@reizhi I might have misread this initially are you saying options like the Core Performance Boost are no longer in the firmware?
@reizhi I might have misread this initially are you saying options like the Core Performance Boost are no longer in the firmware?
Not that one. I mean, under Peripherals-AMD CBS-NBIO Common Options, "XFR Enhancement" option have been removed.
There we can extend TDC range to 114A and EDC range to 168A.
but when i disable CPB and TPB wouldnt the CPU stuck at base frequenzy?
i will test this soon
right now i use ZenStates to run CPu @4.1GHz with 1.25V - that is ok for me for now
@ket Thanks for responding and looking into fixing those issues in the future!
Also thanks for enabling this by default, then. 
Iām surprised to hear you think the latest X570 boards are even worse than X370. Both firmware wise, and even hardware wise (in terms of having balanced designs). 
What about something like the upcoming MSI X570 Tomahawk, though? Or even the current MSI X570 Unify? Those are supposed to be among the best. If you choose to believe the various review outlets. (Making up for the fact that MSI released a lot of shitty X570 boards, until now.)
I do wonder about X670 . . . I heard a rumor that it might be cancelled. Or, at least delayed and repurposed, as the moniker used when AM5 socket DDR5 and PCI-E 5.0 boards are released. (When X670 was originally expected to be ASMediaās updated, and cheaper, chipset for PCI-E 4.0.)
I also wonder what B550 will be like. Since thatās made by ASMedia, too. Versus the AMD made X570.
Although your modified firmware makes my Gaming K7 much more pleasant to use (thank you again!), and I do like Gigabyte boards from a hardware feature standpoint: Iām really uncertain as to whether Iād ever buy Gigabyte again. Iām leaning toward either MSI or Asus next time.
@reizhi I might have misread this initially are you saying options like the Core Performance Boost are no longer in the firmware?
Not that one. I mean, under Peripherals-AMD CBS-NBIO Common Options, "XFR Enhancement" option have been removed.
There we can extend TDC range to 114A and EDC range to 168A.
Ah as I initially thought then @reizhi , Iād need a Gaming 5/7 again to start poking around CBS options and testing they are easily broken and in some cases are so badly broken Iāve had to outright inject them from completely different firmwares. (Iām looking at you Biostar).
If you disable both yes, but not one or the other.
Also thanks for enabling this by default, then.
Iām surprised to hear you think the latest X570 boards are even worse than X370. Both firmware wise, and even hardware wise (in terms of having balanced designs).
What about something like the upcoming MSI X570 Tomahawk, though? Or even the current MSI X570 Unify? Those are supposed to be among the best. If you choose to believe the various review outlets. (Making up for the fact that MSI released a lot of shitty X570 boards, until now.)
I do wonder about X670 . . . I heard a rumor that it might be cancelled. Or, at least delayed and repurposed, as the moniker used when AM5 socket DDR5 and PCI-E 5.0 boards are released. (When X670 was originally expected to be ASMediaās updated, and cheaper, chipset for PCI-E 4.0.)
I also wonder what B550 will be like. Since thatās made by ASMedia, too. Versus the AMD made X570.
Although your modified firmware makes my Gaming K7 much more pleasant to use (thank you again!), and I do like Gigabyte boards from a hardware feature standpoint: Iām really uncertain as to whether Iād ever buy Gigabyte again. Iām leaning toward either MSI or Asus next time.
Itās not all X570 boards are bad @redrain85 but rather the excuse of PCI-E 4.0 causing monstrously high prices for something that equates to nothing more than correct placement of a redriver and some verification. Most X470 boards to a limited degree at least could and can handle PCI-E 4.0 spec yet at the 11th hour AMD pulled that support. The result of all this (which smells a lot like AMD just trying to price hike their chipsets which leads to board partners having to pay more per chipset hence the higher prices) is that any board under about Ā£200 is rather heavily compromised, lower quality audio implementation, no dual BIOS, in some cases thinner PCBs, etc so on and so forth where even with X470 you could go out and find a very nicely balanced board for Ā£150-160, Asus Prime Pro being one such example. The problem with review sites is that 90%+ of them HAVE to find a way to put a positive spin even on something that is a turd because if you upset that manufacturer poof goes your review samples from them. Places are getting better at being more honest with their thoughts but this is quite a new thing and only seems to be something that started happening since I started simply calling things as I see them in an unbiased and objective manner, could just be coincidence, but feels kinda iffy like places were waiting for someone to have the balls to just say it to give them their window. You should also be aware of the chipset fan X570 needs I have not yet seen a good chipset heatsink that would allow easy replacement of the fan when it fails (and sooner or later, that fan will fail essentially rendering the board unusable as the chipset will overheat) which just adds yet another point of failure and more noise where there doesnāt need to be. I canāt even remember the last chipset that needed an active fanā¦ nForce2 maybe? Either way going back to an active cooling solution for a chipset is literally decades worth of regression there. Whats a real kick in the balls is that if just a proper thermodynamically designed heatsink were placed on the X570 chipset rather than all these designs purely made for looks is that you probably wouldnāt need a fan at all, the chipset might get a bit warm but it wouldnāt overheat, and if it did that is why you have a properly designed heatsink so you can just mount a small fan on top of it for easy replacement when it fails. Nobody seems to think like this anymore though compared to 10 years ago everyone designing boards now look like they have had railroad spikes rammed though their skulls and have the IQ of chimps.
I understand why you wouldnāt go with GB again I certainly wouldnāt say their mainboards are good products out of the box there is FAR too much flexibility hidden away other manufacturers give you access to but not GB so you have to be someone like me capable of making the boards comparable to what other manufacturers are offering. It is worth remembering though that no manufacturer is perfect and any motherboard consideration needs extreme scrutiny before making a final decision. As a general rule any board I look at must have competent cooling, Load Line Calibration options, not tear away anything like manual voltage control (Iām looking at you GB) and use a good voltage regulator and VRM setup. If you donāt have these things in a board thats Ā£150-160 upwards then it is an automatic fail. Manufacturers are getting an ever increasingly nasty habit of gating a lot of things like that off to their most expensive boards, Asrock have become among the worst offenders for this even their Taichi boards no longer have just one board in that class if you want everything you have to look at the Taichi "Ultimate". Literally every manufacturer has forgotten that less is more at least half of the boards a manufacturer sells in their product stack are literally just there to fill a price bracket even if that bracket is only Ā£10 less. Give me any product stack you like and I could half its size at least which would only have benefits, R&D isnāt stretched to the limit so you get less bugs, more timely updates, and better quality firmware as a whole. RMA centers would see an increase in efficency due to not having to have as many different parts on hand or to test, and companies would make more money by not having to re-tool for so many different boards as well as making more money by not having excess stock of all the shitty boards hardly anyone wants which means they could even afford to lower the price of their boards which would attract more customers and thus better profits through volume sales.
Anyway Iāll stop ranting there you get the idea
As for B550 from what I have seen it is just a rebadged B450 with minor changes at best soā¦ meh. X670 from what I know would potentially be used for DDR4 and DDR5 designs with whatever comes after X670 being AM5/DDR5 only. DDR5 will be stupid expensive as new generations of DDR historically always is for the first 18-24 months and historically you donāt start to really see the benefits of a new DDR generation until manufactures start getting to grips with it properly, get the latencies and timings down and work out the kinks so you really arenāt going to be missing anything with DDR5 in the first year or two.
@ket Ah, yeah I can definitely agree with you there, that requiring active cooling with a chipset fan is quite the regression. Itās the biggest turnoff for me when looking at the X570 platform, as a whole. Only one board, that I know of, opted to passively cool the chipset. And that one was Gigabyteās highest end Aorus X570 Extreme, which costs a fortune.
Meanwhile, der8auer already demonstrated (at 15:47 in the video) that a chipset fan is absolutely not required. A very simple, and cheap passive heatsink is good enough. So why the mobo makers all insisted on fans, I have no idea. Is it really that much cheaper to use a fan, than to mill a small chunk of aluminum or copper for use as a heatsink?
I still own an old Asus MA32-MVP Deluxe AM2+ socket mobo from around 2007, and that came with proper finned copper heatsinks and heatpipes on everything. Hell, it even had heatpipes connecting to the memory, which was overkill.
BTW, I just remembered . . . isnāt it odd that Gigabyte chose to put the Display Resolution option for the X370 BIOS (and I guess B350/B450/X470/X570, too) on the Chipset screen? Weird decision. Wouldnāt it make more sense on the System or BIOS tab/screen?
@ket Ah, yeah I can definitely agree with you there, that requiring active cooling with a chipset fan is quite the regression. Itās the biggest turnoff for me when looking at the X570 platform, as a whole. Only one board, that I know of, opted to passively cool the chipset. And that one was Gigabyteās highest end Aorus X570 Extreme, which costs a fortune.
Meanwhile, der8auer already demonstrated (at 15:47 in the video) that a chipset fan is absolutely not required. A very simple, and cheap passive heatsink is good enough. So why the mobo makers all insisted on fans, I have no idea. Is it really that much cheaper to use a fan, than to mill a small chunk of aluminum or copper for use as a heatsink?
I still own an old Asus MA32-MVP Deluxe AM2+ socket mobo from around 2007, and that came with proper finned copper heatsinks and heatpipes on everything. Hell, it even had heatpipes connecting to the memory, which was overkill.
BTW, I just remembered . . . isnāt it odd that Gigabyte chose to put the Display Resolution option for the X370 BIOS (and I guess B350/B450/X470/X570, too) on the Chipset screen? Weird decision. Wouldnāt it make more sense on the System or BIOS tab/screen?
I donāt know why manufacturers insisted on actively cooled chipsets @redrain85 it might have even been something AMD did on their own in-house prototype board supplied to manufacturers to use as a template for their own designs and everyone just assumed the heatsink needed to be actively cooled rather than actually do their own testing. A good thermodynamically designed heatsink I doubt costs any more (probably less) than the actively cooled solutions everyone is using and I donāt even want to imagine how RMAs for the X570s will rocket in a year or two when all those chipset fans start failing. Stupid thing is manufacturers could probably take Ā£5 off the RRP of X570 boards if they updated them to use passive cooling from what Iāve seen there really arenāt many people that have opted to go for X570 largely down to the active chipset cooling and over inflated prices for nothing more than "because reasons". Instead most picked up an X470 or B450, few weeks ago I saw the Asus B450-F Strix selling for Ā£100, which isnāt too bad of a deal at all. I do find it funny that D8 takes almost 20mins just to say "put a passive heatsink on" though along with a before and after temperature comparison lol, its why I donāt particularly watch his videos theres a lot of padding that everyone already knows before getting to the actual point I donāt like wasting other peoples time like that which is why my reviews are somewhat clear cut. I remember the MA32-MVP Deluxe it was around the time Asus were experimenting with cooling they did stuff like use backplates for the VRM areas too on some boards, not necessary but certainly not something anyone minded either only thing I wasnāt keep on was the integrated memory cooling the idea itself was good it was just badly executed on that board.
As for GB and the X370 thing, I could probably move the option but then it might not show up in the "Easy Mode" the firmware has so pretty stuck with leaving it where it is I did try moving some options in the early days but had people saying they no longer showed up in the easy mode.
Do you have GA-AB350M-Gaming 3 (rev. 1.x) custom bios for me?
@ronen1n
i am 98% sure the AB350-Gaming 3 will also work 
OR you have to pay Ket to mod this bios for you (and maybe make it public when F25M)
AB350-Gaming 3 bios work on the matx version? ill i want is to unhide the llc settings, if someone can teach me ill do it myself. Thanks 
@Yadj123 the Gaming 3 doesnāt have LLC options at all. To even attempt to add those options some quite intricate splicing would need to occur with elements from a "better" Gaming board. Its a process I typically decided against doing for the boards that donāt have LLC due to the sheer amount of time it would take to do and me not knowing if a failed splice would brick a board or not.
Damn it, I need llc to stabilize my 3533mhz oc and any oc over 3200mhz for that matter. Seems Iāll be changing this board for a b550 as soon as possible then. Thanks man!
Hmmā¦ What with the recent sad news of no Zen 3 / Ryzen 4xxx support on anything earlier than the 500-series chipsets, Iām starting to wonder if F50a will be the last BIOS we get for the X370 Gaming K7. If so, Iād be ready to plunk down some dough for an F50a mod, @ket , so as to have it on-hand for my eventual R9 3900X upgrade.
Whatās your gut feeling on whether theyāre likely to do a non-beta F50 release at this point, or anything further at all? I know in many cases older boards are left with a beta as the last BIOS thatās ever released.
In theory assuming there are no drastic AGESA changes @spurdy adding Ryzen 4000 support is just a case of adding their CPU microcodes. Some low grade consumer and business class CPU support would possibly need to be removed but that would be about it. X470 owners I can see getting pissed with no 4000 series support those boards are not very old at all and you likely can add support using the current latest AGESA even with space limitations being what they are on the ROM chips of those boards. Unless AMD throw some money at manufacturers to go back to the drawing board with their UEFIs for X470 at least support just wonāt happen unless modders attempt what I suggested.
Is that something itād be possible for you to accomplish, or is it dependent on Gigabyte doing at least some sort of supporting release for the 300/400 boards first?
Iām mostly just wondering if itās time to give up on further releases from Gigabyte for the AX370-Gaming K7 specifically, and pay to have you mod F50a for it. But if you think thereās any chance Gigabyte might release a BIOS supporting Ryzen 4000 for it (seems very unlikely), or that you might be able to edit it in, then I might hold off.
It is an unknown factor at the moment @spurdy. If one manufacturer decides to have a go at supporting the 4000 series (there are a couple X370/470 boards out there with 32mb ROM chips) then chances are all the other manufacturers will rush to support them as well by doing things such as removing surplus microcode as they wonāt want to be made to look bad. In all honestly though there is absolutely no excuses for X470 boards particularly not having ROM chips big enough to support the 4000 series AMD know what their roadmap is and thus internally inevitably would have known some time ago (likely dating back to 1st gen Zen) a larger AGESA would be required in future so could have easily informed manufacturers of this and advised larger ROM chips for future development. If it turns out even X470 boards donāt get official 4000 series support then Iād have to think that the move was a play made just before X470/B450 was released to get AMD and board manufacturers more money while publicly AMD have the somewhat dirty explanation of "We said socket AM4 would support up to at least Zen3, not that every chipset on the AM4 platform would support up to Zen3."
In my book, thats a dishonest, sly, disgusting move to make. It is however as I have said all along during AMDs revival; their aim is to make money not be your pal so just like you would any other company you should take what they say with a large dose of skeptisism until it actually happens.
AMD made a turn
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-reā¦70-motherboards
AMD Reverses Course, Will Enable Zen 3 and Ryzen 4000 Support on B450 and X470 Motherboards.
ps KET, can you give me an update about the modified X370 Gaming K3 F50a bios.
Iām glad for the owners of 400-series boards that some might end up with Zen3 support. However, at this point, after digesting all the info (particularly the Gamers Nexus series covering the issue) I think Iām ready to place a bet that F50a may be the last & best we get for the AX370 Gaming K7.
@ket , Iāll be DM-ing you about chipping in for an F50a mod here shortly!
@spurdy Iāve heard rumors X370 will see support for Zen3 as well, so I wouldnāt be giving up all hope yet 
Iād already toyed with reverse engineering an X470 firmware for X370 anyway to get Zen 3 support. Interesting times ahead it seems.
@mobo370dutch remind me again what was I doing for you? Iāve probably had 100 PMs or so since things get lost sometimes 