Crosshair VI Hero: UEFI build update thread

[Raja]

Directly from Elmor:

Beta BIOS 3008 for C6H/C6HWIFI/C6E:

AGESA 1.0.7.1, temperature offset fixed after S3 resume, GPU Post function fixed, 0d with some GPUs fixed

http://www.mediafire.com/file/f95motjmh211e7h/CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-ASUS-3008.zip
http://www.mediafire.com/file/ntn6i3jiub610ai/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-WIFI-AC-ASUS-3008.zip
http://www.mediafire.com/file/yj22ld2rmmedp01/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-EXTREME-ASUS-3008.zip





C6H Test BIOS 0020 with AGESA 1007 (405200c4e299c1eed9a0044edec9aba51f37cee1d70caabe40b9485b0604521a)

In order to get back to an older version after flashing, you have to use USB BIOS Flashback.

Let me know how it works for you, especially regarding cold boot issues. Any confirmed bugs in the bug report form please




Beta BIOS 1501

* Workaround for some CPUs stuck at 22x ratio if using override voltage
* Fixes PCIEX4 bandwidth setting getting lost after power is removed
* Same DRAM boot behavior as 1403 (no cold boot fix)
* Same DRAM profiles as in 9920
* Still has the Vcore value issue when booting with Offset Mode and switching to Manual Mode

Crosshair VI Hero 1501 SHA256 EDE223DC6897B7199C93D9985E28B7A2CD1B8A8DB2DCBF3D3555A521DB4F045D
Crosshair VI Hero Wifi AC 1501 SHA256 0D9F51F43AA3A56A4AC984B11A52F58451B76F8A7CCB9A04E1C3194231C9D4DA






UEFI build 9920 for the C6H:

* Improved DRAM cold boot, results in slightly longer POST time
* Fix for CPU Ratio stuck at 22x on some CPUs when using Vcore override/offset
* SenseMi Skew is now Disabled by default. If you want to return to previous behavior set SenseMi Skew = Enabled and Offset = 272.
* Added DRAM profiles for Samsung B-based DIMMs with tuned subtimings, including The Stilt's settings



C6H beta UEFI 1403

* Fixed W_PUMP and AIO_PUMP speeds during POST
* Fixed Fan tuning sometimes failing
* Fixed a few issues with AMD USB3.1 ports
* Some tuning on DRAM settings, let us know how they work for you. tRDRD_Sc is still at 5 above 3500 MHz as it helps with stability. For performance you want to force this to 1. We'll consider changing this in future releases as the performance impact can be quite noticeable in certain applications.

An update on DRAM Boot Voltage, currently it should be 1.35V by default if the DRAM Voltage is changed. So if you're setting DRAM Voltage to above 1.35V, you might want to sync this setting. Additionally there might be scenarios where you will have better luck by syncing DRAM Boot Voltage to DRAM Voltage even at lower values.




AGESA 1006 RC4 official UEFI 1401

Just tested quickly 3600 memory and cold booting, seems good but you guys are going to have to help me test this before we have a judgement. Seems CPU temp reading from SIO now has -20*C offset for XFR enabled CPUs.





UEFI build 1107





Older test builds:


Test BIOS 0079

Test BIOS with new AGESA 1004a, with a couple of bugfixes. Up to 5% performance increases in specific applications. Also has P-state overclocking working with BCLK increase. If you want to keep C-states, make sure to set Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-state Control = Enabled. There are two new settings under AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DDR4 Common Options\ you might want to take a look at, Fail_CNT and ProcODT. Fail_CNT decides how many times to retry when DRAM training fails (F9 -> 0d), default is now 1. ProcODT can help improve your DRAM overclocking. There's a setting available also on previous BIOSes under AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DRAM Memory Mapping named BankGroupSwap. If you have 2x Single-Rank modules you can try setting this to Disabled and you might see some performance boost in certain applications.

Test BIOS 0081

Same as 0079 but has ProcODT default = 53.3 ohm

Test BIOS 0082

Same as 0081 but with a DRAM compability patch for the below part numbers

CMK16GX4M4A2133C13
AHU08GGB13CGT7G
PV416G240C5QK
F4-2400C15Q-32GRR
TCD44G2400C14BK
F4-2666C16Q2-64GRB
AVD4UZ126661504G
BLT8G4D26AFTA.16FAD
IMA41GU6MFR8N-C F0
MD16GK4D4266615AXR
HX430C15PB2K4/16
HX430C15PBK4/32
AX4U3333W4G16-QGZ
GAM4DBLBM2133D15IE041C
TC48G24S817
SP004GBLFU213N02
78.C1GM3.AF10B
F4-3200C16D-8GVKB

MTA4ATF51264AZ-2G6B1
MTA8ATF1G64AZ-2G3B1
MTA16ATF2G64AZ-2G6B1
HMA41GU7AFR8N-TF T0
HMA451U7AFR8N-TF T0
HMA41GU6AFR8N-UH N0
M378A2K43BB1-CTD
M378A1K43BB1-CRC
M378A1G43EB1-CRC

Test BIOS 0083

Same as 0081 but with "2T" DRAM Mode when using above 2666 DRAM Ratio.

[skellattarr]

yep i hope they fix it soon

[jbasemoine]

With bios 6001 i managed to set ram @ 3600 without any additional overclocking, i haven't been able to check ram stability yet but will test it later this week.
Thus far windows crashed only one time, but i was unable to determin wheter crash was ram related or that the hdd which was over used at that time caused windows to crash (was copieen multiple files to multiple different drives on my nas, was downloading and updating some apps that where on that disk all at the same time).
The only thing i neede to change to get the ram working @ 3600 was voltage i set it to 1.41 and all works pretty fine atm.

I will inform what thestability test results.

[SIMONHANDLEY1]

hey guy's I said that last week, I went back to 3008 and I am getting 3.85Ghz with Corsair dominator 32gb at 3.1Mhz. Also the bios causes the CPU to throttle back which makes it unstable!

[jbasemoine]

Check the stability ram running @ 3600 and it's not stable at this time.
When playing games or doing anything that stresses the RAM windows or the program will crash, tried the same thing with ram tuned back to 3466 and all was stable with no crashes what so ever!

It pleases me to see that i can boot with ram @3600 (finaly) and so far did not have had any problems with cold booting, though some more tweaking they wil iron out the stability!
Even though it took +/- 1 year for this board to cold boot on 3600 i'm verry pleased at this moment to see that 3600Mhz is achieveble!

[jbasemoine]

p.s. Note that i run my 1800x at Stock clock, i have only set Ram timings and set volt to 1.40!
I'm going to try to run ram @3600 with ram set to 1.45volts to see if this bring more stability!

[Red_Core]

jbasemoine wrote:
p.s. Note that i run my 1800x at Stock clock, i have only set Ram timings and set volt to 1.40!
I'm going to try to run ram @3600 with ram set to 1.45volts to see if this bring more stability!

It makes not much sense to go above 3200 with the ram.
There r many test results in the internet, everything above 3200 cl14 is just a tiny improvement about +0% - 3% and only if its the best ram with lowest cl.
If you reached more than 3200, then tighten ur timings of the ram, that would increase the performance aswell.

And if u didnt done it, use ur ram in dualchannel.

[Clouseau]

Red Core wrote:
It makes not much sense to go above 3200 with the ram.
There r many test results in the internet, everything above 3200 cl14 is just a tiny improvement about +0% - 3% and only if its the best ram with lowest cl.
If you reached more than 3200, then tighten ur timings of the ram, that would increase the performance aswell.

And if u didnt done it, use ur ram in dualchannel.

Would beg to differ about performance above 3200. Those tests can say whatever they want. Ryzen starts to wake up above 3200 with tight timings. Actual FPS may only improve by ~ 3% but everything outside of that is noticeably far more responsive. Gaming, currently, diminishing returns starts to kick in after 3200. Raw cpu GHz is not as important as how the ram is set. Just the few Mhz above 3466 with the timings from my post above made noticeable improvements. Performance is not shabby with ram at 3200 but the combination of tight timings and 3466 or above, feels like the whole system is just beginning to stretch its legs. Setting up the CBS section, in particular the DF Common Settings, has noticeable impact on performance; not just talking gaming. Each interleaving discipline has its advantages and disadvantages along with the interleaving size. Personally have found that an interleaving size of 512 ended up being a decent compromise. Plus did not purchase this board to not push the limits no matter how small the gains end up being. Right wrong, or indifferent; just my opinion.

[Syaoran]

Clouseau wrote:
Would beg to differ about performance above 3200. Those tests can say whatever they want. Ryzen starts to wake up above 3200 with tight timings. Actual FPS may only improve by ~ 3% but everything outside of that is noticeably far more responsive. Gaming, currently, diminishing returns starts to kick in after 3200. Raw cpu GHz is not as important as how the ram is set. Just the few Mhz above 3466 with the timings from my post above made noticeable improvements. Performance is not shabby with ram at 3200 but the combination of tight timings and 3466 or above, feels like the whole system is just beginning to stretch its legs. Setting up the CBS section, in particular the DF Common Settings, has noticeable impact on performance; not just talking gaming. Each interleaving discipline has its advantages and disadvantages along with the interleaving size. Personally have found that an interleaving size of 512 ended up being a decent compromise. Plus did not purchase this board to not push the limits no matter how small the gains end up being. Right wrong, or indifferent; just my opinion.

The snappy response of every click and program opening when RAM speeds are above 3466 is a noticeable difference as well.

[Red_Core]

Clouseau wrote:
Would beg to differ about performance above 3200. Those tests can say whatever they want. Ryzen starts to wake up above 3200 with tight timings. Actual FPS may only improve by ~ 3% but everything outside of that is noticeably far more responsive. Gaming, currently, diminishing returns starts to kick in after 3200. Raw cpu GHz is not as important as how the ram is set. Just the few Mhz above 3466 with the timings from my post above made noticeable improvements. Performance is not shabby with ram at 3200 but the combination of tight timings and 3466 or above, feels like the whole system is just beginning to stretch its legs. Setting up the CBS section, in particular the DF Common Settings, has noticeable impact on performance; not just talking gaming. Each interleaving discipline has its advantages and disadvantages along with the interleaving size. Personally have found that an interleaving size of 512 ended up being a decent compromise. Plus did not purchase this board to not push the limits no matter how small the gains end up being. Right wrong, or indifferent; just my opinion.

But the most common question is about the gaming performance, because this board stands for ROG.
You r right, in non-gaming scenarios its performance increase noticeable with the faster ram. 🙂

[looncraz]

Clouseau wrote:
Would beg to differ about performance above 3200. Those tests can say whatever they want. Ryzen starts to wake up above 3200 with tight timings. Actual FPS may only improve by ~ 3% but everything outside of that is noticeably far more responsive. Gaming, currently, diminishing returns starts to kick in after 3200. Raw cpu GHz is not as important as how the ram is set. Just the few Mhz above 3466 with the timings from my post above made noticeable improvements. Performance is not shabby with ram at 3200 but the combination of tight timings and 3466 or above, feels like the whole system is just beginning to stretch its legs. Setting up the CBS section, in particular the DF Common Settings, has noticeable impact on performance; not just talking gaming. Each interleaving discipline has its advantages and disadvantages along with the interleaving size. Personally have found that an interleaving size of 512 ended up being a decent compromise. Plus did not purchase this board to not push the limits no matter how small the gains end up being. Right wrong, or indifferent; just my opinion.

The 'subjective' feel would almost certainly be a result of lower latency allowing updates to occur on screen just a little faster, but allowing the update to occur on an entirely earlier frame (modern OSes use compositing, so they act like games in their rendering behavior).

If you are running 60hz on the desktop, then you are moving from having completion on-screen by 16.7ms - which you can absolutely feel. If you took 16.8ms to compute something before, you wouldn't see it for 33.4ms... but, now, computing it in 16.6ms, you see it twice as quickly.

The old way of rendering (direct) allowed you to feel a 10% performance increase in everything you did. But, now, you need BIG changes to feel it everywhere... but, once you get close, it only takes a tiny bit extra to put you over the top - the changes are accumulative.

Using 120hz refresh rate on the desktop allows you to feel the performance jumps even better, but you still have 8ms chunks of time.