It may not be a good idea to do that. You don't know how a profile from an old BIOS will interact with a new BIOS that may have different features, or the features look the same but work differently.
Intel Raptor Lake voltage problem
- Thread starter homerdog
- Start date
-
- Tags
- intel raptor lake voltage
I have boards with that option too and I had one board go instabad when I loaded my profile from the previous BIOS on to it. Just because it saved all your old settings doesn't mean that they may have changed the selection of settings in the new BIOS.
If it works for you great, just be aware that it might not and it might stick a gremlin in your system that could come up later.
I wouldn't recommend just loading a profile and then job done. You still need to go through the settings to check everything but it can speed the process up as you can change a lot of settings in one go
The only time my bios had a different setting was when resizable bar was added otherwise its been agesa updates, additional cpu support and bug fixes
Just looked and a new bios came out on the 23rd August (mine's dated 11th July)
Version : f40c
Checksum : 00BF
Update AMD AGESA 1.2.0.Cc for fix Sinkclose Vulnerability of AMD processors (SMM Lock Bypass)
Gives me a chance to test the save profile to disk
The only time my bios had a different setting was when resizable bar was added otherwise its been agesa updates, additional cpu support and bug fixes
Just looked and a new bios came out on the 23rd August (mine's dated 11th July)
Version : f40c
Checksum : 00BF
Update AMD AGESA 1.2.0.Cc for fix Sinkclose Vulnerability of AMD processors (SMM Lock Bypass)
Gives me a chance to test the save profile to disk
Last edited:
I'm mostly saying if they change something like microcode it could change the way the mobo responds to some settings. So settings that were stable before are no longer. Also there's a higher chance of running into bugs if you're importing settings from different BIOS versions.
Anyway it's probably fine. Let us know if your computer explodes
I take a picture of all my bios settings before flashing, reset to default, and then go through and set everything back by hand. It helps me notice what they changed and gives me flexibility if there are changes.
Most of the time just saving a profile and loading it would be fine but having been burnt once before and considering how rarely I update mobos the manual way will work for me. Best of luck with yours and I hope it all works out fine!
That's exactly what I do. If I hadn't taken pictures I wouldn't have noticed that the "Intel Default Settings" thing wasn't there before. And that's at the very top of the main menu lol.
More related to the topic, best I can tell the "Intel Default Settings" just makes your CPU run worse for no reason. I think this was Intel's response back before they (or at least we) knew what the actual problem was. I see no reason to use it.
That would be the safe conservative setting
IDK how much difference it makes in terms of safety. It makes my CPU run hotter, so I assume it is increasing voltage. It does have a hard power limit which the non default settings lack. I wish I could have the power limit but without the other default settings that make it run hot and slow. That doesn't seem to be an option on my mobo.
Maybe it is safer in that it is less likely to crash. But I don't think people were having crashing problems until their CPUs got degraded which the default settings don't prevent. It's the new microcode that stops degredation as far as I know.
Again, the microcode issues included (but were not limited to) problems with the internal thermistor reporting lower-than-actual temperatures which resulted in Thermal Velocity Boost overshooting power and clock as a function of being told a colder than actual temp.
The "hotter" temperatures are likely not actually hotter at all; they're likely reporting the temperatures as they always were, but this time without the erroneous 6*C misrepresentation. I would encourage you to stop focusing on the temperatures, as that's not what was actually damaging the CPUs. Instead, focus on the fact it's now (purportedly) acting on real temperatures when making overarching clock and voltage changes, thus avoiding the damaging over-voltage issues.
The "hotter" temperatures are likely not actually hotter at all; they're likely reporting the temperatures as they always were, but this time without the erroneous 6*C misrepresentation. I would encourage you to stop focusing on the temperatures, as that's not what was actually damaging the CPUs. Instead, focus on the fact it's now (purportedly) acting on real temperatures when making overarching clock and voltage changes, thus avoiding the damaging over-voltage issues.
This wouldn't be affected by my BIOS settings though would it? The new microcode is in effect always once I update to the latest BIOS as far as I know.
BIOS and Microcode are two seperate entities, although applying Microcode to modern processors is often (but not always) performed as a function of a BIOS upgrade to the motherboard. Microcode is literally embedded in the CPU itself, and among its myriad jobs, includes some oversight on how values are reported back to your motherboard (and thus related BIOS things, such as temperature readings and VID requests.)
this particular microcode has been decided by Intel to for now only be distributed as part of a bios update, but they can come from different sources for example from windows update
Just to be clear, the method of application is irrelevant. As reported by Intel, the microcode update includes a correction to CPU core temperature being underreported. Hence my prior statements cautioning anyone against assuming their CPU is "hotter" than before the update. Just because the reading has changed doesn't mean the CPU is actually hotter, when instead it's likely the temperatures before were being underreported allowing a false sense of thermal security for many.
Right. In my case it was only hotter after the update because of the Intel Default Settings being enabled. After the update once I turn off Intel Default Settings the temp goes back to normal. I was already running a fairly recent BIOS so maybe they'd already fixed the temperature reporting bug.
Last edited:
Reported where?
Pretty sure the temps and voltages are simply higher on average for me with the stock settings and new Intel defaults. That's not just the CPU sensors, but also the mobo VRM. Feels uncomfortable to be sacrificing performance, temperatures, and voltage to address a stability problem I've never had, and taking it on faith that these higher temperatures and voltages will counterintuitively stave off long-term health problems with the CPU.
I don't see how any of this can be considered fully resolved until the companies who previously came forward about their fleets of failing CPUs are willing to come forward again and say their problems are all gone. Assuming they haven't cycled out their hardware for AMD by this point.
Last edited:
Looks like MSI might be finally implementing a manual voltage limit setting like the other vendors have, so at least there's that. Thankfully the BIOS flashing for me has been quite painless. I've probably flashed back and forth between 0x123 and 0x129 a half-dozen times this past month. I can't imagine what that'd feel like for people whom are presently troubleshooting weird system crashes that might be caused by a CPU. Like asking a brain surgeon to operate on himself in the hopes that the surgery will fix his shaky hands.
I wager (but cannot say with certainty) the CPU microcode itself is not rolled back as part of the motherboard BIOS changes. While microcode updates can (and usually are) included with BIOS updates, they're still discrete entities and are not intrinsically linked.
That's not to say there aren't ways in which CPU microcode could be rolled to a prior version, however I suspect this happens through specific utilities and not something a system board manufacturer would want to do as a regular task. Think about the possibility of new CPUs coming out, compatible with your motherboard, but superceding the date of your own BIOS. If you drop that brand new CPU in, and your old BIOS decides it needs to downgrade the microcode...
That's not to say there aren't ways in which CPU microcode could be rolled to a prior version, however I suspect this happens through specific utilities and not something a system board manufacturer would want to do as a regular task. Think about the possibility of new CPUs coming out, compatible with your motherboard, but superceding the date of your own BIOS. If you drop that brand new CPU in, and your old BIOS decides it needs to downgrade the microcode...
