Overclock.net banner
12,421 - 12,440 of 20,233 Posts
I am on a chiller now, just to get more out of my KS, but I had a 12700K in first, upgraded to a 13900K and thought my new CPU or board went bad.. I was having crashing issues out of the blue,
to make a long story shorter... I had corrupted GPU drivers. del your current driver using the display driver uninstall tool. get latest GPU driver and always click the clean install box.

I think this might help you, we have similar build, or what I have had.
last thing, you mentioned checking your GPU temps after a crash, but what are you CPU temps looking like using HWINFO64
I'll give that a shot and let you know what I find. I don't want to totally uninstall the video driver, so maybe I'll check clean install next update. When I first built the machine, Windows threw some horribly outdated version of the Nvidia driver at it, so the screen blanked out, and I had to boot into safe mode to update the driver.

I have seen something though that makes me a little suspicious of the video card. It's one of those things where it feels like the computer is gaslighting you. Just a split second frame of the screen turning black with just a grid of italicized cubes (rhombus) on the screen. Normally it's just been a flicker on my second monitor, but yesterday after exiting game, it held for at least half a second. Not sure what that is, or if I should be worried.
 
Some feedback about bios 1501 from Shamino (790 Apex): bug with nvme ssd. When you have two ssd or more in your system, you can't use them. Only one ssd will be work. And if you want to write some data on second (non system ssd), the system will reboot, and after rebooting MB doesn't see your ssd (no one ssd, including ssd with windows).
I don’t know how Asus allows such bios versions to be posted on its official forum... And at the same time they banned bianbao from publishing its versions... Great job, dudes))))) Freedom Bianbao!!!

I have 4 NVME drives and a SATA SSD on 1501, they all work fine. So I'm not sure if this post is somehow taking something out of context. Even if there is a bug, your post doesn't make much sense. This is why there is a validation process in the first place. If, for example, these other builds were not permitted to be posted in the first place, this presents an ethical issue as much as a technical one. We can safely assume one person is not writing all the code, so one person shouldn't be signing off on it. We already receive prerelease BIOSes via Safedisk.
 
I have 4 NVME drives and a SATA SSD on 1501, they all work fine. So I'm not sure if this post is somehow taking something out of context. Even if there is a bug, your post doesn't make much sense. This is why there is a validation process in the first place. If, for example, these other builds were not permitted to be posted in the first place, this presents an ethical issue as much as a technical one. We can safely assume one person is not writing all the code, so one person shouldn't be signing off on it. We already receive prerelease BIOSes via Safedisk.
This problem is observed on windows 11. What is your operating system?
 
Some feedback about bios 1501 from Shamino (790 Apex): bug with nvme ssd. When you have two ssd or more in your system, you can't use them. Only one ssd will be work. And if you want to write some data on second (non system ssd), the system will reboot, and after rebooting MB doesn't see your ssd (no one ssd, including ssd with windows).
I don’t know how Asus allows such bios versions to be posted on its official forum... And at the same time they banned bianbao from publishing its versions... Great job, dudes))))) Freedom Bianbao!!!
I have 2 SSDs and both work fine; using Win11. That’s not a 1501 issue..
 
I'am running Asus z790 hero, 13900k and G.Skill 6000 F5-6000J3040G32GX2-RS5K
BIOS 1303.
I have some minor instabilities when I use XMP1, XMP2 or Tweaked.
I have read from SPD that tRFC1 should be 884 for XMP profile, but BIOS always sets 480 (DRAM REF Cycle Time - It's grayed out). Is this ok?

Font Line Screenshot Technology Software
 
I'am running Asus z790 hero, 13900k and G.Skill 6000 F5-6000J3040G32GX2-RS5K
I have some minor instabilities when I use XMP1, XMP2 or Tweaked.
I have read from SPD that tRFC1 should be 884 for XMP profile, but BIOS always sets 480 (DRAM REF Cycle Time - It's grayed out). Is this ok?

View attachment 2632851
Did you try changing it to 884?
 
Some points to remember:

Any operation that exceeds the specified current threshold will accelerate the degradation, the pseudoscience occurs when trying to determine by how much as these things aren't easily quantifiable, hence nobody has proper data.

Intel whitepaper specifications for VID or otherwise are concluded after risk assessment and based on stock frequencies only. One we increase the frequency the spec sheets are no longer valid.

Whilst not speaking directly to Z590/690/790, on older platforms where users were more inclined to use power viruses such as Prime - internal testing consistently found that subjecting the CPU to high current workloads rapidly accelerated electromigration. Fundamentally, you only need to look at how Intel implemented AVX2 mechanisms to combat power consumption under certain workloads.

Perfect! Agree with you!


We create our own fear.

Intel's datasheet explicitly states voltage, power, and temperature limits.
Everyone gets scared when they see idle voltage close to 1.5V, even if the temperature is low and power consumption is minimal.

On the other hand, as soon as we start tweaking the CPU on the motherboard, we ignore Intel's recommended LLC, remove power limit protections, and completely change core scaling and voltage to a fixed mode.
We do all of this and subject the CPU to an effort far above any acceptable level for hours and several days.

But all of this doesn't seem to create any kind of fear or embarrassment because the monster we've created is called voltage, and that's what must be fought.
There seems to be no problem testing the CPU for hours above 95°C and 300W as long as the voltage is within a value we simply pull out of a hat.

If we check the vf tables for processors, we'll see that there are CPUs with voltage values above 1.500V for turbo frequencies.
Do Intel engineers not know that voltage is the real monster that destroys the CPU?
Do we need to teach them that processors should be sold with all-core frequencies locked and with a fixed voltage?

I guess that's why we don't see any Intel engineers participating in forums... Lol.

Once again, I say... There's nothing wrong with configuring the CPU by synchronizing all cores and fixing the voltage...

But when things go wrong, let's be fair in assigning blame. It's not worth deceiving ourselves.
 
Discussion starter · #12,438 ·
You have some of the 8000 24gb sticks? You have a good base timing set for 8400/8600?

I am really struggling to get these sticks running.
Try this timings on 8400:

Font Screenshot Technology Multimedia Software
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: Gadfly
12,421 - 12,440 of 20,233 Posts