CoffeeLake Completely working on 100/200 series chipsets

143683 Views 103 Replies 49 Participants Last post by munternet, Feb 4, 2020

rootmoto

Discussion Starter · Mar 1, 2018

CoffeeLake is now completely working on 100/200 series motherboards, so far Core i3 8100 has been tested working completely on the 100 series boards. Thanks to dsanke, littlehill, elisw and Mov AX, 0xDEAD from win-raid forums.

List of contributions done by the respective people:

LittleHill contributed in the adding of CoffeeLake CPU microcode and suggestions of using the correct ME Version to boot CPU
rootuser123 (me) fixed iGPU by extracting CoffeeLake iGPU VBIOS and using latest GOP Driver from SoniX and updating the VBIOS and GOP Driver.
dsanke contributed in booting 6 core CPU on MSI Z270 motherboard and helping along giving a lot of assistance in solving the problems.
elisw contributed in testing and writing guides
Mov AX, 0xDEAD solved the issue with the PCI-E x16 not working and CPU Voltage readout fixes when using CoffeeLake CPUs.

Please read the various threads for more information:

Initial think tank thread: https://www.win-raid.com/t3251f16-Coffee-lake-Cpus-on-Sky-Kaby-Lake-chipsets.html
Guide: https://www.win-raid.com/t3413f16-GUIDE-Coffee-Lake-CPUs-on-Skylake-and-Kaby-Lake-motherboards.html
Patches: https://www.win-raid.com/t3483f16-F...on-Sky-Kaby-Lake-non-Asrock-motherboards.html

PC1:
Intel Core i9 9900KS, Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 7-OP, 64GB DDR4-3400 RAM, Gigabyte RTX 2070 SUPER AORUS 8GB, Pioneer BDR-212DBK Blu-Ray Drive, 2x1TB Crucial MX500 Raid 0, Intel Optane M10 32GB, Seagate Firecuda 2TB SSHD, Enermax Revolution 87+ 850W PSU, Cooler Master K350 Case
PC 2:
Intel Core i9 10900K, Gigabyte Z590 AORUS Master motherboard, 32GB DDR4-4000 RAM, Gigabyte Radeon RX 470 G1 Gaming 4GB (flashed with Gigabyte RX 580 AORUS BIOS) @1350MHz core/2150MHz GDDR5 RAM, Pioneer BDR-209DBK Blu-Ray Drive , Intel Optane H10 512GB, Samsung 4TB QVO SSD, Cooler Master V1200 1200W PSU, Cooler Master K350 Case

HTPC System:
Intel Xeon X3450 @4.0GHz, Gigabyte GA-P55-USB3 (rev 2.0) motherboard, 8GB DDR3-1600 RAM Dual Channel, Gigabyte GTX 750 Ti Windforce OC 2GB @1437.5MHz core/1602.5MHz GDDR5 RAM, ASUS, Pioneer and TSST-Corp DVD-DL Drive, Seagate 500GB HDD @7200RPM, OCZ 700W PSU, Huntkey Case

Reactions: 2

1 - 20 of 104 Posts

BeeDeeEff

· #2 · Mar 1, 2018

That's quite something.

Wildcard36qs

· #3 · Mar 1, 2018

"Because of higher power limits I would not suggest this mod with i5 and i7 K series CPUs "

That is a lot of work just to get an i3 working. *edit* oops K series. OK. Still, very interesting.

EniGma1987

· #4 · Mar 1, 2018

We all knew it was compatible, just Intel locking it out on purpose to sell new stuff. Good job to these folks for showing it can be done.

kd5151

· #5 · Mar 1, 2018

Everyday I'm hustlin'

rootmoto

Discussion Starter · #6 · Mar 1, 2018

@EniGma1987 Intel uses the Management Engine Firmware to lock out compatibility, just use Intel ME 11.6 and it will just boot. Intel is a d!ck about the Intel ME Firmware, that's how they lock BCLK overclocking on non-K CPUs too.

PC1:
Intel Core i9 9900KS, Gigabyte Z370 AORUS Gaming 7-OP, 64GB DDR4-3400 RAM, Gigabyte RTX 2070 SUPER AORUS 8GB, Pioneer BDR-212DBK Blu-Ray Drive, 2x1TB Crucial MX500 Raid 0, Intel Optane M10 32GB, Seagate Firecuda 2TB SSHD, Enermax Revolution 87+ 850W PSU, Cooler Master K350 Case
PC 2:
Intel Core i9 10900K, Gigabyte Z590 AORUS Master motherboard, 32GB DDR4-4000 RAM, Gigabyte Radeon RX 470 G1 Gaming 4GB (flashed with Gigabyte RX 580 AORUS BIOS) @1350MHz core/2150MHz GDDR5 RAM, Pioneer BDR-209DBK Blu-Ray Drive , Intel Optane H10 512GB, Samsung 4TB QVO SSD, Cooler Master V1200 1200W PSU, Cooler Master K350 Case

HTPC System:
Intel Xeon X3450 @4.0GHz, Gigabyte GA-P55-USB3 (rev 2.0) motherboard, 8GB DDR3-1600 RAM Dual Channel, Gigabyte GTX 750 Ti Windforce OC 2GB @1437.5MHz core/1602.5MHz GDDR5 RAM, ASUS, Pioneer and TSST-Corp DVD-DL Drive, Seagate 500GB HDD @7200RPM, OCZ 700W PSU, Huntkey Case

fg2chase

· #7 · Mar 1, 2018

EniGma1987 said:
We all knew it was compatible, just Intel locking it out on purpose to sell new stuff. Good job to these folks for showing it can be done.

yeah on a low power i3, good luck trying to run an 8700K on it. Intel doesn't sell motherboards what difference does it make to them?

silverwing

· #8 · Mar 1, 2018 (Edited)

fg2chase said:
yeah on a low power i3, good luck trying to run an 8700K on it. Intel doesn't sell motherboards what difference does it make to them?

They sell the chipsets, which go on the motherboard.

Tbh, I'm completed disillusioned with coffee lake at this point. When it was released I really really wanted it for my first ever customer loop. But Between Intels crap supply, retailers tacking on 30-60 dollars on MSRP and the Z370 Maximus Formula coming out like 4 months late. I just got tired of it before I even bought it.

Imglidinhere

· #9 · Mar 1, 2018

fg2chase said:
yeah on a low power i3, good luck trying to run an 8700K on it. Intel doesn't sell motherboards what difference does it make to them?

Even if it's on a low power processor, why is it so out of the question that this might be capable of getting an 8700 working? I mean, the TDP differences between the 8700 and 8700k are different by about 50%. One is a 95W chip, the other is 65W.

In any case, this just shows that Intel outright lied about the compatibility issues here. Same socket, new chipset to unlock the new processors, but lock the old ones too. Excessively dumb. Just one more reason to stick to AMD.

epic1337

· #10 · Mar 1, 2018

Imglidinhere said:
Even if it's on a low power processor, why is it so out of the question that this might be capable of getting an 8700 working? I mean, the TDP differences between the 8700 and 8700k are different by about 50%. One is a 95W chip, the other is 65W.

In any case, this just shows that Intel outright lied about the compatibility issues here. Same socket, new chipset to unlock the new processors, but lock the old ones too. Excessively dumb. Just one more reason to stick to AMD.

power pin allocation, its not that the motherboard can't support higher power usage, but the power pin on the CPU-side is shifted to unused pins on the socket-side.

meaning, theres a risk of burning the CPU itself, the motherboard will survive the load.

LancerVI

· #11 · Mar 1, 2018

epic1337 said:
power pin allocation, its not that the motherboard can't support higher power usage, but the power pin on the CPU-side is shifted to unused pins on the socket-side.

meaning, theres a risk of burning the CPU itself, the motherboard will survive the load.

You mean to tell me that Intel HAD TO do it that way????

I absolutely believe that Intel did this purposely to drive sales.

Don't get me wrong; they have every right to do it. But I'll tell you this: AMD is guaranteed to be in my next build when I move beyond my 5820k.

epic1337

· #12 · Mar 1, 2018

LancerVI said:
You mean to tell me that Intel HAD TO do it that way????

I absolutely believe that Intel did this purposely to drive sales.

Don't get me wrong; they have every right to do it. But I'll tell you this: AMD is guaranteed to be in my next build when I move beyond my 5820k.

it might've been necessary to spread load due to more cores.
to compare it to socket 2011, 1151 had much fewer power pins, specially the 1151-v1 and 1151-v2 sockets.

it would've been a different story if Intel pushed the 1151-v3 from the beginning, so yes Intel was at fault on this in either case.

SavantStrike

· #13 · Mar 1, 2018

LancerVI said:
You mean to tell me that Intel HAD TO do it that way????

I absolutely believe that Intel did this purposely to drive sales.

Don't get me wrong; they have every right to do it. But I'll tell you this: AMD is guaranteed to be in my next build when I move beyond my 5820k.

They have a hard limit of two series per socket, sometimes 1.

Of course this was to drive sales. They didn't even have the z390 ready so z370 isn't even a refresh. How much do you want to bet z390 is going to be a single series socket

epic1337

· #14 · Mar 1, 2018

SavantStrike said:
They have a hard limit of two series per socket, sometimes 1.

Of course this was to drive sales. They didn't even have the z390 ready so z370 isn't even a refresh. How much do you want to bet z390 is going to be a single series socket

they didn't really need to switch sockets though?

they could refresh the chipsets instead, with more interesting features, imagine if they were like this:
100series = 1x M.2, 20 PCIe lanes.
200series = 2x M.2, 30 PCIe lanes, native 2.5gbps Intel NIC.
300series = 3x M.2, 40 PCIe lanes, native 5gbps Intel NIC.

all these wouldn't require a socket swap, however DMI 3.0 would ultimately become the bottleneck.

nonametoclaim

· #15 · Mar 1, 2018

hasnt this been known for a while? i mean not the potential compatibility but that intel more or less nerfs reverse compatibility. p67/z68/z77 very minor variations in performance and features. where AMD makes it a point to allow users to camp an older board and upgrade cpus while missing out on new features at their own discretion.

JackCY

· #16 · Mar 1, 2018

Well, does 8700K work on ASRock boards? Or is it just 8100 on Gigabyte and the like, in other words undesirable mobos and CPUs?

EniGma1987

· #17 · Mar 1, 2018

epic1337 said:
they didn't really need to switch sockets though?

they could refresh the chipsets instead, with more interesting features, imagine if they were like this:
100series = 1x M.2, 20 PCIe lanes.
200series = 2x M.2, 30 PCIe lanes, native 2.5gbps Intel NIC.
300series = 3x M.2, 40 PCIe lanes, native 5gbps Intel NIC.

all these wouldn't require a socket swap, however DMI 3.0 would ultimately become the bottleneck.

They just need to switch to a DMI 4.0 and move to the newly released PCI-E 4.0 spec, and while they are at it they should move it up to 8 lanes instead of 4 to quadrouple the bandwidth from DMIv3. Then we would finally be able to connect a couple m.2 drives without de-activating SATA ports and not having enough bandwidth to do stuff with.

mouacyk

· #18 · Mar 1, 2018

I still don't see any results of 8600K/8700K at 5GHz+ pulling 200W+ from all this hacking. That's the real deal with Z370. Is 4 real cores for an i3 really the main attraction of Z370? If so, you might as well look toward AMD for equivalent or better performance.

Andrew LB

· #19 · Mar 4, 2018

mouacyk said:
I still don't see any results of 8600K/8700K at 5GHz+ pulling 200W+ from all this hacking. That's the real deal with Z370. Is 4 real cores for an i3 really the main attraction of Z370? If so, you might as well look toward AMD for equivalent or better performance.

Actually the i3-8100 pretty much wipes the floor with the similarly priced Ryzen 3 1300x.

boot318

· #20 · Mar 4, 2018 (Edited)

Andrew LB said:
Actually the i3-8100 pretty much wipes the floor with the similarly priced Ryzen 3 1300x.

What? The Ryzen 1300x is $115 on newegg right now, but the i3 8350k is $180! At least compare it to the Ryzen 1400 ($160) or the Ryzen 1600 ($190).

SMH.

[EDIT] I see the 8350k is $169 on Amazon.

1 - 20 of 104 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.