This ATX motherboard with TR4 socket forms the basis for our “TR server”, a high-performance Proxmox server for virtualizing Windows 10 and 11 VMs. For a long time, it ran the UEFI version “F13a” without any problems.

After recently seeing that there is a newer version available – “F13d” – I wanted to update the board to this version. It is important to note that this motherboard has a “DualBIOS,” i.e., a second UEFI that boots instead of the first one in case of an error.

So far, so simple: save the settings in the UEFI, format a USB stick with 4 GB or less as FAT32, copy the new firmware. Plug the USB stick directly into the board, switch to “Qflash” at startup with “END” and start the update after navigating to the file. The model name is correct, and there are no other abnormalities.

And then things went downhill.

At first, the update stalled a little, but then ran through to 100% and the computer restarted on its own. There was no POST from this first, freshly updated UEFI: without any beeps or similar, it finally booted from the backup UEFI after several attempts. I only noticed this because I had disabled the LED lighting and it was now glowing red.

Surprisingly, the UEFI version that had now started was “F12” from 2019, which was older than the previously installed ‘F13a’ and also older than the latest version I had actually updated to, “F13d”. Then I thought, “I’ll update it again here too, maybe something went wrong.” No sooner said than done – I updated it again from the UEFI using Qflash. Again, it ran a little sluggishly but got through. Then the automatic restart again.

“No Boot”

Nothing worked anymore. No beeping, and according to the digital error code (luckily this board has a display for it!), the UEFI kept booting in a loop between “3E” and “C2”. At that moment, I thought the board was dead without a lot of fiddling around with manual flashing.

Many restarts later, there was still no change. So I did some research—others must have encountered this problem too. In fact, I was lucky in my misfortune: this motherboard has “Qflash Plus,” which I wasn’t aware of. This allows you to restore the UEFI if it is defective or corrupt. Great feature!

UEFI Recovery

The manual (archive.org) for this motherboard explains how to proceed on page 75. The computer should of course be switched off. For simplicity’s sake, here are the steps:

Step 1: Firmware

Download the desired firmware version from the Gigabyte website. (here, archive.org).

Step 2: Unpacking

Unpack the ZIP archive.

Step 3: Rename

Rename the included firmware file (16 MB in size) and its file extension to: "GIGABYTE.bin".

Step 4: Copy file

Use a USB 2.0 stick with a maximum capacity of 32 GB that is formatted as FAT32 and place the renamed file on it. A stick with a status LED is very helpful for seeing the activity.

Step 5: Plug the stick in

The Mainboard has a white USB-Port (archive.org), plug the stick in there.

Step 6: Flashing

Turn on the computer. If the stick has a status LED, it will light up briefly during initialization. After a short time, an orange LED will flash next to the white USB port and the stick should also show activity for a few seconds.

Step 7: Flashing finished

After a while, nothing will light up anymore. Either the computer will restart automatically, or you will have to manually switch the power supply off and on again. Remove the USB stick in the latter case.

Step 8: First POST

Start with the power button; it takes a really long time for a response to appear. If the board beeps, just ignore it. Eventually, the familiar silver “AORUS” boot screen will appear.

Step 9: Recovery

Press “DEL” to enter UEFI. This will start a recovery sequence, which will take some time. Afterwards, you will be back in UEFI and the board will be saved!

Puh.

First of all, thanks to Gigabyte for making this “headless flashback feature” available. At the same time, the UEFI is really unstable, freezes often, and the backup UEFI was more annoying than useful. But the server is up and running again.

The latest UEFI for this motherboard, “F13d”, still does not run via Qflash Plus. The 2021 version, “F13a”, no longer runs this way either! I had to downgrade to the 2019 version “F12”, which worked right away. Totally illogical, since “F13a” was previously installed and ran without any problems. Resetting the CMOS didn’t change anything. Since little has changed technically, I can live with the older version, but I still find it strange.

Even updating from the working version “F12” to one of the two F13 versions doesn’t work. Everything looks fine at first, but in the end, there is no POST again. I have read in several places that a lot of RAM could be part of the problem, but I didn’t want to take the server apart because everything is very tightly built. I’m running 128 GB DDR4-2666 @ 3000 MHz in the form of 8 sticks with 16 GB capacity each. With less, the boot might work again with the newer versions.

I hope I was able to help someone with this. I really thought I would have to find another X399 motherboard as a replacement.

Der Beitrag Gigabyte X399 Aorus Gaming 7 – Failed BIOS update, Board Rescue erschien zuerst auf flohs blog.

Due to personal preference and a bit of coincidence, I ended up with a first-generation AMD Threadripper, complete with motherboard and cooler. I would describe the purchase price as “unignorable low”; I bought it second-hand via “Kleinanzeigen”.

A old Threadripper wasn’t my first choice, but it was up there. The power consumption, especially when idle, is said to be quite high, which is probably due to the multi-die design of these CPUs. On the positive side, there are plenty of PCI Express 3.0 lanes. The bundle consisted of the following components:

Processor

⧉ AMD

⧉ TPU

⧉ TPU

CPU Cooling

With an emphasis on appearance, the bundle included a powerful Wraith Ripper processor cooler from CoolerMaster. Only compatible with the TR4 socket, it was released specifically for the launch of the second generation Threadripper. I would have bought something flatter (and without RGB) from Noctua, BeQuiet, or Thermalright, but that’s just how it turned out.

⧉ CoolerMaster

⧉ CoolerMaster

⧉ CoolerMaster

Mainboard

I’m a little unhappy with this one – it’s turned out to be an RGB-overloaded Christmas tree, an AORUS Gaming 7 from Gigabyte. Not really the right choice for use in a rack case. From a technical point of view, it will work fine, but I’m turning the RGB off completely.

However, the VRMs are quite weak, so the 1950X (or its successor, the 2950X) is the best you can hope for. With the new UEFI version, second-generation Threadrippers, some of which have a significantly higher TDP (32 cores and 64 threads with the 2990WX -> 250 watts TDP), should also work in theory. Overclocking is not recommended with this board, with any Threadripper variant for TR4. The power supply and its cooling are too weak.

If I had had the choice, I would have gone with MSI or ASUS, as I usually do. Nevertheless, the Gigabyte board is still well suited for its intended purpose.

⧉ Gigabyte

⧉ Gigabyte

⧉ Gigabyte

Let’s move on to the other components, starting with the Memory.

Der Beitrag <h5>TR-Server #2: </h5><h3><b>The Base</b></h3> erschien zuerst auf flohs blog.

After acquiring one of these desktop processors from Intel a long time ago, I came across the bundle consisting of a motherboard and CPU again while rearranging other hardware. I personally have never overclocked on this platform, but according to everything you read in overclocking circles at the time (2007/2008), there should be quite a bit of potential. Poor heat transfer in the heat spreader is not an issue, as processors from this era were soldered.

With these first quad-core processors, Intel took the same approach as it had some time before with the first dual-core processor: two dies together on one carrier. From a technical point of view, the result is therefore more of a 2 + 2 core processor, also in terms of other functionalities (shared bandwidth, shared cache, double power consumption, etc.).

Which processors are we talking about?

The code name Kentsfield tells seasoned overclockers everything they need to know: the first mainstream quad-core CPUs were called Intel Core 2 Quad Q6xxx. The most legendary model, the Q6600 (test from back then), was first available in the “B3” stepping with 105 watts TDP and shortly thereafter in the improved “G0” stepping, then with 95 watts TDP. The newer G0 revision is generally slightly better, especially when overclocking, where the lower power consumption is very noticeable and significantly increases the headroom.

My Q6600 is the G0 stepping, which is ideal for an “old-school FSB overclocking session.” — the multiplier is locked (only the much more expensive Extreme variants available at the time had an unlocked multiplier). The biggest advantage was getting at least equal performance from the cheapest quad-core processors compared to their expensive counterparts.

These are all the Kentsfield models from back then, excluding Xeon:

All of these processors fit into the LGA 775 socket, have 8 (4 + 4) MB L2 cache, and are quad-core. They are all manufactured by Intel with a 65 nm structure size. For serious overclocking to the limits of this generation, an Extreme model with a free multiplier would of course be essential. In my case, however, it’s more about nostalgia – apart from that, the Q6600 G0 in particular is a legend. PCGH users also thought so in 2010.

⧉ Intel

⧉ Intel

⧉ Intel

Hm, Mainboard?

At the time, I got the CPU together with two 2 GB sticks of 667 standard RAM installed on a Gigabyte GA-965P-DS4 in revision 1.0. A usable to good board for overclocking. I replaced the RAM with four XMS2 DDR2-800 modules, each with 2 GB from Corsair – so in total, I still have 8 GB of RAM that is theoretically usable today.

I continued to use the Freezer 7 Pro from Arctic that was already on the board as a cooler, together with new MX-4 thermal paste* – whether this will be sufficient remains to be seen.

⧉ Gigabyte

Initial situation

In good old DIY fashion, I put the motherboard on the benchtable, inserted all four RAM sticks, and connected the cables. For such projects, I like to use a “problem-free” GPU model, in this case an older GeForce 210 from ASUS with 1 GB VRAM – no additional power connection, no fan. PCI Express 2.0 with 16 lanes.

As the system drive, I used an inexpensive Intenso SATA SSD with 256 GB capacity* connected to the first SATA-II port, with Windows 10 22H2 Professional 64-bit installed. The BIOS was already up to date (F12 from June 25, 2009).

This is what it looked like:

Then let’s get started!

First of all, I ran Cinebench R23 for single and multi-core performance, using the default settings. Incidentally, the required VID for my model is a moderate 1.288 volts. The results were 330 / 1251 points:

As was previously common with Gigabyte motherboards, you have to press “CTRL + F1” in the main BIOS menu to display all options. At first, I wondered why I couldn’t enter RAM timings anywhere – but after pressing the key combination, all the options suddenly appeared in the overclocking submenu. You have to know this kind of thing first.

Once I had cleared the first hurdle, I set everything relevant from “Auto” to fixed values, primarily the RAM timings to those stored in the modules (5 – 5 – 5 – 18 at 1.8 volts) and the PCIe speed to “100 MHz”. I wanted to achieve a RAM divider of 1:1, so I always made sure that the final value was at or below the 800 MHz of the RAM modules.

The actual overclocking began here: First, I had to find out what this specific processor was capable of at its original Vcore voltage. According to the BIOS, this was 1.28750 volts, which matched the read VID of 1.288 volts exactly. 266 MHz is the original FSB clock, which has to run in any case.

Front Side Bus…

I slightly increased the clock speed, saved it, restarted, and then briefly checked stability with Cinebench R23. Starting with 300 MHz FSB – as expected, this ran smoothly and already resulted in a clock speed of 2.70 GHz (300 x 9). Next, 333 MHz also ran without any problems (333 x 9). This already resulted in 3.00 GHz instead of the original 2.40 GHz.

At a clock speed of 350 MHz, I had my first blue screen in CB23. No problem, just slightly increase the Vcore in the BIOS – in this case to 1.30 volts to have some leeway. Then everything ran smoothly again, reaching 3.24 GHz!

After further smaller clock jumps, instabilities, and Vcore increases, I had to increase the FSB and MCH voltage by a minimal 0.10 volts for the first time at 372 MHz FSB. Then it ran stably again. I pushed the whole thing much further, up to about 1.55 volts—that’s way too much, especially with air cooling!

I wanted to find out at what point the clock speed no longer scales well with the Vcore. With this very old hardware, I ultimately settled for 380 MHz FSB, as anything above that required really significant voltage increases for marginal gains (from 380 MHz to 386 MHz instead of 0.10 volts, now 0.25 volts on FSB and MCH, plus 1.525 volts Vcore!). Of course, the temperatures also rose disproportionately – I wouldn’t have wanted to go above 1.50 volts permanently anyway. The Arctic Freezer 7 Pro does a good job; thermally and voltage-wise, this is an acceptable range.

The result

With 380 MHz FSB and 1.45 Vcore set in the BIOS, this results in 3.42 GHz at 760 MHz RAM clock speed (1:1 division, 380 x 9). That’s 1.02 GHz more than the original, even with a rather small air cooler. It’s clear why this CPU is so well known among overclockers around the world – my sample is actually only average in terms of silicon quality, as can be seen from the average VID. Under full load, HWiNFO reads only 1.392 volts as Vcore, so the Vdroop is clearly visible.

The processor does get very warm with these settings. After about 45 minutes of Prime95 Smallest FFTs, the hottest core was at 79 °C and the package at 84 °C. These are clearly too warm as permanent values, but in Cinebench R23, nothing ever exceeded 72 °C. Prime95 is a rather unrealistic load in normal operation anyway.

CB23 Comparison

Here, I have once again compared the changes between the original and the newly overclocked Q6600 G0:

This was a very nostalgic overclocking project. All that remains to be said is: you notice the difference in performance immediately. Both in terms of computing speed under Windows 10 and the significantly increased waste heat. Over 40% performance gain with a locked multiplier at only 15% more voltage!

Der Beitrag The first desktop quad-core processors: OC legends erschien zuerst auf flohs blog.

The choice of CPU poses a real problem: the most powerful processor for which the appropriate workstation boards were developed at the time had “only” 6 cores. However, the Xeon E5-1680 v2 I chose has eight, 25% more potential power consumption. Of course, this is also specified with 130 watts TDP, but the goal is, of course, to overclock it to the maximum, and then it will be significantly more—the motherboard must also be able to deliver this.

On the platform side, it must be X79 (Patsburg), otherwise overclocking would not be possible.

The search was brief

Given the processor’s assumed high power consumption when overclocked and the desire to be able to fully utilize graphics cards with PCI Express 3.0, it quickly became clear that in this case, an extreme motherboard for hardcore overclockers was needed. Since I have always been impressed by ASUS products and there weren’t really many alternatives at the top end, I opted for an ASUS Rampage IV Extreme in the standard version (there was also a Black Edition, which I found more visually appealing, but it is much rarer and more expensive).

The form factor is the maximum in the desktop sector, Extended ATX (or E-ATX for short). Despite this, the board is very well equipped:

⧉ ASUS

⧉ bit-tech

⧉ bit-tech

⧉ bit-tech

⧉ bit-tech

⧉ bit-tech

Technical specifications

I was able to buy a used one on eBay for less than €100, with some accessories (but the rear panel was missing), which was a really good deal at the time of purchase.

Der Beitrag <h5>Retro-XP-PC #3: </h5><h3><b>A good Board is crucial</b></h3> erschien zuerst auf flohs blog.

The ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero is one of the highest quality and most expensive AMD X570 motherboards available. This is especially true if you ignore the very extreme models at the top end, which seem to have little practical use in everyday life.

This makes it all the more annoying that this model appears to have a hardware defect, at least according to rumors. Several threads in the official ASUS forums have been closed or removed, and there is no real solution to this problem. ASUS simply replaced the product within the (now expired) warranty period to sit out the problem.

The problem occurred after about two years of heavy use:
When I pressed the power button on my BeQuiet Dark Base Pro 900 Rev. 2, nothing happened. My first thought was that something might be defective in the power supply (an HX1200i from Corsair*). I have never experienced a sudden motherboard or power supply failure in standby mode.

After a quick search, it was clear that I wasn’t the only one affected. The solution is to completely disconnect the power to the motherboard by turning off the power supply. After turning the power supply back on, the computer can be started normally with the power button.

A permanent solution is needed.

To permanently resolve the issue, you must set the “ErP” power setting in the UEFI to “S4 + S5,” which is equivalent to disconnecting the power in standby mode. However, this also has side effects:

• Wake on LAN no longer possible
• USB power supply no longer works when switched off
• RGB lighting in standby mode is also not functional

I don’t know of any other solution to get this phenomenon under control. It’s a shame, considering that it was a €400-500 motherboard, which is really far from cheap. Several BIOS updates over the years have not brought about any change.

Der Beitrag ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero: Computer does not start after pressing the power button erschien zuerst auf flohs blog.

After upgrading the processor for potential peak performance, a motherboard was needed that could deliver this.

There are several good motherboards with compatible Z170 or Z270 chipsets (Z170 only after a BIOS update). The Z170 boards were released in tandem with the i7-6700K as the top model, while Z270-based boards were released with the i7-7700K. Only Intel motherboards with Z chipsets allow overclocking of the CPU and RAM.

Because you shouldn’t completely ignore the price/performance ratio and the i7-7700K has been around for a few years now, I started looking on the second-hand market (new compatible motherboards haven’t been available for a long time anyway).

My requirements:

• ATX or E-ATX format
• At least one M.2 slot with NVMe compatibility
• Four DIMM slots
• Powerful VRMs with good heat sinks
• If possible, best with Z270 chipset (Union Point), even if little has changed compared to the Z170
• Stable power supply for the CPU (VCore)
• Compatibility with as many cooling solutions as possible
• OPTIONAL: Integrated Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for flexibility

Seek and you shall find:

I’ve always been impressed by ASUS ROG products, even though they are usually overpriced.
After doing some research on which boards would be suitable and spending several weeks looking for suitable candidates on eBay, I finally found what I was looking for.

One morning, a private seller listed the ASUS ROG Strix Z270-E Gaming motherboard, with the option to make a price suggestion. An ATX board with impressive specs and one of my favorites. The description was sparse, “Works.” – I made an offer anyway, and it was accepted a day later – ~€82 including shipping.
I can’t complain if it arrives in one piece.

A few days later, the board arrived. There were no accessories except for the cover, which came in a box for a different motherboard. Since the Socket 1511 is an LGA socket and the contacts are therefore located on the motherboard, the most important thing was to make sure that these contacts were undamaged. The cap that normally protects them when they leave the factory was also missing. After a thorough inspection, however, the socket looked really good and the rest of the board also appeared to be undamaged, apart from a little dust here and there.

After doing some research, I discovered that this specific model was available with or without Wi-Fi + Bluetooth. I had gotten the model with integrated Wi-Fi + Bluetooth. That’s great, because Wi-Fi 5 (IEEE 802.11ac) and Bluetooth v4.1 are not bad additions.

An overview of the ASUS ROG Strix Z270-E GAMING:

Click here for the test from back then. This board even exceeds some of the requirements, for example, it supports two fully connected M.2 SSDs with 4 PCIe 3.0 lanes each, which can only be a good thing, as well as integrated Wi-Fi and Bluetooth.

⧉ ASUS

⧉ ASUS

⧉ ASUS

Here are the most important technical data:

The motherboard, together with the CPU, provides 24 fast PCIe 3.0 lanes.
These are good prerequisites for connecting everything you need:

• 16 lanes for the first x16 slot, for a dedicated graphics card (or x8 x8 for both physical x16 slots on this board)
• 4 lanes for the NVMe SSD with the operating system
• 4 lanes to connect the PCH (chipset)
  

It’s immediately apparent why the additional 4 lanes in Z270 vs. Z170 represent a genuine improvement.
NVMe was still expensive and only just emerging at the time, but today it is state of the art and allows even this relatively old hardware to perform at its best. However, the optional second M.2 NVMe SSD would then be powered by the PCH with slightly less theoretical throughput and would disable two SATA ports when in use. Nevertheless, it is still much faster than SATA.

The 4 lanes to the PCH supply the remaining components on the motherboard, i.e., SATA, USB, Ethernet, etc.

Use the integrated graphics unit?

I like the digital image outputs (some motherboards from different manufacturers have these chipsets, so it’s nothing exclusive), which allow you to use the graphics unit integrated in the processor in an energy-efficient way. Especially considering the later intended use of the whole thing, it’s an advantage not to have to use a dedicated graphics card. The following specifications can be achieved:

The DisplayPort looks really good, possibly in combination with an adapter to HDMI v2.0*.
The capabilities of the integrated graphics unit have already been described in the overview of the CPU.

Cleaning:

As a preparatory measure, I thoroughly cleaned* the motherboard—first removing the heat sink from the PCH die and the VRMs, then the plastic cover over the connectors.

I then blew everything clean and brushed it with a soft plastic brush*.
Now the journey could continue.

Der Beitrag <h5>i7-7700K OC #4: </h5><h3><b>A suitable motherboard is required</b></h3> erschien zuerst auf flohs blog.