BIOS v1720 Compulsory Update Mega Thread

[xeromist]

Hi all,

ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation.

ASUS provided this update as optional but if you had a different experience please post here in as much detail as possible:
-Whether you clicked check for updates or Windows updated automatically
-Exact name of the update as it appears on your system
-Date you got the update
-Country or region
-Windows version and product level (ie Windows 11 Home)
-Any update related settings you have chosen such as the Windows Insider Program
-Screenshots if you see Windows listing this update as anything other than optional

Thank you

This thread will be updated as more information is available.

*Multiple threads merged here. Apologies if some of the conversation is disjointed.*

[MasterC]

Memory kits listed in the QVL should work out-of-the-box. XMP settings on the other hand are overclocked settings, some may not be able to hit them. Many people in the forum can help and point you in the right direction, but overclocked settings are never guaranteed. Undervolting is more likely to cause you more problems than solve them.

We could definitely be more descriptive for updates, do keep in mind that many small changes and tweaks are often not significant enough to mention or are confidential.

Traumatik wrote:
OK i finally got 6200 cl38 2x16 in a2 b2 thanks to Buildzoids video , passed bios memtest on my Asus z690 Extreme bios 1601 (pretty sure its a 2021 manufactured). 1720 doesnt allow for cpu undervolting , most think its a bug , since Asus has been quiet on the issue til now. See if your descriptions would be more descriptive your customers would know what to diagnose. The only thing i did different then buildzoid is not use xmp, i set manual in bios but used all his tweaks for memory.

Asus , when your customers have memory on your QVL , they should just work , when our setups match what your boards say they can do. I went thru 2 12900k and 2 12900ks cpus , thinking that its the cpus memory controllers. My 1st z690 extreme nuked itself with the Teamgroup 2x16 6200 cl38 on your QVL didnt boot at all with memory code errors, i even tried GSKILL 2x16 cl36. I then rma that board with place of purchase and bought extreme from microcenter , i have tried it with xmp1 xmp2 and also asus tweaked settings in bios for both sets then also tried the settings posted in the asus maximus oc pdf that that was on overclockers forum, and nothing got me stable ( memtest errors or a lot of game crashing) until i took buildzoids settings for his hynix 4x16 6000 settings for my TG 6200 cl38.

This isnt a rant but hopefully things will get better with your customers input. Your customers are loosing faith after the z690 Heros on fire 7 months time to recall debacle, then the z690 apex 2021s memory problems, and now still waiting on fix for memory that is on QVL to just work when using xmp1 and/or xmp2.
Thanks for your time. I hope i explained this right.

[trihy]

Undervolt is not amazing. Its been always this way.

When new architectures arrives, the overvolt margin is high to avoid unexpected behavior.

All the community knows this but asus.

Thats why rocket or alder supports 0.100 undervolt or more without winning any silicon lottery. And also thats why architectures like comet lake, which are based on old and proven architectures, support less undervolt, because stock svid is much more refined.

[MasterC]

To clarify, undervolting for the purpose of gaining performance is very difficult - I didn't mean for the sole purpose of lowering temps and fan noise.

Of course, people like what they like, if they want to build a killer system that is focused on silent and cool but not performance, others shouldn't judge. However, buying a 'premium gaming' board with no intention of pushing gaming performance is usually a questionable decision.

trihy wrote:
Undervolt is not amazing. Its been always this way.

When new architectures arrives, the overvolt margin is high to avoid unexpected behavior.

All the community knows this but asus.

Thats why rocket or alder supports 0.100 undervolt or more without winning any silicon lottery. And also thats why architectures like comet lake, which are based on old and proven architectures, support less undervolt, because stock svid is much more refined.

[akgis_]

MasterC@ROG wrote:
To clarify, undervolting for the purpose of gaining performance is very difficult - I didn't mean for the sole purpose of lowering temps and fan noise.

Of course, people like what they like, if they want to build a killer system that is focused on silent and cool but not performance, others shouldn't judge. However, buying a 'premium gaming' board with no intention of pushing gaming performance is usually a questionable decision.

Please understand that with Intel own XTU or your own AI suite3 you can create profiles for undervolting at desktop, normal for gaming or slight OC, and extreme for benchmarks!

Most of the time you can undervolt without losing performance but gaining cooler temps/lower power usage that in some cases might lead to higher BOOST clocks!

[Zardoc]

@ MasterC@ROG I must say that I really appreciate you taking users at heart and replying to our grievances. This is really appreciated.

Like I mentioned before, I have been building Asus systems for over 20 years. All my customers have Asus boards. However in the 2010 period I switched to Gigabyte because I thought that Asus was not giving it's customers what they wanted. Unfortunately Gigabyte was worst with beta bios's and never a final updated stable bios.

MasterC@ROG wrote:
Of course, people like what they like, if they want to build a killer system that is focused on silent and cool but not performance, others shouldn't judge. However, buying a 'premium gaming' board with no intention of pushing gaming performance is usually a questionable decision.

Well, you are judging aren't you? I don't game. I overclocked in the past but don't have time anymore. I build Asus boards for my customers.

I buy the mid range to high quality boards not for gaming but for durability, accessories and functionality. Some people will buy a Porsche and never go over the speed limit, Others will buy a Bentley for the quality and luxuries.

Sometimes users want a board that's TUF (get the pun) and has all the bells and whistles they need. Good onboard sound, lots of fast USB ports, Wifi (if needed) BT etc.
They don't want to OC. They just want a good steady board that runs fast, boots fast, can connect and transfer fast has great sound.

If Asus wants to gain more credibility with customers, all they have to do is respond like you are doing. Give enough details (not a novel) when putting something out. and show that they are listening when users want answers and provide those answers.

The USB 4080 chip is one of the worst issues that I have seen since I have been using Asus products (the Hero fire thing also but I don't have a Hero board).
That sound chip is such a pain that I sold my board to buy a TUF series with an ALC chip.

It really is so simple but seems so difficult at times.

OH BTW, MoKiChU has been here for a while and is a STAR to Asus but mostly to us users. He works hard, respects users and answers any question thrown at him on top of giving you all the drivers you need.

Great JOB MoKiChU!!!

[Spicedaddy]

1720 is trash apparently because of Intel's micro-code. (seems to overvolt Alder Lake CPUs)

Asus should take it down from their site and Windows Update.

[trihy]

OC is not the same that was a few years ago, where you could add 500mhz to 1ghz oc. Since Intel pushed their cpus to their limits, bacause amd performance, there is little margin for oc.

I think most people focus on mb features than oc.

[alessast]

trihy wrote:
OC is not the same that was a few years ago,

Overclocking works very well on my z690 extreme even on bios 1720 when you are using the LLC1 settings from Falkentyne and Roberto from this thread:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?126369-Maximus-Z690-and-Alder-Lake-Modern-CPU%92s-require-...

As far as i can see Only Asus found a way with these settings to overclock the 12900k at high frequencies using the lowest voltage possible for the lowest temperatures..

Before i have i followed many 12900k overclocking guides from famous overclockers like SkatterBencher, der8auer, JayzTwoCents and many more...but none worked well..

Only the Falkentyne and Roberto settings worked very well:

Falkentyne wrote:

LoadLines:

LLC=#1
AC_LL=0.60
DC_LL=1.70

By Core:
P: 54x3 – 53x5 – 51x8
E: 41x4 – 40x8
OCTVB:
+2Boost Profile
Voltage Optimization = Enable

Voltage:
Adaptive Voltage=1.460
IA VR Voltage Limit=1500
VF#11 offset = 1.460 – Native VF# 11 voltage.
*** If needed, use VF# 6 to tune the 51x full load voltage ***

also for OCTVB to work you need to have Advanced/ CPU Power Management/ CPu C states enable.

i customized them a bit for my use case to get just :
5.4 Ghz all cores (full load 51x8)

Adaptive Voltage=1.4
By Core:
P: 52x8 +2 OCTVB Boost Profile

Ecores: disable
to get the cache at 4.7 Ghz

With these settings Asus found a way to get a bad 12900k chip SP 86 like mine to 5.4 Ghz all cores at 1.4v with very low temperatures,
i think it is quite an achievement ,
because the usual overclocking methods do not seem to work well with the 12900k..

using the same settings i can also get 5.3ghz all cores
P: 51x8 +2 OCTVB Boost Profile
without even adding any voltage (around 1.3v),
just leaving Global core SVID voltage on Adaptive + auto
and temperatures are extremely low even on air cooling..

[trihy]

Thats less than a 10%. Its great for this gen. But oc was much better than that some years ago.

[carlisle97]

Latest BIOS on Z690-P Prime D4 is 1620, probably same as 1720 but for Prime series and there are problems with Voltage control as well: Global SVID Adaptive (in this example) V/F Offset Points are just ignored. Downgraded to 1603 with the same BIOS settings and everything works fine. I reported it to Asus Support but their reply was irrelevant.

MasterC@ROG wrote:
We will investigate, thanks for reporting it.

Voltage problems also present on recent updated BIOS 1620 too (Z690 Prime), I guess it's related to the same issues on 1720 @MasterC@ROG