[b][/b]
[i][/i]
[u][/u]
[s][/s]
[code][/code]
[quote][/quote]
[spoiler][/spoiler]
[url][/url]
[img][/img]
[video][/video]
Smileys
smile
smile2
spook
alien
zunge
rose
shy
clown
devil
death
flash
sick
heart
idee
frage
blush
smokin
mad
sad
wink
frown
crazy
grin
hmm
laugh
mund
oh
rolling_eyes
lil
oh2
shocked
cool
[mail][/mail]
[pre][/pre]
Farben
[rot][/rot]
[blau][/blau]
[gruen][/gruen]
[orange][/orange]
[lila][/lila]
[weiss][/weiss]
[schwarz][/schwarz]
e.v.o
Posts: 118 | Last online: 05.24.2017
Name
Velocet
Hobbies
Sex, Drugs & Goth'n Roll
Location
Köln, Germany
Date registered
07.12.2015
Sex
not specified
    • just my 2 cents:

      The shown m.2 cooling solution is crap in many ways and absolutely not necessary:
      - You don't need active cooling for a SSD. Passive cooling is enough for this kind of consumer SSDs (also for the 960 Pro).
      - The fan makes extra noise
      - The height is a problem: You can't use the next PCIe slot
      - The fan probably needs an extra cable for power which is a bit stupid when you are using a adapter card which could normally handle this

      I bought this adapter which has cooling included: https://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_inf...roducts_id=3659
      This solutions makes way more sense cause the back also gets cooled and you can still use the next PCIe slot. Since it sits above the GPU there is enough airflow to cool it.

      If you have a m.2 slot on your motherboard or have a adapter card then you should go with something like this: https://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_inf...roducts_id=3660

    • e.v.o has written a new post "[Guide] Manual AMI UEFI BIOS Modding " 05.21.2017

      Zitat von futiless im Beitrag #190
      SAY WHAT : I'm all ears how do I do this I also have this e5-2699 v3 what mods did you make to the microcode.

      You don't mod the microcode. Just use an old version and that's it.

    • Zitat von SOSKI_KROTA im Beitrag #1961
      I got Gigabyte p85-d3 motherboard and i want either one of those 2 ssds:

      https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a...N82E16820249085
      https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a...=9SIA4S857X3214

      They differ mainly in form factor: one is m.2 2280 and the other is AIC

      The AIC one is PCIe x4 (which i have on my motherboard) so i would rather buy AIC so i don't need to buy an adapter. Does it matter in this case?
      Which should i buy?

      Got one more question: does success rate of this manupulation really justify the risk of buying hardware you prolly can't use?


      It would be good if you inform yourself (and i am not talking about asking questions on forums) about the whole topic. But back to your questions:
      It doesn't matter which one you buy but i would go with a Samsung 960 Evo or it's OEM counterpart the Samsung PM961 plus a m.2 > PCIe adapter: Better performance and bang for the buck. But if you really wanna get the Plextor then stick to the m.2 plus a adapter: If you every get e newer system you could simply just swap the SSD in it or use it in a laptop.

      If really does justify the risk of buying. But this is something you have to answer yourself before buying.

    • @SoniX
      Well.. i have to thank you for UBU and your work! If i can help you in any way then please let me know :)

    • Zitat von Fernando im Beitrag #2962
      @e.v.o:
      Although it obviously was your intention to help
      a) the Forum visitors, who are always waiting for an updated UBU version, and
      b) SoniX, who has written, that he doesn't have the required time to create a new UBU tool version,
      I am not sure, whether it was a good idea to offer a v1.67 of SoniX's UBU tool.
      Did you get his ok, before you published the new version?
      If not, you should remove your links.
      I want to avoid everything, what may end with SoniX's "good-bye" to our Forum.
      I am sorry! I would not harm anyone! Just read he didn't had the time so i thought i could do it and help him. It is his tool and will always be. But i am removing it since i didn't get his ok.

    • Fixed.

    • I updated UBU to version 1.67 to give something back. Thanks SoniX! I hope thats okay. I also changed the script to incorporate the updates. MMTool ist NOT included.

      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      12
      13
      14
      15
      16
      17
      18
      19
      20
      21
      22
      23
      24
      25
      26
      27
      28
      29
      30
      31
      32
      33
      34
      35
      36
      37
      38
      39
      40
      41
      42
       
      # UEFI BIOS Updater (UBU)
       
      ## [1.67] - 2017-05-15
      ### Added
      - Intel RST enterpise EFI and OROM (DevID 2826, 2827, 1d68/1d69) - 5.0 Branch
      -- SATA and sSATA 4.5.0.1012 > 5.0.0.1217 (oROM)
      -- SATA 4.5.0.1012 > 5.0.0.1139 (EFI)
       
      - Intel CPU MicroCodes
      -- 1150 - Haswell/Broadwell
      --- cpu000306C3_plat32_ver00000022_date27-01-2017
      --- cpu00040671_plat22_ver00000017_date27-01-2017
      -- 1151 - Skylake/Kabylake
      --- cpu000506E3_plat36_ver000000BA_date09-04-2017
      --- cpu000906E9_plat22_ver00000058_date09-03-2017
      -- 2011v3 - Haswell-E/Broadwell-E
      --- cpu000406F1_platEF_ver0B000021_date01-03-2017
      --- cpu000406F1_platEF_ver0B000020_date02-02-2017
      --- cpu000306F2_plat6F_ver0000003A_date30-01-2017
       
      - MMTool.txt
      -- Contains MMTool.exe hashes for verification
       
      ### Changed
      - ME Analyzer v1.10.2 > v1.11.2
      - ME Analyzer IME FW Repository DB Revision r82 > r86
      - MC Extractor Microcode Repository DB Revision r21 > r26
      - UEFIFind 0.10.6 > UEFIFind 0.10.8
      - GenFfs Version 0.1 Build 16164 > Version 0.1 Build 23431
      - GenSec Version 0.1 Build 16164 > Version 0.1 Build 23431
      - LzmaCompress Version 0.2 Build 16164 > Version 0.2 Build 23431
       
      - Intel EFI GOP Driver
      -- Skylake and Kabylake 9.0.1063 > 9.0.1064
       
      - Intel LAN only chips 82579/i217/i218/i219
      -- EFI Gigabit Undi 0.0.16 > 0.0.17
       
      ### Fixed
      - Typo: ..\Modules\mCode\1151\cpu000906E9_plat22_ver0000003C_date05-09-2016.bin > cpu000906E9_plat22_ver0000003C_date#05-09-2016.bin
       
      Many Thanks to SoniX - see Info.mht
       



      Download:
      N/A



      --- EDIT

      No more available. Just here for info reasons on latest versions.

    • e.v.o has written a new post "ASUS CrossHair V Formula Z MOD bios 2201" 05.14.2017

      ASUS is so god damn xxxx shitty when i comes to their BIOSes. I really hate them for this situation.

      EDIT by Fernando: The f-word has been deleted. I don't want to see such words within my Forum.

    • e.v.o has written a new post "Intel security assist?" 05.14.2017

      Zitat von deterministik im Beitrag #1
      when i install intel MEI drivers from my motherboard manufacturer i get a application called Intel Security Assist. Does anyone know how this is related to Intel MEI?? i cant find any information regarding this tool

      btw is it safe to upgrade the latest drivers from this site on X99 asus motherboard? Is the MEI drivers modified by asus? I know that the Intel ethernet drivers are because i can not install official latest drivers from intel.


      You don't need any of the ME software. Drivers are enough. The rest should not bother you.
      AFAIK MEI Drivers never get modified by OEMs.
      It's safe to upgrade to the latest drivers.
      If you can't install the latest drivers and you probably choose the wrong drivers?

    • e.v.o has written a new post "Intel Management Engine: Drivers, Firmware & System Tools" 05.09.2017

      Zitat von bronxamigo im Beitrag #2892
      Zitat von e.v.o im Beitrag #2888
      If it would be possible to flash the ME without the need for a SPI that would be great :)

      Yes. IIRC for HM86 I applied momentary weak +3V on the HDA_SDO (pin A24) at power on. It was either that, or ground the pin. You need trial and error to get the timing.

      Nice. Thanks! Will give it a shot as soon as i find some time.

      Zitat von bronxamigo im Beitrag #2892
      To be honest, I don't think HM86 is hardware limited from running Haswell Refresh (i.e. initial information shared here could be wrong). There are boards with this configuration if you google. It would be great if anyone has any idea what BIOS prerequisites allow me to flash MEI 9.1.x
      I examined a ASRock BIOS where they updated from 9.0 to 9.1. There were only 4 modules in the BIOS that were changed. One of them was MePlatformPolicy. Dunno what it does but the name suggests to look there ;)

    • e.v.o has written a new post "Intel Management Engine: Drivers, Firmware & System Tools" 05.09.2017

      Zitat von Ferrous im Beitrag #2889
      Zitat von e.v.o im Beitrag #2888
      Are you really sure about this? I don't think so cause normally this is only the case if it's a newer version...
      Get overwritten by older one, I mean..

      @plutomaniac Sorry to mention you here but just to clarify this one last time (maybe @Fernando could put this in the start posting):
      From what i know it is not possible to flash the same version or older ME versions. This is only possible if there is no lock present (which normally isn't the case) or you are doing it via a SPI flasher.
      Is this correct?

    • e.v.o has written a new post "Intel Management Engine: Drivers, Firmware & System Tools" 05.09.2017

      Zitat von Ferrous im Beitrag #2886

      Zitat
      I believe if I get a BIOS update after updating the ME Firmware, I can just go ahead with the update without worrying about ME firmware version in the BIOS update file. Right?

      Yes, but you should not run MESET while updating, or the ME region will get overwritten.


      Are you really sure about this? I don't think so cause normally this is only the case if it's a newer version...

      Zitat von bronxamigo im Beitrag #2868
      I flashed to 9.1 some years ago. Then I read that the chipset HM86 was not supposed to run 9.1 - hardware limitation. I had to ground a pin to bypass protection and flash it back to 9.0.

      Is this the thingy that this mentioned here? https://twitter.com/gsuberland/status/859814308078923776
      If it would be possible to flash the ME without the need for a SPI that would be great :)

    • Zitat von deadpool im Beitrag #2946
      Zitat von Ferrous im Beitrag #2944
      Since your ES CPU has a different CPUID from retail one, it won't use the μcode for retail CPU. UBU will simply update retail CPU's μcode and remove the others.
      So DO NOT update your μcode if you are using an ES CPU!
      Can anyone else confirm this? Does this shatter my overclocking dream?

      First things first: This isn't a OC related forum and yes i can confirm this. Seems you don't know how CPUID/Microcode updates work? So yeah.. don't update the microcode in this case. Get a "real" CPU instead of an ES one. This solves the case...

    • Zitat von speter2 im Beitrag #2939
      How to use UBU? Because as far as i know it requires a program which no longer can be found or used. I tryed to download it from the web with no luck. I couldn't find it anywhere and without it, i have no idea how to use this tool. Maybe my question seems stupid, sorry for that...

      As stated: you need MMTool. I would suggest to search Google for "UEFI BIOS Updater 1.65 download". A nice little tool you really should check out...

    • Zitat von Fernando im Beitrag #1899
      Yes, I had added the "version section" to be able to identify this module as version 3 by opening the modue with an Hex Editor
      Don't forget to update the checksum of the FFS if you updated just the version section or create a new FFS with GenSec and GenFfs.
      Also i think UEFITool isn't capabale of reading (parsing) the version section of a FFS file. Maybe @CodeRush could clarify this?

    • e.v.o has written a new post "Intel Management Engine: Drivers, Firmware & System Tools" 05.01.2017

      Read that SemiAccurate (what a name ^^) article just a few hours ago via HN and it basically says nothing. Also Intel says "This vulnerability does not exist on Intel-based consumer PCs"... i really dunno what to expect from all of this and i am curious about the whole situation.

      Zitat von plutomaniac im Beitrag #2812
      At least, maybe, since this vulnerability targets AMT and thus Corporate firmware which we don't have any at 11.7 yet.

      This vulnerability targets all systems not only AMT enabled?

Recipient
e.v.o
Subject:


text:
{[userbook_noactive]}


Xobor Forum Software von Xobor