cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Random restarts with 3009 and 3101

Griever
Level 7
I have used every single bios extensively as they have been released; all on default settings. With bios 3009 and 3101, I am experiencing random, hard resets. This doesn't happen under load; it can happen even at idle or small load. Oddly, I didn't even have this issue with the beta 3008 bios. Any suggestions as I would like to keep my bios up to date.
306 Views
235 REPLIES 235

karab44 wrote:
3101 Restarts after making a coffee. Default settings nothing modded... This BIOS is a crap! It goes POST very long, it doesn't work with AI Suite as it should anymore and it restarts- crap!

Nvidia 365.19


Agree, POST takes ages 😞 😞 😞 Asus come on, do something !

Legolas
Level 9
Can you guys provide your hardware specifications?
Sincerely,
Legolas

Brighttail
Level 11
I tried the latest BIOS and couldn't get it running stable. At first it simply would NOT recognize my watercooling pump if I plugged it into the CPU fan header. This is nothing new as other versions have done this off and on but this version it simply wouldn't let me do anything with it plugged in.

I'm assuming it has something to do with the new MB's have a separate pump header. So I plugged it into another fan header and chose to ignore the CPU monitoring.

At this point many crashes while I was within BIOS and I could never get to the point where I could get into Windows at all. After about an hour i gave up and wanted to revert back to my Old version of 2001 BIOS.

That took another hour or so as I would load up 2001 and after a couple of reboots it would reset itself to 3101. I have finally got it back to 2001 and it looks to have held but a very nasty and bad experience.
Panteks Enthoo Elite / Asus x299 Rampage VI Extreme / Intel I9-7900X / Corsair Dominator RGB 3200MHz

MSI GTX 1080 TI / 2x Intel 900p / Samsung 970 Pro 512GB

Samsung 850 PRO 512GB / Western Digital Gold 8TB HD

Corsair AX 1200i / Corsair Platinum K95 / Asus Chakram

Acer XB321HK 4k, IPS, G-sync Monitor / Water Cooled / Asus G571JT Laptop

Andrew_WOT
Level 7
After numerous crashes went back to 2101.
No problems so far.

Andrew_WOT wrote:
After numerous crashes went back to 2101.
No problems so far.

One week on 2101, not a single reboot since rolling back.

Qwinn
Level 11
Kinda ironic. For the longest time I was stuck on 1902 modded as the only BIOS that my OC was stable on. Couldn't get my OC to work on any official BIOS. Now 3101 comes out, working perfect for me, problems for everyone else.

samboy87
Level 9
Bios 3101 works totally perfect for me aswell. and to be honest, the best/stable bios for me right now. only bad thing is the long Post/Boot time! from 20sec to 30.2 sec!

linxeye
Level 8
Good for you 🙂 The random restart (had one yesterday evening) is IRRITATING. But I wonder what's worst... The random reset of the infinite POST that makes you nervous like will it ever boot 😮

Menthol
Level 14
The 3000 series bios adds support for BW-E processors, if you had issues before I wouldn't expect any new bios to correct them now, I haven't seen any improvements since 1502 myself
there has been some changes to support new memory modules but nothing to fix anything that I am aware of.
The ASUS Extreme boards are designed for enthusiasts to squeeze the most performance out of their hardware and typically require more tweaking than other boards
If the new bios doesn't work well for your setup I would suggest reverting to an earlier bios that did work, if you are planning on updating to a BW-E processor than you will need the latest bios
The good thing is we have dual bios's so we can easily try new bios without losing your bios settings that you spent time tweaking to get your perfect setting

Just to mention that I didn't have any stability issues with my righ until BIOS 3000. Agree with you that reverting will probably correct the stability issues but I'm hopeful Asus will get its act together and fix what several of use are experiencing out of the blue.

Also BW-E or not, your reply doesn't adress the longer POST delay... Is that an expected behaviour ? Why ?