Crosshair VI Hero: UEFI build update thread

[FoxTech]

Dunno why your same profile has not worked. Again only thing I can think is it had not had fullest testing on previous UEFI. I can only state when I tested UEFI prior to 6301 (UEFI 0001), whatever profile I had on it, actually worked on 6301. I had 4.1GHz 3400MHz C15 1T on 4x8GB on UEFI 0001 and it worked the same on UEFI 6301.

Do go and read that some of the owners of boards which have AGESA 1.0.0.4 have had issues and some reverted back to past UEFI. The C7H has also been on same AGESA as C6H, only had a beta of 1.0.0.6 a week'ish ago.

As stated before I do not know why people have this thing that the latest AGESA is going provide a vast gain. All I can say is that comparing what Ryzen gen 1 and C6H was at launch, Ryzen gen 1/2 and C6H/C7H is vastly developed and I really can't see any big gains coming from firmware.

The C6H has not been gimped or left behind in development so far IMO. In fact I prefer my C6H to C7H, I have been using the C6H more than the C7H. Due to the ASUS T-Topology that C6H has, it handles 4 dimms better than the C7H does in my experience.

The "maybe Asus wants us to buy the CH7" text was ment as joke ;-)
I have no clue, why it wont run 3333 MHz again. Sometimes it boots into windows, but BSOD in between 1-5 minutes, or it wont boot. Black screen and no reboot/dram test. Have to power down manualy.
Same, when I set CPU at stock and Dram OC. I can run my system at 4,0Ghz and 3200 CL14 on my Dimms. Thats ok.
Only wanna understand, why the other settings are acting that strange .

[gupsterg]

No problem on joke . I just wanted to state I reckon the C6H is better board than C7H and not being left behind .

I don't think any [Auto] settings would have changed between last UEFI and new, but you can check most of them using Ryzen Timings Checker and ASUS Turbo V. Recently I started setting all the voltages on Extreme Tweaker > Tweakers Paradise page. I saw in Turbo V that when CPU Aux 3.3V is left [Auto] and we OC, it becomes 3.6V.

I also think at times when we create a profile we forget to add "headroom" in the profile. For example if I find a CPU is stable for xGHz at xV I add a step or two of voltage after passing stability testing.

[FoxTech]

No problem on joke . I just wanted to state I reckon the C6H is better board than C7H and not being left behind .

I don't think any [Auto] settings would have changed between last UEFI and new, but you can check most of them using Ryzen Timings Checker and ASUS Turbo V. Recently I started setting all the voltages on Extreme Tweaker > Tweakers Paradise page. I saw in Turbo V that when CPU Aux 3.3V is left [Auto] and we OC, it becomes 3.6V.

I also think at times when we create a profile we forget to add "headroom" in the profile. For example if I find a CPU is stable for xGHz at xV I add a step or two of voltage after passing stability testing.

For Ram OC i use Ryzen Ram Checker. Works mostly good. For my 3200Mz speed, I was able to use them 1:1 (Fast Preset)
Voltages (CPU, SB and Ram) I set manualy. I don't trust AUTO Settings.
OC for the CPU was a fast forward. 4,0Ghz @ 1,36250v. This seems to be the best setting and ist stable. Less voltage sometimes generate a BSOD.
Ram is tricky... have spent hours on testing. Guess, there is no more headroom on my PC or me XD

[rchiwawa]

As stated before I do not know why people have this thing that the latest AGESA is going provide a vast gain. All I can say is that comparing what Ryzen gen 1 and C6H was at launch, Ryzen gen 1/2 and C6H/C7H is vastly developed and I really can't see any big gains coming from firmware.

Is it unrealistic to hope that an AGESA update will be the last piece necessary to get my otherwise, close but not stable ram speed and timings to run?

The quoted text considered, do you think there might be any chance for some improvement? Initially, the ram kit I elected to keep would post and pass 10 passes of Memtest @3466 running fast preset in the 1.3.1 Ryzen dram calculator. After that intial pass I considered everything well and good. Over several weeks, a few out-of-the-blue Windows stutters and a few random and well spaced Folding@home CPU work unit failures later I realized the ram settings were not as good as I had thought. With a known good set of operating parameters for my processor that predated the kit and the 3466 configuration, I came to the conclusion (the hard way) you stated in another post; extensive, multiple cold boot tests are required to fully ascertain the stability of ram timings with Ryzen.

I spent some time @ auto sub-timings, the DOCP speed DOCP set primaries, and Ryzen Dram Calc SoC voltage. This consistently passed my updated test procedure that rooted out 3466's problems. When I went to seeing what could be truly and stably obtained, I found anything beyond 3333 would bug out. Typically < 3 errors in 10 passes but consistently not the same test in succession with even the exact same settings and only in tests 3-9. Sometimes I would see multiple, even innumerable errors depending on the subs I attempted. I could get both 3400 and 3466 to behave exactly the same. 3533 is iffy to post no matter what and I haven't bothered with faster. After a week of decent effort I gave up on finding the magic combo of SoC, Dram voltages and timings to make either 3400 or 3466 100% multiple boot stable... Maybe I am thinking of the AGESA updates as being more significant than they actually are and a correction to my perception in this matter would be most appreciated.

[TaijRai]

Cross Quote posting from Overclock.net

Hey guys, I've decided to discontinue my employment at Asus as of today. I realize that puts you guys in a worse position, but it's something I really felt was necessary. Primarily I want to focus more on product development and actual engineering instead of debugging endless issues. Hopefully I've been able to make your experience with our boards a little bit better. I'll still be around on the forums, just not dealing with product specific issues anymore. If you have any questions I'm always available through the PM function.

FYI: Last I heard PinnaclePi-1.0.0.6 BIOS releases are delayed and targeted for mid November.

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694594-post4090.html


Wishing Elmor well in his future endeavors!

[Syaoran]

Damn! That is a massive loss for Asus! Best of luck in all of your future endeavors and thank you for all that you have done for Asus customers and the various communities!

[Dicehunter]

Cross Quote posting from Overclock.net

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694594-post4090.html

Wishing Elmor well in his future endeavors!

At least he gave us a rough time frame, So a bit of a silver lining

[TaijRai]

His support both official and unofficial was worth it weight in gold. He was the best the customer relations ASUS had even though it was not his official duties. You made ASUS seem better and did better then any "official" front facing representatives. Between losing you and the fact that ASUS decided to lock down bios modding...I will now look at competitors for motherboards.

[Dicehunter]

His support both official and unofficial was worth it weight in gold. He was the best the customer relations ASUS had even though it was not his official duties. You made ASUS seem better and did better then any "official" front facing representatives. Between losing you and the fact that ASUS decided to lock down bios modding...I will now look at competitors for motherboards.

Yeah it's a shame Asus won't hire a handful of people to interact in the community and keep people in the loop about updates, Problems etc... shame really as I like their hardware but Asus' people skills are the worst in the industry.

[Syaoran]

Personally, I hope Gigabyte offers him a job. I have been very happy with my X470 Gaming 7 but it does lack the additional tweaking some of the flagship Asus boards have offered. He would be a huge shot in the arm for Gigabyte!