TouchBIOS time troubled (solved!)

[FoLmEr]

I did a post a while back about TouchBIOS messing around with my system time where, after using the software to change a setting in the BIOS, I'd lose x minutes (the number of minutes the program had been open, to be exact).

Yesterday I received an answer via GGTS with an attached version of TouchBIOS that solves this issue.

I am happy about this, of course, but also kind of disheartened because it's taken GIGABYTE months to fix this issue, and it's not like the time problem is the only thing wrong with TouchBIOS. I guess it was always some kind of a rushed bandaid solution for not having a UEFI and therefore didn't really receive the attention it required.

As I replied to GGTS, it's actually becoming a piece of software worthy of releasing to the public.

[Dark Mantis]

Hi

Thanks for taking the time to update the original post so that anybody else with a similar problem will know how to proceed. I am sure that you are correct and that it probably didn't get as much time allotted as it could have done but as with anything there is only so many manhours available and they have to be put to the most efficient uses.

At least it seems to have been rectified now. 

[Allanm]

Hi , I have the same Problem.....Can you point me to the correct version of TOUCHBIOS that fixes the problem please?

[Citizen Crazed]

I am happy about this, of course, but also kind of disheartened because it's taken GIGABYTE months to fix this issue, and it's not like the time problem is the only thing wrong with TouchBIOS. I guess it was always some kind of a rushed bandaid solution for not having a UEFI and therefore didn't really receive the attention it required.

Amen, indeed. The frustrating part is that most of the issues with it are (or should have been) quickly fixable. DM  you make a valid point re. manpower limitations, but that isn't really any excuse. The number of mainboard manufacturers has shrunk dramatically in the last few years, and thus there should be an employer's market for engineers with the relevant experience, both in Taipei and the rest of the world. Aside from anything else, the last thing Gigabyte want to do is allow a reputation for dodgy BIOS development to propagate - as it will negatively affect their sales. One of the first signs of one or two of the deceased board makers gave of being in trouble was a similar lack of attention to product quality - which quickly became a self-fulfilling prophesy. Would hate to think of the same thing happening again.

[canardlover]

Hi folks, have just assembled my new "passive" desktop with:
Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 (Rev: 1.3)
Intel Core i5-2500K 3,3GHz
Corsair Vengeance LP 4x4GB DDR3 PC3-12800 1600MHz
Intel 520 series SSD 180GB
Thermalright HR-02 Macho (1x140mm fan)
Seasonic X-Fanless 400W PSU
Samsung DVD/RW 22X SATA
Fractal Design Arc case
Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
..and started with some stresstesting using Prime95 to find out how much CPU fan speed I would have to use.
In the process I was quite a bit confused regarding my readings in Touch BIOS when I compared it with BIOS and SpeedFan readings.
1) with Prime95 running stably SpeedFan showed CPU core values levelling out at 40/41/46/48 C while Touch BIOS showed 39C Current CPU Temp.
2) with pc stably at idle, SpeedFan reported CPU cores 29/29/29/29 C while Touch BIOS showed 19C and BIOS showed CPU temp at 27C.
So it appers that Touch BIOS is still not quite "in touch" with what is happening...
Should I expect better results after updating, I have not yet connected to internet.??
..Cheers/Harald