Zitat von reizhi im Beitrag #1314

---

PBO and xfr settings has been hidden by gigabyte for Gaming K3 after bios version F22. Their reason is in some boards PBO settings has some problem with new AGESA.
Could you bring PBO and XFR settings back?
Thank you.

---

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1321

---

Zitat von reizhi im Beitrag #1314

---

PBO and xfr settings has been hidden by gigabyte for Gaming K3 after bios version F22. Their reason is in some boards PBO settings has some problem with new AGESA.
Could you bring PBO and XFR settings back?
Thank you.

---

@reizhi I might have misread this initially are you saying options like the Core Performance Boost are no longer in the firmware?

---

but when i disable CPB and TPB wouldnt the CPU stuck at base frequenzy?
i will test this soon
right now i use ZenStates to run CPu @4.1GHz with 1.25V - that is ok for me for now

@ket Thanks for responding and looking into fixing those issues in the future!

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1319

---

The CEC option is my doing though, I enabled and removed it by default as its something that made sense to just be enabled off the bat no option necessary.

---

Zitat

---

but if I were asked now out of all the generations of boards which are the best I'd say the Aorus X370 5/7 with a modified firmware, Asus X370-F, and Asus X470 Prime. Theres a few other boards you can add to that list but none which are anywhere close to being as well balanced. Dual BIOS boards are also extremely thin on the ground, GB have the most boards, Biostar if you have the patience to fix their shitty firmware have a few as well, but thats about it. I don't like the X570 boards at all though they are more a step backwards rather than forwards. The Sooner X670 arrives the better.

---

I'm surprised to hear you think the latest X570 boards are even worse than X370. Both firmware wise, and even hardware wise (in terms of having balanced designs).

What about something like the upcoming MSI X570 Tomahawk, though? Or even the current MSI X570 Unify? Those are supposed to be among the best. If you choose to believe the various review outlets. (Making up for the fact that MSI released a lot of shitty X570 boards, until now.)

I do wonder about X670 . . . I heard a rumor that it might be cancelled. Or, at least delayed and repurposed, as the moniker used when AM5 socket DDR5 and PCI-E 5.0 boards are released. (When X670 was originally expected to be ASMedia's updated, and cheaper, chipset for PCI-E 4.0.)

I also wonder what B550 will be like. Since that's made by ASMedia, too. Versus the AMD made X570.


Although your modified firmware makes my Gaming K7 much more pleasant to use (thank you again!), and I do like Gigabyte boards from a hardware feature standpoint: I'm really uncertain as to whether I'd ever buy Gigabyte again. I'm leaning toward either MSI or Asus next time.

Zitat von reizhi im Beitrag #1322

---

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1321

---

Zitat von reizhi im Beitrag #1314

---

PBO and xfr settings has been hidden by gigabyte for Gaming K3 after bios version F22. Their reason is in some boards PBO settings has some problem with new AGESA.
Could you bring PBO and XFR settings back?
Thank you.

---

@reizhi I might have misread this initially are you saying options like the Core Performance Boost are no longer in the firmware?

---

Not that one. I mean, under Peripherals-AMD CBS-NBIO Common Options, "XFR Enhancement" option have been removed.
There we can extend TDC range to 114A and EDC range to 168A.

---

Zitat von Benman2785 im Beitrag #1323

---

but when i disable CPB and TPB wouldnt the CPU stuck at base frequenzy?
i will test this soon
right now i use ZenStates to run CPu @4.1GHz with 1.25V - that is ok for me for now

---

Zitat von redrain85 im Beitrag #1324

---

@ket Thanks for responding and looking into fixing those issues in the future!

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1319

---

The CEC option is my doing though, I enabled and removed it by default as its something that made sense to just be enabled off the bat no option necessary.

---

Also thanks for enabling this by default, then.

Zitat

---

but if I were asked now out of all the generations of boards which are the best I'd say the Aorus X370 5/7 with a modified firmware, Asus X370-F, and Asus X470 Prime. Theres a few other boards you can add to that list but none which are anywhere close to being as well balanced. Dual BIOS boards are also extremely thin on the ground, GB have the most boards, Biostar if you have the patience to fix their shitty firmware have a few as well, but thats about it. I don't like the X570 boards at all though they are more a step backwards rather than forwards. The Sooner X670 arrives the better.

---

I'm surprised to hear you think the latest X570 boards are even worse than X370. Both firmware wise, and even hardware wise (in terms of having balanced designs).

What about something like the upcoming MSI X570 Tomahawk, though? Or even the current MSI X570 Unify? Those are supposed to be among the best. If you choose to believe the various review outlets. (Making up for the fact that MSI released a lot of shitty X570 boards, until now.)

I do wonder about X670 . . . I heard a rumor that it might be cancelled. Or, at least delayed and repurposed, as the moniker used when AM5 socket DDR5 and PCI-E 5.0 boards are released. (When X670 was originally expected to be ASMedia's updated, and cheaper, chipset for PCI-E 4.0.)

I also wonder what B550 will be like. Since that's made by ASMedia, too. Versus the AMD made X570.


Although your modified firmware makes my Gaming K7 much more pleasant to use (thank you again!), and I do like Gigabyte boards from a hardware feature standpoint: I'm really uncertain as to whether I'd ever buy Gigabyte again. I'm leaning toward either MSI or Asus next time.

---

It's not all X570 boards are bad @redrain85 but rather the excuse of PCI-E 4.0 causing monstrously high prices for something that equates to nothing more than correct placement of a redriver and some verification. Most X470 boards to a limited degree at least could and can handle PCI-E 4.0 spec yet at the 11th hour AMD pulled that support. The result of all this (which smells a lot like AMD just trying to price hike their chipsets which leads to board partners having to pay more per chipset hence the higher prices) is that any board under about £200 is rather heavily compromised, lower quality audio implementation, no dual BIOS, in some cases thinner PCBs, etc so on and so forth where even with X470 you could go out and find a very nicely balanced board for £150-160, Asus Prime Pro being one such example. The problem with review sites is that 90%+ of them HAVE to find a way to put a positive spin even on something that is a turd because if you upset that manufacturer poof goes your review samples from them. Places are getting better at being more honest with their thoughts but this is quite a new thing and only seems to be something that started happening since I started simply calling things as I see them in an unbiased and objective manner, could just be coincidence, but feels kinda iffy like places were waiting for someone to have the balls to just say it to give them their window. You should also be aware of the chipset fan X570 needs I have not yet seen a good chipset heatsink that would allow easy replacement of the fan when it fails (and sooner or later, that fan will fail essentially rendering the board unusable as the chipset will overheat) which just adds yet another point of failure and more noise where there doesn't need to be. I can't even remember the last chipset that needed an active fan... nForce2 maybe? Either way going back to an active cooling solution for a chipset is literally decades worth of regression there. Whats a real kick in the balls is that if just a proper thermodynamically designed heatsink were placed on the X570 chipset rather than all these designs purely made for looks is that you probably wouldn't need a fan at all, the chipset might get a bit warm but it wouldn't overheat, and if it did that is why you have a properly designed heatsink so you can just mount a small fan on top of it for easy replacement when it fails. Nobody seems to think like this anymore though compared to 10 years ago everyone designing boards now look like they have had railroad spikes rammed though their skulls and have the IQ of chimps.

I understand why you wouldn't go with GB again I certainly wouldn't say their mainboards are good products out of the box there is FAR too much flexibility hidden away other manufacturers give you access to but not GB so you have to be someone like me capable of making the boards comparable to what other manufacturers are offering. It is worth remembering though that no manufacturer is perfect and any motherboard consideration needs extreme scrutiny before making a final decision. As a general rule any board I look at must have competent cooling, Load Line Calibration options, not tear away anything like manual voltage control (I'm looking at you GB) and use a good voltage regulator and VRM setup. If you don't have these things in a board thats £150-160 upwards then it is an automatic fail. Manufacturers are getting an ever increasingly nasty habit of gating a lot of things like that off to their most expensive boards, Asrock have become among the worst offenders for this even their Taichi boards no longer have just one board in that class if you want everything you have to look at the Taichi "Ultimate". Literally every manufacturer has forgotten that less is more at least half of the boards a manufacturer sells in their product stack are literally just there to fill a price bracket even if that bracket is only £10 less. Give me any product stack you like and I could half its size at least which would only have benefits, R&D isn't stretched to the limit so you get less bugs, more timely updates, and better quality firmware as a whole. RMA centers would see an increase in efficency due to not having to have as many different parts on hand or to test, and companies would make more money by not having to re-tool for so many different boards as well as making more money by not having excess stock of all the shitty boards hardly anyone wants which means they could even afford to lower the price of their boards which would attract more customers and thus better profits through volume sales.

Anyway I'll stop ranting there you get the idea :p

As for B550 from what I have seen it is just a rebadged B450 with minor changes at best so... meh. X670 from what I know would potentially be used for DDR4 and DDR5 designs with whatever comes after X670 being AM5/DDR5 only. DDR5 will be stupid expensive as new generations of DDR historically always is for the first 18-24 months and historically you don't start to really see the benefits of a new DDR generation until manufactures start getting to grips with it properly, get the latencies and timings down and work out the kinks so you really aren't going to be missing anything with DDR5 in the first year or two.

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1325

---

You should also be aware of the chipset fan X570 needs I have not yet seen a good chipset heatsink that would allow easy replacement of the fan when it fails (and sooner or later, that fan will fail essentially rendering the board unusable as the chipset will overheat) which just adds yet another point of failure and more noise where there doesn't need to be. I can't even remember the last chipset that needed an active fan... nForce2 maybe? Either way going back to an active cooling solution for a chipset is literally decades worth of regression there. Whats a real kick in the balls is that if just a proper thermodynamically designed heatsink were placed on the X570 chipset rather than all these designs purely made for looks is that you probably wouldn't need a fan at all, the chipset might get a bit warm but it wouldn't overheat, and if it did that is why you have a properly designed heatsink so you can just mount a small fan on top of it for easy replacement when it fails. Nobody seems to think like this anymore though compared to 10 years ago everyone designing boards now look like they have had railroad spikes rammed though their skulls and have the IQ of chimps.

---

Zitat von redrain85 im Beitrag #1326

---

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1325

---

You should also be aware of the chipset fan X570 needs I have not yet seen a good chipset heatsink that would allow easy replacement of the fan when it fails (and sooner or later, that fan will fail essentially rendering the board unusable as the chipset will overheat) which just adds yet another point of failure and more noise where there doesn't need to be. I can't even remember the last chipset that needed an active fan... nForce2 maybe? Either way going back to an active cooling solution for a chipset is literally decades worth of regression there. Whats a real kick in the balls is that if just a proper thermodynamically designed heatsink were placed on the X570 chipset rather than all these designs purely made for looks is that you probably wouldn't need a fan at all, the chipset might get a bit warm but it wouldn't overheat, and if it did that is why you have a properly designed heatsink so you can just mount a small fan on top of it for easy replacement when it fails. Nobody seems to think like this anymore though compared to 10 years ago everyone designing boards now look like they have had railroad spikes rammed though their skulls and have the IQ of chimps.

---

@ket Ah, yeah I can definitely agree with you there, that requiring active cooling with a chipset fan is quite the regression. It's the biggest turnoff for me when looking at the X570 platform, as a whole. Only one board, that I know of, opted to passively cool the chipset. And that one was Gigabyte's highest end Aorus X570 Extreme, which costs a fortune.

Meanwhile, der8auer already demonstrated (at 15:47 in the video) that a chipset fan is absolutely not required. A very simple, and cheap passive heatsink is good enough. So why the mobo makers all insisted on fans, I have no idea. Is it really that much cheaper to use a fan, than to mill a small chunk of aluminum or copper for use as a heatsink?



I still own an old Asus MA32-MVP Deluxe AM2+ socket mobo from around 2007, and that came with proper finned copper heatsinks and heatpipes on everything. Hell, it even had heatpipes connecting to the memory, which was overkill.




BTW, I just remembered . . . isn't it odd that Gigabyte chose to put the Display Resolution option for the X370 BIOS (and I guess B350/B450/X470/X570, too) on the Chipset screen? Weird decision. Wouldn't it make more sense on the System or BIOS tab/screen?

---

Do you have GA-AB350M-Gaming 3 (rev. 1.x) custom bios for me?

@ronen1n
i am 98% sure the AB350-Gaming 3 will also work :p

OR you have to pay Ket to mod this bios for you (and maybe make it public when F25M)

AB350-Gaming 3 bios work on the matx version? ill i want is to unhide the llc settings, if someone can teach me ill do it myself. Thanks :)

Zitat von Yadj123 im Beitrag #1330

---

AB350-Gaming 3 bios work on the matx version? ill i want is to unhide the llc settings, if someone can teach me ill do it myself. Thanks :)

---

Damn it, I need llc to stabilize my 3533mhz oc and any oc over 3200mhz for that matter. Seems I’ll be changing this board for a b550 as soon as possible then. Thanks man!

Hmm... What with the recent sad news of no Zen 3 / Ryzen 4xxx support on anything earlier than the 500-series chipsets, I'm starting to wonder if F50a will be the last BIOS we get for the X370 Gaming K7. If so, I'd be ready to plunk down some dough for an F50a mod, @ket, so as to have it on-hand for my eventual R9 3900X upgrade.

What's your gut feeling on whether they're likely to do a non-beta F50 release at this point, or anything further at all? I know in many cases older boards are left with a beta as the last BIOS that's ever released.

In theory assuming there are no drastic AGESA changes @spurdy adding Ryzen 4000 support is just a case of adding their CPU microcodes. Some low grade consumer and business class CPU support would possibly need to be removed but that would be about it. X470 owners I can see getting pissed with no 4000 series support those boards are not very old at all and you likely can add support using the current latest AGESA even with space limitations being what they are on the ROM chips of those boards. Unless AMD throw some money at manufacturers to go back to the drawing board with their UEFIs for X470 at least support just won't happen unless modders attempt what I suggested.

Zitat von ket im Beitrag #1334

---

In theory assuming there are no drastic AGESA changes @spurdy adding Ryzen 4000 support is just a case of adding their CPU microcodes. Some low grade consumer and business class CPU support would possibly need to be removed but that would be about it. X470 owners I can see getting pissed with no 4000 series support those boards are not very old at all and you likely can add support using the current latest AGESA even with space limitations being what they are on the ROM chips of those boards.

---