Dust specs in one of the contacts perhaps!
At least it's all working proper now though
At least it's all working proper now though
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
*** The Official Alder Lake owners thread ***
- Thread starter mrk
- Start date
Personally I'd stick to the Realtek driver anyway and I might just do just that and install it as that's what I used to do on Z190 too!
Good thing it's sorted though.
Good thing it's sorted though.
Recently noticed by temps when idle or normaly using the PC are lower than when I first built the system, rather impressed. I guess its a mix of the paste settling in fully now, and a couple of rpm tweaks I did in the BIOS for the fan curves. You can see the rpms in the screen below. I'm basically at room temp now with an ultra quiet system 
What would be the ideal way to go about it? I don't want to touch any of the core speeds etc, just undervolt if possible as my 3080 Ti is undervolted too so could do same to the CPU. Although as you can see there the vcore is at 0.4v when idle/normal usage anyway hence the low temps so maybe auto is doing what it needs to just ramping up when demand comes in from a game/app.
Hmm I think for now I will leave the CPU well alone, I've got the option if/when needed though it seems so that's good. I have everything set up super stable and running well so want to keep it that way as long as possible I think!
12900K purely for gaming? Yes you would be wasting your money. 12700 is where it's at, but 12600 is more than capable.
Check out a number of youtube gaming comparisons of both, I checked the 12700 vs 5950x back when I was getting my upgrade priced up and the 5950x wasn't that much ahead where it did win by a few fps, in other games the 12700 was ahead at the same 1080p CPU bound resolution. So a 12900k would be slightly ahead still but nothing to shout about. In single threaded scenarios the 12th gen will beat the 5950x, in multi threaded there's not a huge deal in it.
Stay with the 5950x if gaming is your main thing.
Stay with the 5950x if gaming is your main thing.
Heads up too for Gigabyte users, new F7 BIOS update with the changelog:
Welcome to the 12th club
Ok so that will be the last BIOS update I ever do I think, if it ain't broke.....
The F7 release from the other day ended up being a dud. Appears it was causing me random BSODs, the error message each time was either page fault, kmode exception, dxkrnl.sys etc etc. The F7 BIOS changelog was posted earlier in the thread and it seems they changed the way the VRM is handled so must have been that I guess. I would see a Firefox tab just crash and it would want me to reload the tab, other software would crash and Windows reliability history was awash with programs that "stopped working".
Rolled back to version F6 and so far all back to normal.
The F7 release from the other day ended up being a dud. Appears it was causing me random BSODs, the error message each time was either page fault, kmode exception, dxkrnl.sys etc etc. The F7 BIOS changelog was posted earlier in the thread and it seems they changed the way the VRM is handled so must have been that I guess. I would see a Firefox tab just crash and it would want me to reload the tab, other software would crash and Windows reliability history was awash with programs that "stopped working".
Rolled back to version F6 and so far all back to normal.
I reloaded the fan profiles off USB but all settings were re-entered manually yep. It's got to the point that I know all the settings now off the top of my head so all is good there 
My usual process now is to flash new BIOS, it reboots 3 times as standard and automatically resets the BIOS settings, I then go into the BIOS and load optimised defaults, reboot and then back into the BIOS to enter previous settings manually.
I suspect you are right though, other changes were made to the F7 BIOS that were not listed in the changelog and it just so happens with my configuration (64GB 3600 in 2x32GB modules) etc it just wasn't a right match whereas on the F6 BIOS all seems well again. I have no issues with VRM or performance, so will just skip F7 I think and probably any new BIOS from here on unless there is a major change. Hopefully by then enough people will have fed back bugs to Gigabyte so the F7 issues causing my BSODs will be gone.
My usual process now is to flash new BIOS, it reboots 3 times as standard and automatically resets the BIOS settings, I then go into the BIOS and load optimised defaults, reboot and then back into the BIOS to enter previous settings manually.
I suspect you are right though, other changes were made to the F7 BIOS that were not listed in the changelog and it just so happens with my configuration (64GB 3600 in 2x32GB modules) etc it just wasn't a right match whereas on the F6 BIOS all seems well again. I have no issues with VRM or performance, so will just skip F7 I think and probably any new BIOS from here on unless there is a major change. Hopefully by then enough people will have fed back bugs to Gigabyte so the F7 issues causing my BSODs will be gone.
I leave it on Auto, I only set it to enabled/disabled to see what it was all about and it instantly put the CPU to 100 degrees running Cinebench whereas it's in the 70s when set to Auto. The score difference was only 1000 on multi core so seems a bit pointless in the real world.
Auto for MCE definitely seems to be fine for me, gaming temps don't go above the 50s generally and when benchmarking it's in the low 60s. I don't know whether the F7 BIOS issue was related to MCE as both times it was kept on Auto, but I do know there were some fundamental changes in F7 as there were some new options I had not seen before like Initial Display Output being visible now which defaults to PCIE #1 so the monitor kicks in right away as opposed to previous BIOS versions where the monitor has a delay before it gets a signal on a cold boot up. The shutdown behaviour was also different, there's a longer delay after Windows has logged off and prepares to shutdown before the mobo actually powers down and the relay clocks.
Edit* Check out this whackness from F7 lol:
Edit* Check out this whackness from F7 lol:
Last edited:
Damn looks like my RAM isn't as stable as I thought, I did a new ramtest run and at 5300% I got one error. Would would be a recommended approach, increase DRAM voltage a bit more or system agent voltage? They are on 1.4v and 1.3v respectively still.
It seems at 3600MHz the board is the most unstable without tweaking voltages even more. The above test was done at 3400MHz as I wanted to test something out due to recent game crashes unrelated to undervolting the GPU as I tested at stock. RAM timings are at 18-22-22-42-64-2T.
Looking online, seems a lot of people have been having DDR4 stability quirks on these Gigabyte DDR4 Z690 boards and each person has had to tweak voltages differently. I appear to be one of the only people with 64GB in 2x32GB configuration on this board it seems.
It seems at 3600MHz the board is the most unstable without tweaking voltages even more. The above test was done at 3400MHz as I wanted to test something out due to recent game crashes unrelated to undervolting the GPU as I tested at stock. RAM timings are at 18-22-22-42-64-2T.
Looking online, seems a lot of people have been having DDR4 stability quirks on these Gigabyte DDR4 Z690 boards and each person has had to tweak voltages differently. I appear to be one of the only people with 64GB in 2x32GB configuration on this board it seems.
Last edited:
It could be that F7 just amplified that underlying problem but lots of others seemed to have similar issues with F7 as well when I was looking around yesterday so there must be a fundamental change in F7 that brings about a few more quirks.
Hmm that is interesting yeah, the 1 error above in the karhu ram test was not far off the 99% coverage karhu states in their FAQ, now i cannot confirm if that 1 error was due to an actual memory error or a random bit flip due to something like cosmic rays (it does happen in this kind of setting and our RAM isn't ECC like server RAM is to account for these). I've increased DRAM voltage at 3400MHz for a new taste currently under way to 1.42v and will see if an error pops up at around the same coverage %. If it gets to 6400% without an error then I can consider that a fully stable configuration at 3400MHz at 1.42v and leaving SA at 1.3v. I can then keep that as a baseline and work my way up to 3600MHz slowly until the 2600MHz baseline is found.
I suspect this may be the only way.
Setting to gear mode 2 will half the memory bandwidth will it not? That's the main thing I was concerned about as this may give lower gaming performance or application performance in heavy workloads like Lightroom exporting and stuff whereas the difference between 3600MHz and 3400MHz is fairly small really.
If all else fails then I will drop to gear 2 and RAM at 3600 though I guess.
Hmm that is interesting yeah, the 1 error above in the karhu ram test was not far off the 99% coverage karhu states in their FAQ, now i cannot confirm if that 1 error was due to an actual memory error or a random bit flip due to something like cosmic rays (it does happen in this kind of setting and our RAM isn't ECC like server RAM is to account for these). I've increased DRAM voltage at 3400MHz for a new taste currently under way to 1.42v and will see if an error pops up at around the same coverage %. If it gets to 6400% without an error then I can consider that a fully stable configuration at 3400MHz at 1.42v and leaving SA at 1.3v. I can then keep that as a baseline and work my way up to 3600MHz slowly until the 2600MHz baseline is found.
I suspect this may be the only way.
Setting to gear mode 2 will half the memory bandwidth will it not? That's the main thing I was concerned about as this may give lower gaming performance or application performance in heavy workloads like Lightroom exporting and stuff whereas the difference between 3600MHz and 3400MHz is fairly small really.
If all else fails then I will drop to gear 2 and RAM at 3600 though I guess.
Ah I did check by setting auto SA voltage yesterday when faffing about with the settings after rollling back to F6 and I recall seeing the SA voltage showing at 1.47v at one point but then another time it was showing 0.9v so it's a bit all over the place in auto it would seem. Perhaps this is why some are experiencing these things in different configurations
My current test is still running and currently at 3600% with no errors. I will let it get to the full 6400% before I call it a safe result for stability at 3400MHz, then will up the DRAM voltage a bit more, maybe 1.43v and put it back to 3600MHz and retest. I recall last night at 3600MHz I was seeing a single error in karhu at around 70% coverage, so quite early on so was able to replicate it via multiple runs so knew it wasn't an anomaly whereas the single error at 5300% could well have been an anomaly as that was at 1.4v 3400MHz whereas the test currently running is at 1.42v.
I will have to do some game benchmarks with Gear 2 vs Gear 1 to figure out if there is any real world impact. If the difference is small then it will be better to edge on the side of stability and use Gear 2 I guess at stock 3600MHz for the RAM.
I am currently using the PC whilst the memory test is running too, I figure this is an ideal way to properly test for stability and errors if I am just generally using the PC, browsing, some media etc. The CPU cores are all at 100% and the temps are 55 degrees so I guess a memory test run like this only puts stress on the memory controller in the CPU rather than other areas that would otherwise generate more heat.
My current test is still running and currently at 3600% with no errors. I will let it get to the full 6400% before I call it a safe result for stability at 3400MHz, then will up the DRAM voltage a bit more, maybe 1.43v and put it back to 3600MHz and retest. I recall last night at 3600MHz I was seeing a single error in karhu at around 70% coverage, so quite early on so was able to replicate it via multiple runs so knew it wasn't an anomaly whereas the single error at 5300% could well have been an anomaly as that was at 1.4v 3400MHz whereas the test currently running is at 1.42v.
I will have to do some game benchmarks with Gear 2 vs Gear 1 to figure out if there is any real world impact. If the difference is small then it will be better to edge on the side of stability and use Gear 2 I guess at stock 3600MHz for the RAM.
I am currently using the PC whilst the memory test is running too, I figure this is an ideal way to properly test for stability and errors if I am just generally using the PC, browsing, some media etc. The CPU cores are all at 100% and the temps are 55 degrees so I guess a memory test run like this only puts stress on the memory controller in the CPU rather than other areas that would otherwise generate more heat.
Hmm I see - Secondary question in that case, in karhu do you leave it on default or also tick the stress FPU box too?
Do you have a link to the profile perhaps? Not heard of Testmem 5 but looks like it's a community thing?
Edit*
I realise that Gear 1 allows the CPU MCto run at the same speed as the RAM, so with my 3600 in mind, would that be 1800MHz at the MC. Whereas in gear 2 it gets cut in half to allow for running higher memory bandwidth. For professional worldload stuff the latter would be more beneficial;, for gamers and genera use the latency is more important hence Gear 1.
The ultimate thing I guess is what was mentioned above that the CPU IMC could handle Gear 1 and be stable, or it might not, it varies from CPU to CPU like OC lottery between the same CPU model.
Edit*
I realise that Gear 1 allows the CPU MCto run at the same speed as the RAM, so with my 3600 in mind, would that be 1800MHz at the MC. Whereas in gear 2 it gets cut in half to allow for running higher memory bandwidth. For professional worldload stuff the latter would be more beneficial;, for gamers and genera use the latency is more important hence Gear 1.
The ultimate thing I guess is what was mentioned above that the CPU IMC could handle Gear 1 and be stable, or it might not, it varies from CPU to CPU like OC lottery between the same CPU model.
Last edited:
Cheers for those, I guess I can only try Gear 2 3600 and see what things are like. I will stay on BIOS F6 though I think as everything works fine and then explore future options at the next update.
My Gear 1 vs 2 testing will be based on exporting a batch of photos in Lightroom, then running a game benchmark. If the difference is small enough to not matter, then I'll stick with Gear 2 I guess for outright stability.
The fun continues
My Gear 1 vs 2 testing will be based on exporting a batch of photos in Lightroom, then running a game benchmark. If the difference is small enough to not matter, then I'll stick with Gear 2 I guess for outright stability.
The fun continues
I suspect you are correct and have been mulling it over whether the slight bit of faff of testing, rebooting, changing setting, rebooting, testing again etc is worth the time - The karhu run has surpassed 6700% with no errors so I have stopped it. According to their FAQ, up to 6400% coverage is a 99.4% error detection rate so I am happy that the current config at 3400MHz @ 1.43v and SA at 1.3v is completely stable in Gear 1.
I think what I will do now is bump it up to 3600MHz and then raise the DRAM voltage one step up and retest just out of curiosity to rule out DRAM voltage being the reason I got the error at 5300% coverage last night.
Edit1*
Back at 3600MHz and RAM at 1.43v - Still using Karhu for now but 1 error at 681% coverage which is around 85% error detection rate.
Bumping up to 1.44v and re-running. SA still at 1.3v.
Edit2*
3600MHz @ 1.44v and 1 error at 1045% coverage.
Edit3*
3600MHz @ 1.46v, 6400% coverage and zero errors. I have found the stable point for my build now. Finally.
I think what I will do now is bump it up to 3600MHz and then raise the DRAM voltage one step up and retest just out of curiosity to rule out DRAM voltage being the reason I got the error at 5300% coverage last night.
Edit1*
Back at 3600MHz and RAM at 1.43v - Still using Karhu for now but 1 error at 681% coverage which is around 85% error detection rate.
Bumping up to 1.44v and re-running. SA still at 1.3v.
Edit2*
3600MHz @ 1.44v and 1 error at 1045% coverage.
Edit3*
3600MHz @ 1.46v, 6400% coverage and zero errors. I have found the stable point for my build now. Finally.
Last edited: