5 90 min run on this one as is 8400 even with the SA Bug but I prefer 8200 with tighter timings with temps being about the same between both.

 

Just like you, I won't pop the tops and keep them stock.

 

I'm going to run 0x129 MC for safety and if, according to @Talon, our OCs aren't really affected,  if this wipes out the SA Bug that is icing on the cake.

 

The major icing on top that icing is having a 0.969 V/F point at 4300mhz just completes the near perfection of this chip for potential future NH55. I was actually fishing/looking/asking for V/F curves from sellers with decent silicon to see if they had a good 4300 point. If I'm going to buy binned silicon, why not try to check all the boxes, right? I was really interested in your R batch then ya went and popped the damn top. 😞 It had the mythical 0.969 point I wanted at 4300.

 

For example, I would turn down your chip if offered because of the poor 4300 point. I'm not sure what was your 5600/5900 points.  I was contemplating an SP112, but it's 4300 (0.984), 5600 (1.319) and 5900 (1.393) points were all higher than my SP109. Same as when I saw an SP111, poor 4300, slightly better 5600, equal 5900. I previously turned down an SP108 for $800 because the 4300 point was poor and in the end  the SP109 I ended up with had superior points across all three.

 

This one? $630 shipped total after all was said and done and it satisfies ALL my criteria both high and low. All I knew was it was an SP109 at a killer price and pulled the trigger. I didn't know I was going to get great V/F points across my main three criteria (especially 43x and 56x which are most important to me) and crazy good under load voltages for AIO use un-delidded.

 

Killer chip.

 

 

 

 

He did say something was wrong with the power reading for the 9700x as it read 88w across everything incorrectly which was strange but that really isn't the point as the 14700k wasn't drawing a metric ton of power either.

 

With that being said, the logical gaming answer was and continues to be the 7800X3D. In their quest to beat Intel , AMD....well they AMD'd themselves with their own CPU.  🫢

 

I still have this suspicion that 15th gen is going to come out on top again.....hope I'm right.

 

 

Lots of hype but I still think the key take away here is basically the same power, smaller node, small uplift in IPC  at much lower power consumption. The lower power consumption is a big deal going forward on many levels especially APUs and mobile platforms. If you weren't compelled to upgrade from your AM4 platform to 7000 series, so far 9000 isn't doing it either. 😞

 

I did not know that Gigabyte gave you MSI like levels of control in their BIOS. I might have to add them to my "maybe" list.

 

 

You are awesome @Prema, thanks! This will make it easy for me to deploy and test on my two 13th gen laptops and Asrock board if I want to test it independently.

 

You rock bro!

Another case of 0x129 fixing the SA Bug on Asus Encore....

 

Full auto stock is the way to go! I have tested overclocked CPU vs stock CPU and the trade-off mostly is just extra power, I truly believe any KS will slam down most of the higher end 13900KS chips, my SP99 was pretty amazing at 5.9 even though it had the 1.447v 5.9 vfcurve 🤭. I always explore all voltage options with these CPU's for benching and for fun though. But Adaptive/Auto is the way for me and no delidding, something about removing the IHS makes me feel like I ruined the chip or something, I regretted delidding that R-batch, and I really just wanted to get back to stock soldered chips. As for my VFcurves, my current P122/E82 chip is 1.378v for 5.9Ghz. 

[Talon]

3 hours ago, Papusan said:

 

Maybe start with 3Dmark Time Spy Extreme (Cpu score). The biggest drop in performance of all tests. Not sure I trust Jayz. Neither do I know if MSI did some own changes in bios.

 

 

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. 

[electrosoft]

 

I mean....

 

Uh.....

 

I don't know what to say....

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

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.

[tps3443]

1 hour 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. 

Yeah, and using Windows balanced power mode has shown higher numbers for me in this TS cpu test. 🤷‍♂️ One more thing, Timespy physics score is very sensitive to stability as well. If your CPU isn’t getting fed enough juice, or is not completely stable, I have seen it score lower. I remember spending an entire day running just TS cpu test and trying different thing. Just another one of those weird things with Win11 I guess. 

[Mr. Fox]

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.

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

@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.

 

[ryan]

overclocked 165/500

 

 

my  best so far...could only top old score by 1 point with new drivers so yeah has me wondering what exactly nvidias doing with drivers these days

 

 

a more impressive result heres stock no overclock...testament to software tweaking

[Papusan]

12 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

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.

 

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

 

[Mr. Fox]

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.

[Papusan]

3 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😁

 

 

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

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.

 

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.

 

Edit:
Microcode (0x129) Update for Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processors by Thomas_Hannaford on ‎08-09-2024 07:00 AM

 

Asus have now posted their beta bios on their official support page.

https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-maximus/rog-maximus-z790-apex-encore/helpdesk_bios/

 

[Mr. Fox]

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.

[tps3443]

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. 

[electrosoft]

11 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

@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.

 

 

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.

 

 

1 hour 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.

 

Edit:
Microcode (0x129) Update for Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processors by Thomas_Hannaford on ‎08-09-2024 07:00 AM

 

Asus have now posted their beta bios on their official support page.

https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-maximus/rog-maximus-z790-apex-encore/helpdesk_bios/

 

 

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.

 

43 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

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.

 

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.

 

 

[Mr. Fox]

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.

Edited August 9 by Mr. Fox
update on GPU conversion