Gigabyte 990fxa-ud3 rev4.0 custom bios

[regit]

Update v5
Fix data and version for bios  bulid
Update microcode for fx and opteron cpu
      Date:2014/07/23 CPUID:00600F20 PatchID:06000832 -> Updated Date:2016/01/25 CPUID:00600F20 PatchID:0600084F

Link in first post

[jorgecorazondeleon]

Hi:
The name and date of Bios change in windows.
In UEFI Bios continues F4a and the same earlier date.
PD: BIos extractor tool,
Have you link for download?

[regit]

can you make photo or something where is old date because i dont have uefi bios.

[jorgecorazondeleon]

yes

[AgentFXA]

Okay, bit clearer here is the old date in v5:

http://pasteboard.co/2OopzqPF.jpg

[jorgecorazondeleon]

I have noticed that the bios has the new patch ( 0x0600084f) (F4X) decreases processor performance (FX8350) with respect to F4a.(0x6000822)
In approximately 1%.
I have done several tests and always gives me the same.

[regit]

You will never have the same resulatat , i do this test few time and look 100 points is not a diffrent

bechmark alway gives other values because system all time work and do something heavy or light

[jorgecorazondeleon]

Sorry
I mean ALWAYS it gives me higher in the F4a
Anyway, that's not your fault, but the patch
May be it sacrificing performance for stability.

[Zyrocenus]

Hello all,  Been following this thread and using this BIOS since v1 and finally decided to register.

First off thanks for continuing work on this board where gigabyte has left off.  This BIOS is definitely an improvement over the official releases.

I have noticed a few quirks though, perhaps others have noticed as well.   I use this board with an AMD 8350 8 core and 8G of 1333 DDR3 and a gigabyte R9 270x. 

My first issue is I have never been able to manually set northbridge or HT speeds.  On occasion I can set 2400 on the northbridge but regardless of voltages or LLC settings etc it is not stable.....also the multipliers seem to be locked to 13x and 11x respectively, perhaps this part is normal for this board.  Anyways, oddly enough if I raise the base clock the raised NB and HT clocks are stable.  I can set 225mhz and the machine will run 2900+ on the HT and 2600+ on the NB.  Temps get a little out of hand at load but my point is the board will do it.  Why cant I manually set any speed for these values with success?  I am currently running 215mhz which yields 2800 HT 2400 NB stable and runs reasonably cool.  My previous board: Asus M5A97 r2.0 could easily run 2600 \ 2600 and could even go beyond with a little effort.  I believe the 990FXA to be superior to the M5A97 so I don't understand the wall I'm hitting currently.

My second issue is with HPC setting in BIOS.  If I boot the computer and allow it to boot windows without interruption I hold any core speed constantly as is supposed to occur.  However, if I enter BIOS -To monitor temps or voltages etc- and then boot to windows from within BIOS HPC is over ridden and the CPU speed fluctuates mostly below half speed, occasionally hitting 3.8 - 4.1 GHz but never close to to my set 4.51.  It is also much more "crashy" in windows.  Is there any reason why I'm stable and rock solid if I simply let the computer start uninterrupted and unstable if I boot windows from within BIOS?

Thanks again for your continued work and Thanks to anyone who can shed some light on this

Zyro

[AgentFXA]

The underlying bios for the patching here is the unofficial version F4a - a hotfix (for the cpu fan issue) and not meant to be overclocked. There are no OC safeguards in place in this bios version hence you're on your own risk. This might explain some of your quirks.

Personally I think the v4.0 board is Gigabyte's worst release I came across - there was a reason a v4.1 board has been rushed out and is now replaced with v5.0 

[jorgecorazondeleon]

I advise you to write to:
technical support in taiwan and insist with the publication of a new Bios
I just did it
http://esupport.gigabyte.com/Login/Index?ReturnUrl=%2f

"Question:   Do you have plan to upgrade the bios ?, since F3 has serious problems with the speed cpu cooler and F4a not been published.
In addition there is a new AGESA code.
And to suit Windows 10"

[Zyrocenus]

The underlying bios for the patching here is the unofficial version F4a - a hotfix (for the cpu fan issue) and not meant to be overclocked. There are no OC safeguards in place in this bios version hence you're on your own risk. This might explain some of your quirks.

Personally I think the v4.0 board is Gigabyte's worst release I came across - there was a reason a v4.1 board has been rushed out and is now replaced with v5.0

Thanks for the replies and opening a dialogue with me on this,

Yes I realize this is an unofficial bios and I'm using it as unintended, but I do feel it is the best performing bios I have tested thus far on this board which when acquired had ver F2.  As for the safeguards....I do believe some if not all are functioning.   If I set 2600 on the HT and quite often when I set 2400 the machine will hang for a moment...the LEDs in my case will dim then brighten and the machine boots to stock setting and gives a warning of the previous settings failure.  The machine also throttles or outright shuts down if I exceed 75C for more then about 5 seconds on either the NB or CPU (both temps are usually within ~ 5 degrees of one another).   So something is saving me I have to think. 

I come from Intel land  lol  My previous C2D quad 9550 2.8 Could hit 5.0 at 1.65V on the core.  Way in excess of standard settings but she took it....I rarely set that speed outside of hypothetical testing scenarios and usually ran at 4.6 @ 1.55V or so....it held up for 6+ years before the motherboard gave out, an MSI x48C platinum.  The 9550 survived.  AMD is a completely different animal of course, my last exposure to AMD was a K6-2 333 and I've never owned one again until now.

I've, of course,  had to re evaluate my previous OC techniques.  I don't feel that this is a bad board....or maybe I somehow got a blessed one?  lol  Its hands down superior to the ASUS M5A97 R2.0 I had first and replaced after less than a month.  I just don't think it had the VRM capacity to drive this chip -FX8350- or sufficient cooling to push it.  My original query still remains tho....why cant I ever adjust the HT or NB speeds? Regardless of official BIOS or otherwise?  Even if I set the exact values that "Auto" determines or one step up or one step down it fails.   Why MUST they be left to auto?  Why is there no multiplier flexibility here?  This is the only feature the M5A97 had over this board and I wish this wasn't the case since I am certain that the machine performed better when the HT and NB frequencies where in line with each other.....example 2600\2600 etc

My observation about core speed being variable if I boot override thru bios vs just letting the system start normally and holding stable with HPC set was not commented upon.....can anyone else confirm this?  Try booting as I have mentioned....once normally, uninterrupted and once thru bios both times with HPC set.  Do you see the same thing I do?  Is HPC overridden if u manually boot your windows drive from bios?  I'm only guessing HPC is overridden here....I haven't investigated much past the root cause...my interest was centered on holding core speed and once I saw that allowing the machine to boot uninterrupted held core speed I dug no further and continued to push my clocks.   

Thanks for the comments thus far and looking forward to more in the future,

Zyro

[Zyrocenus]

I advise you to write to:
technical support in taiwan and insist with the publication of a new Bios
I just did it
http://esupport.gigabyte.com/Login/Index?ReturnUrl=%2f

"Question:   Do you have plan to upgrade the bios ?, since F3 has serious problems with the speed cpu cooler and F4a not been published.
In addition there is a new AGESA code.
And to suit Windows 10"

Good Morning, well morning for me anyways

After batting this post around in my head throughout the night I have the feeling that there likely wont be a new release, at least not specifically to suit windows 10.   The board is 8.1 certified and there is little diff between 8.1 and 10, please educate me if I'm wrong here but the slope of OS development was sharper from win 7 to 8 than it was from 8 to 9....er 10 -still hate they skipped 9 to distance themselves from 8....so stupid- So in that light why re invent the wheel so to speak when there is little diff between the 2 under the hood?  Virtually anything that works in win 7 will work unhindered in win10 and even more so the case when using windows 8 designed software on windows 10....no probs, no performance hits nothing. So why, outside of marketing gimmicks, would you need to stamp win10 on this board when nothing has really changed from the motherboards perspective?  Also, and perhaps most damaging, as you say, 4.1 and subsequently R5 were rolled out fairly quickly. R5 being fairly recent too for a ~ 4 year old chipset which some speculate is a dead end.  I digress....my point was with age not on this variants side, 2 "redo's" of the same model ahead of this one and the A series socket getting all the attention -FM2 is it?-..... can we really expect much, if any development on this platform, officially anyways?  The 9000 series 8 cores were meant to breath life back into this platform but from what Ive read fell far short of this goal..... 225W TDP being just too much for anything but the elite boards and even they -MSI 990 gaming, sabertooth 2.0 etc- have trouble wielding that chip.  Just seems like too many nails in the coffin.

My view, which I may be alone in, is this is a very capable board and CAN bring out the best from the FX processor, mine anyways, you just have to be patient and willing to work at it, which I understand is not everyone's cup of tea.  However, I have noticed that most people who come across Modded BIOS threads and the like are slightly more computer savvy than the average joe and don't mind tinkering under the hood.  That said my current config, as far as the most recent AIDA64 extreme is concerned, can keep pace with a 4th Gen i7, and outrun the other FX8000 CPUs easily which isn't too shabby I don't think.  By no means am I done yet tho  lol   

I do agree with you tho Jorge,  Id love to see more official work done on the 4.0 but I just don't see it in the cards.  On this I do hope I'm mistaken.

Thank you for initiating this thought exercise and I look forward to your counterpoints

Zyro

[AgentFXA]

...........Why MUST they be left to auto? .....

Zyro

You can just use the + key to change the desired value once hi-lighted

other than that I am not into OC hence no skills here

 

[Zyrocenus]

...........Why MUST they be left to auto? .....

Zyro

You can just use the + key to change the desired value once hi-lighted

other than that I am not into OC hence no skills here

Yes I understand that I can adjust frequencies ie 2200 2400 2600..... but I cannot manipulate multipliers unless I'm seriously missing something.....the multipliers seem to be locked at 13x on the HT and 11X on the NB with no adjustment possible. also setting any value other than auto on either of these fields results in instability....  I have no choice but to set Auto here....which baffles me.  Id like to hear input from the BIOS modder on this as they have dissected this BIOS and recompiled it.  Of course any input is welcomed    

Possibly there is a language barrier here?  Perhaps I could assist with that if I'm not coming across clearly?  I do use a lot of slang and shorthand which can be difficult

Zyro

Thanks for your reply, Id be happy to share data and screenshots on my results if needed