Here's a pic with Auto. If I leave it on auto, it will give my SOC some bizarre voltage of 1.35V when im running the RAM at 3000MHz





Here's a picture with "Normal" this will leave my SOC Voltage at 0.9V if I'm running my RAM at 2400MHz. Now if I start to increase my RAM speed in increments ex, 2566, 2600 etc etc, it will bump the voltage up automatically in Normal mode to 0.95V - 1.0 - 1.1V etc





Here is the next option after Normal, We've now in the + range. If I leave it on +0.00 it's basically the same as leaving it in Normal mode, only increasing in increments after it's automatically pre-determined voltage that it gives you, with no way of returning to 0.9V at 3000MHz





Getting the SOC to undervolt would be great. My CPU idle temperature is now 27C instead of 34C <that's with SOC at 1.1V If I can get it to 0.9V with the RAM at 3000MHz, I can hopefully have more overclocking headroom on the stock cooler, as it's topping out at 80-85C at 3.6GHz @ 1.18V

Gaming k5 fast and utra fast boot working. First time Im able to use this since getting this board. Either u are a miracle worker or gigashit fixed the bios. thank you anyway

@atomfix41 That looks like GB have completely pulled out the ability to manually enter a SoC and CPU voltage, very, very strange decision from GB.

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #873

---

@atomfix41 That looks like GB have completely pulled out the ability to manually enter a SoC and CPU voltage, very, very strange decision from GB.

---

@orondf343 I've not seen that bug before but I always set voltages manually anyway particularly with GB boards can't trust them as far as you can throw them. I'd also be very surprised if GBs excuse of "hardware limitation" is true. The K5, K7 and plain 5 as far as I recall are all built on the same PCB just with a couple bits missing / added depending on model. Not being able to manually adjust voltages would also just be a very bizarre move so.. I'm just not buying it. Not saying 100% GB haven't done that, it would just be one of the most backward decisions I've ever seen.

Force those settings to User w/ AMIBCP doesn't help you set negative value or manually go to 0.9v?

Zitat von atomfix41 im Beitrag #871

---

Here's a pic with Auto. If I leave it on auto, it will give my SOC some bizarre voltage of 1.35V when im running the RAM at 3000MHz

In my case any RAM OC/XMP Profile/EZOC Mode always runs ~1.35V for DRAM Voltage...



Getting the SOC to undervolt would be great. My CPU idle temperature is now 27C instead of 34C <that's with SOC at 1.1V If I can get it to 0.9V with the RAM at 3000MHz, I can hopefully have more overclocking headroom on the stock cooler, as it's topping out at 80-85C at 3.6GHz @ 1.18V

---

@Lost_N_BIOS I've looked at the K5 firmware for those options just now GB have outright pulled them out of the firmware... might be able to reverse engineer something thought, not sure.

That's crap! Sorry for opening my big.... I didn't look, just assumed they were there but hidden from other similar BIOS I've enabled them in before.
Reverse engineer... Maybe pull modules from previous, was it there previously? I'm sure your already considering that, thinking out loud to help

The chip on the K5 board that controls the voltages and clocks has LLC capability too. GB Has also removed that option.

Is it possible to edit the voltage table so that when the memory is running at 3000MHz that the SOC is automatically stuck to 0.9V? I can confrim that using Ryzen Master to set the SOC Votlage to 0.9V with the memory at 3000MHz works, but resets back to it's original 1.1V at every reboot. I can also confirm that the SOC at 0.9V is also bench stable with the RAM at 3000MHz, CPU is running a lot cooler too which enables me to run a higher CPU clock with the stock cooler.

@Lost_N_BIOS finding the correct module might work but I have no idea which module it would be, extracting the GB and default AMD files might provide some answers but we are starting to talk about something that would take a fair bit of time to investigate. Looking at older revisions shows the K5 has always had these options pulled out it seems so theres nothing that can help in that regard either.

I assumed it's in the Setup module, but I am not skilled on that kind of editing like you do with assembly.

Editing setup files is usually fairly simple mostly a copy/paste exercise the bit that can be tricky is adding the correct strings pretty easy to make a mistake there. This is all just some ideas being thrown around though don't know if I'll find enough motivation to actually give any of this a go.

@ket Thanks very much for continuing to do modded Gigabyte BIOSes! I flashed your most recent K7 F23 BIOS and it's working well for me. (And all the Fast Boot options appear to be there.)

I think X470 board owners are a bit envious that they're not getting any modded BIOSes from you (so far), as I've see them lamenting that fact on the Gigabyte forum.

Such a shame Gigabyte continues to drop the ball on the software side, as the hardware side of their products seems to be pretty good. Most of the time. There are, of course, some awful exceptions.


Speaking of which . . . since I took your advice and switched my X370 Gaming K7 to Single BIOS mode, the board has no longer attempted to brick itself. It's been many months now, since I've had this problem.

That says to me that, to put it bluntly, it's the Dual BIOS automatic BIOS recovery feature that's broken and defective. It can randomly decide your main BIOS is bad, attempt to do a "recovery", and screw it up. Leaving you with a corrupted Main BIOS.

The worst part is, apparently, this issue still exists on X470 boards. I've seen posts on the Gigabyte forum describing the exact same "soft brick" problem as on X370 boards. So Gigabyte hasn't even fixed the problem yet!


I guess I'll stick with my Gaming K7 now, but I'm not likely to buy Gigabyte again in the future. (I always used to buy Asus.) It's only your modded K7 BIOS that makes owning this board tolerable!

@redrain85 Good to know all is working out well for you now, I have to admit I chuckled when I read people are lamenting me not making X470 GB firmwares. Off Topic: Sorry guys I can't develop and test firmwares without a GB X470 test board. If anyone wants X470 GB firmwares from me I'd need at least a X470 Gaming 5, same process I took for the X370 boards that way, it uses the same PCB as the 7 WiFi and Ultra so I'd be able to make firmwares for those 3 boards knowing if it works on one it's a safe gamble it'll work on the other 2 as well. Would probably be able to develop B450 firmware as well for the boards that are worthy, I'd be able to do a trickle down effect for options that could carry over to the B450s.

Back on topic: You're quite right for the most part GB hardware isn't too bad, terrible CPU voltage stability aside on the X370 boards and that god awful soft bricking issue which fortunately is easily circumvented by switching the boards to single ROM operation. I'm not the first one to try and tell GB how to fix problems in their firmware (some folks from the mydigitallife forums have as well) but of course it did absolutely no good. Best boards to buy right now in order of best to worst are the X470 Gaming Pro Carbon, X470 Prime Pro, and X470 Fatality K4. On the MSI side the X470 Gaming Pro is well worth considering as well if flashing lights isn't your thing and missing out on some bells and whistles doesn't bother you. Boards like the Taichi, Crosshair, and M7s of the world are only worth considering investing in if you want to do some OCing on LN2.

EDIT: Just had a quick poke around the X470 Ultra, Gaming 5 and 7WiFi firmwares. Easy to see why users are... miffed, shall we say. X470 Gaming 5 has also been demoted to the level of the Ultra, so in short, don't waste your money on the Gaming 5. Ultra or 7 WiFi, better yet, just don't buy a GB board.