# After a Windows 10 Update Today Overclocking is lost. WTF Microsoft and Intel???



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

KB4100347 is the one I am talking about. After installing this update my CPU is no longer overclocking to the BIOS set 4.3GHz.  This results in massive loss of performance. 


See for yourself. I tried resetting BIOS and everything and nope. CPU is stuck in default speed.  If you are using Intel BWE CPU do not install the KB4100347 patch as it will cripple your system overclocking.


----------



## spectatorx (Sep 14, 2018)

How windows can disable something what is set in bios/uefi? Windows should have no access to bios settings.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

spectatorx said:


> How windows can disable something what is set in bios/uefi? Windows should have no access to bios settings.




CPU Microcode update "validated by Intel" and pushed by Microsoft. Modern processors can be programmed through OS. In this case Intel must have hired bunch of high school dropouts to do their validation.

For people who use BWE CPUs, make sure to block this freaking update. I am gonna try to remove this update and see if that helps. Jesus.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2018)

spectatorx said:


> How windows can disable something what is set in bios/uefi? Windows should have no access to bios settings.



Must of passed a firmware agesa update in, switch to 7


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 14, 2018)

Maybe I’ve been living in a cave, but: HWE and BWE?


----------



## hat (Sep 14, 2018)

Guessing he means Haswell Extreme and Broadwell extreme.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

KB4100347

*Summary*


*Recent Changes:*

 
Intel Microcode Updates around the following products (CPUs) have been revised. We recommend to take this latest update to stay current:     
 
Broadwell Server E, EP, EP4S
 
Broadwell Server EX
 
Skylake Server SP (H0, M0, U0)
 
Skylake D (Bakerville)
 
Skylake X (Basin Falls)
 

 
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us...or-windows-10-version-1803-and-windows-server

Well it seems to impact a lot of Intel CPUs. Be careful then.


----------



## Candor (Sep 14, 2018)

I just installed this update with an i7-5820K on Asus ROG Strix X99 Gaming.

The update had no effect my overclock of 4.5ghz.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

Need another Broadwell-E owner to check this.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 14, 2018)

If you are having a problem with that update, uninstall and block it.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

Well f*uck me. Forced uninstalled that update in safe mode and now system is stuck in BSOD loop and can’t even get into recovery mode!

Thanks a bunch Microsoft  for mess up my work computer with your “Intel validated” microcode update.


----------



## Candor (Sep 14, 2018)

Oh snap. This is why I use third party system backup software.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Well f*uck me. Forced uninstalled that update in safe mode and now system is stuck in BSOD loop and can’t even get into recovery mode!
> Thanks a bunch Microsoft  for mess up my work computer with your “Intel validated” microcode update.


Use the install media recovery to get into system restore.


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 14, 2018)

Exactly what I was going to say. You'll have a restore point that was made automatically before the update was installed. If you're not dumb enough to have System Restore disabled... Yeah...don't count on it. Not only is there not likely to be an automatic restore point, even if there was it probably wouldn't work. Seems as though there's some kind of major fuckery going on with this one...

EDIT: BTW...I'm headed in to see for myself. Restarting to apply update in 3...2...1....

EDIT 2: That was quick. Everything seems fine so far. 3770K booted @ 5.0GHz anyway. InSpectre now says "system is Spectre  protected". Not for long it isn't. First things first...kill that BS.

EDIT 3: Hmmm...I dunno. Still doesn't seem quite right. Linpack seems a bit slower than it was...IIRC. Gonna System Restore and see if anything changes.

EDIT 4: Ummmm...yeah. This is not looking good. First, there was no automatic System Restore point. Though I had made one just before downloading and installing the update. Which failed. Then the next most recent restore point from a couple days ago failed too. Got a handful more to try. But IME...once one fails...they all fail. Rarely has that not been the case...for me anyway. We'll see I suppose...


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

Yep we are not the only ones

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1909316-1-1.html&edit-text=&act=url

So a quick TL;DR


Intel is pushing out new CPU microcode to ALL of their modern CPUs via WIndows 10
Old montherboards (Like X99, X79) will not receive any more BIOS updates from ASUS, MSI and etc.
Updated CPU microcode have conflict with BIOS microcode
You now loose ALL of your overclock capability, or worse BSOD loops

Can we potentially get some news converage @btarunr or @W1zzard ? This will be a very nasty surprise for people with older platforms which with a bit of OC should run perfectly fine.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 14, 2018)

go the update, no problems here on Skylake-X. Seem like a problem with your specific board, IMHO. Too bad.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> go the update, no problems here on Skylake-X. Seem like a problem with your specific board, IMHO. Too bad.
> 
> 
> View attachment 106869



Skylake-E probably have latest system BIOS update. Broadwell-E will no longer receive BIOS update from motherboard makers.


Also run a few benchmarks @cadaveca see if the score stacks up


Also no, not my specific board. Check my reply a few posts up with Broadwell-E owners from ChipHell. A lot of folks are affected.


----------



## phill (Sep 14, 2018)

Interesting development.....


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

Here is the funny thing. I was already on latest 3902 beta BIOS when this happened. I seriously doubt ASUS will continue support their X99 boards with new microcode updated BIOS though.


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 14, 2018)

So, what will happen, when you try to install it on manually moded BIOS or UEFI (with ucode updates) ?
Think X58/LGA 1366 stuff...


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 14, 2018)

I gave up trying to system restore for the moment. I'm running benches instead to see if I really need to. So far not so good. Significant performance loss across the board. And that's with Meltdown and Spectre protections disabled too. Meaning there doesn't appear to be a way to fix it once the update is installed.

Time Spy CPU -4.63%(best of 3 runs)
Time Spy Extreme CPU -3.22%(best of 3 runs)
PCMark 7 -12.01%(1 run)
PCMark 10 Essentials -26.02% / Productivity -33.81% / Digital Content Creation -crashed with previously stable clocks and voltages(1 run)
Linpack -6.35%(best of 5 runs)

More to come...

*BIG EDIT: *Somewhere around 75% of the performance loss percentages stated above(as in ~3/4 of whatever -%) were actually from having Core isolation with Memory integrity enabled. Who knew?  The Spectre microcode performance loss was no less real. Just much less significant(and possibly non-existent or negligible in some instances, though definitely not all).

Good news: I can still overclock my 3770K.

Bad news: It runs quite a bit hotter, slower, and/or with less stability.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> So, what will happen, when you try to install it on manually moded BIOS or UEFI (with ucode updates) ?
> Think X58/LGA 1366 stuff...



With microcode updated? In theory it should be completely fine. Thing is not a lot of people are comfortable editing their own BIOS.

I wish there is a way to roll back the CPU microcode update. But I may have to reinstall Windows 10 first.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Also no, not my specific board. Check my reply a few posts up with Broadwell-E owners from ChipHell. A lot of folks are affected.


I'll check my son's system later, but he would have noticed himself, and didn't mention anything.

And yeah, not just your model ,but X99 should get Spectre updates, and these updates are likely the root cause of the problem (whether not in place, or in place, not sure). Given certain companies tossed out BIOS updates without proper vetting as a practice, I'm not exactly surprised.

Still doesn't change the fact that this is a BIOS problem. That's most definitely going to be board-specific. AS in some boards won't have this problem, some will.

Performance on my system is fine. I always check after OS updates, and I just updated all my systems with Sept OS updates. Nothing exciting there.

BIOS losing OC-ability isn't restricted to Intel systems, either. I've been it on TR-based systems in the past few months as well.


----------



## AsRock (Sep 14, 2018)

Makes me think of Apple, it's all to make your system to run cooler and save electric lmao.

Never liked the idea of UEFI and how Microsoft\Intel could just change shit. just to much control over some thing you payed good money for.


----------



## jsfitz54 (Sep 14, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> So, what will happen, when you try to install it on manually moded BIOS or UEFI (with ucode updates) ?
> Think X58/LGA 1366 stuff...



X58:  No issues so far on my i7 970.


----------



## Ahhzz (Sep 14, 2018)

There are still some benefits to waiting to see what breaks before moving to new advancements....


----------



## Static~Charge (Sep 14, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> If you are having a problem with that update, uninstall and block it.


Unfortunately, that won't have the desired effect. If that update installed new microcode for the processor, then uninstalling it won't revert the microcode back to the previous version unless a copy of the older microcode was stashed on your system (highly unlikely).


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 14, 2018)

Real way to fix this is a BIOS update. Your BIOS doesn't like the MEI code, hence the OC problems. Sucks, but what you gonna do? Even my Surface got this update, and it works fine too.  Complain to your board makers for not having proper BIOSes ready for this, because its not like they didn't know it was coming.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Real way to fix this is a BIOS update. Your BIOS doesn't like the MEI code, hence the OC problems. Sucks, but what you gonna do? Even my Surface got this update, and it works fine too.  Complain to your board makers for not having proper BIOSes ready for this, because its not like they didn't know it was coming.



X99 is EOL for BIOS support


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> X99 is EOL for BIOS support


With Spectre/Meltdown/Foreshadow, it's not, really. That's what is causing this... a spectre/meltdown fix. I've seen both Gigabyte and ASRock releasing updates for X99, but yeah, you're right, this is a problem, and these updates via OS are supposed to counteract that, but the base BIOS code has to be ready for that, and I doubt that the last ASUS X99 update in April was good enough/ready. Gigabyte waited until June...

So those BIOS updates being EOL... are due to the board maker, not Intel or Microsoft...


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 14, 2018)

Using broadwell-c and it's fine, but I use xtu for OC.Try it.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

Looking up tutorials on WinRAID on editing microcode now. Hopefully i can make my own updated UEFI BIOS


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 14, 2018)

You do that. I'm pretty sure that's not going to solve my problem though. I can still overclock with the BIOS I have from 12/27/13. Overclocking is not the problem. It's the microcode update in the OS that's causing performance loss. And the Spectre mitigation disabling techniques/registry hacks aren't "disabling" it. But I think I know how to do it another way. From what I just read the OS gets the microcode from *c:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll* or *c:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_AuthenticAMD.dll*. So you should be able to replace that file with an earlier version(pre-this fucked update). Which might work. I'm about to find out. Because I do have a an earlier copy of that file for my CPU.

EDIT: Also of note. I've tried 7 restore points dating back to a week and a half ago now. None of them work. The don't make it past the restoring the registry phase. Pretty sure I could still temporarily fix it with an in-place upgrade. Or obviously by using a backup of the entire system. But I can't see how either is more than a temporary solution. The next time it tries to update itself...right back to square one.


----------



## Assimilator (Sep 14, 2018)

tl;dr If you're running a Broadwell-E system, don't install KB4100347 *unless your motherboard BIOS is updated to the absolute latest Intel microcode*.

If you've already installed the update and your motherboard doesn't have an updated BIOS, I'd strongly suggest editing your current BIOS to include the latest microcode, then flashing it.



MrGenius said:


> You do that. I'm pretty sure that's not going to solve my problem though. I can still overclock with the BIOS I have from 2014. Overclocking is not the problem. It's the microcode update in the OS that's causing performance loss. And the Spectre mitigation disabling techniques/registry hacks aren't "disabling" it. But I think I know how to do it another way. From what I just read the OS gets the microcode from *c:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll* or *c:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_AuthenticAMD.dll*. So you should be able to replace that file with an earlier version(pre-this fucked update). Which might work. I'm about to find out. Because I do have a an earlier copy of that file for my CPU.
> 
> EDIT: Also of note. I've tried 7 restore points dating back to a week and a half ago now. None of them work. The don't make it past the restoring the registry phase. Pretty sure I could still temporarily fix it with an in-place upgrade. Or obviously by using a backup of the entire system. But I can't see how either is more than a temporary solution. The next time it tries to update itself...right back to square one.



You can't just arbitrarily copy old versions of files, Windows Resource Protection will detect that and replace what it sees as a "bad" file with the current one.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 14, 2018)

Haswell-E here. Everything seems to work fine. CPU is still overclocked and CPU-Z benchmark scores are the same pre and post update. I do have Spectre protected now (showing in InSpectre) which wasn't before when I downgraded BIOS.


----------



## mkdr (Sep 14, 2018)

Wasnt the MC update until today optional? Just great...

Did a CrystalDiskMark and I lost about 50% in write speed on my Samsung 970 Evo 500GB. That is an additional loss to previous impacts.

23.08.2018
   Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) :  3511.899 MB/s
  Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) :  2493.400 MB/s
  Random Read 4KiB (Q=  8,T= 8) :  1069.782 MB/s [ 261177.2 IOPS] <- this was already impacted by 30% before
Random Write 4KiB (Q=  8,T= 8) :  *1605.116 MB/s* [ 391874.0 IOPS]
  Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   308.759 MB/s [  75380.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   *493.769 MB/s *[ 120549.1 IOPS]
  Random Read 4KiB (Q=  1,T= 1) :    38.656 MB/s [   9437.5 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q=  1,T= 1) :    94.370 MB/s [  23039.6 IOPS]

Today
   Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) :  3439.877 MB/s
  Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) :  2492.474 MB/s
  Random Read 4KiB (Q=  8,T= 8) :  1013.286 MB/s [ 247384.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q=  8,T= 8) :   *876.680 MB/s* [ 214033.2 IOPS]
  Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   301.853 MB/s [  73694.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) :   *257.336 MB/s* [  62826.2 IOPS]
  Random Read 4KiB (Q=  1,T= 1) :    40.152 MB/s [   9802.7 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q=  1,T= 1) :    95.270 MB/s [  23259.3 IOPS]


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 14, 2018)

Assimilator said:


> You can't just arbitrarily copy old versions of files, Windows Resource Protection will detect that and replace what it sees as a "bad" file with the current one.


Well, not only have I done it before and had it work(replaced imageres.dll in System32 and SysWOW64 with a hacked version to remove the blue and yellow UAC shield icons from shortcuts), but I just did it again, and it worked again!!! So much for that theory!!! You are half-right though. If you run sfc /scannow the files will be detected as corrupt and replaced. The process is not automatic however.

So yes, as stated...*PROBLEM SOLVED*. All you need to do is replace mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll in System32 with an earlier version of the file. The one installed by this update is dated 9/4/18. Which I replaced with the same file dated 4/11/18. Not as easy as it sounds. But totally doable.

First I made sure Spectre protection was disabled. Then copied mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll from an earlier backup/clone of Windows 10 version 1803. Then booted WinPE with Active@ Boot Disk from a USB drive with a copy of the older version of mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. And used that copy to replace the updated version. Easy fricken peasy, lemon fricken squeezy.

Booted up the "updated" Windows 10 to see if it worked. Booted just fine. Noticed the 3-5 second lag in boot time since the update had instantly gone away. Ran a couple benches. FIXED!!! Performance loss GONE!!!  

Here's a copy of mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll from 4/11/18. I don't know what other CPUs it applies to. But if you have a 3770K, or any CPU with CPUID 306A9 I'd imagine, this is the one you need.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Well, not only have I done it before and had it work(replaced imageres.dll in System32 and SysWOW 64 with a hacked version to remove the blue and yellow UAC shield icons from shortcuts). I just did it again, and it worked again!!! So much for that theory!!! You are half-right though. If you run sfc /scannow the files will be detected as corrupt and replaced. The process is not automatic however.
> 
> So yes, as stated...*PROBLEM SOLVED*. All you need to do is replace mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll in System32 with an earlier version of the file. The one installed by this update is dated 9/4/18. Which I replaced with the same file dated 4/11/18. Not as easy as it sounds. But totally doable.
> 
> ...




Thank you!!!!

I will try to do this with your file first. That is IF I can get into Windows system first.

Do you think it is possible I can boot off a Linux interactive image from a thumb drive and replace the file using Linux?


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Do you think it is possible I can boot off a Linux interactive image from a thumb drive and replace the file using Linux?


I've never done it. But it sounds like it should work.


----------



## Ahhzz (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Thank you!!!!
> 
> I will try to do this with your file first. That is IF I can get into Windows system first.
> 
> Do you think it is possible I can boot off a Linux interactive image from a thumb drive and replace the file using Linux?


I've been able to in the past, as long as you have a recent enough version to recognize the drive properly. I still remember the first Win8.1 that I had to try to access with my older recovery tool disc...


----------



## Punx223 (Sep 14, 2018)

I have an X99 and X299... both with same KB installed, no issues with OC..

X99 = Strix X99 Gaming & 6950X

X299 = MSI Gaming M7 & 7980XE

I would try reflashing your BIOS... sounds like UEFI screwed the pooch somewhere.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

Punx223 said:


> I have an X99 and X299... both with same KB installed, no issues with OC..
> 
> X99 = Strix X99 Gaming & 6950X
> 
> ...



That would makes no sense. I have been using beta 3902 BIOS for a few months now and it has been perfect.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> That would makes no sense. I have been using beta 3902 BIOS for a few months now and it has been perfect.


ASUS has this recurring problem where the BIOS shits the bed if your OC isn't quite stable, so its possible. I've had users report a stable OC not working, when pushing memory, reflash somehow fixes it. What other use is USB BIOS Flashback? Its like they know and then that's the fix...



mkdr said:


> Wasnt the MC update until today optional? Just great...
> 
> Did a CrystalDiskMark and I lost about 50% in write speed on my Samsung 970 Evo 500GB. That is an additional loss to previous impacts.



This is normal when you use a SSD. More data on it = slower drive. You must always test drive speeds with no data and fresh partition to get real potential speeds. You'd be amazed how slow some drives get when they get full.


----------



## Punx223 (Sep 14, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> ASUS has this recurring problem where the BIOS shits the bed if your OC isn't quite stable, so its possible. I've had users report a stable OC not working, when pushing memory, reflash somehow fixes it. What other use is USB BIOS Flashback? Its like they know and then that's the fix...




What he said... I have had BIOS go wonky when overclocked for a long period... try to reflash man...

Why fight or dispute it?   you have nothing to lose by trying..I mean worst case it still doesn't OC right?


----------



## mkdr (Sep 14, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> This is normal when you use a SSD. More data on it = slower drive. You must always test drive speeds with no data and fresh partition to get real potential speeds. You'd be amazed how slow some drives get when they get full.



No, not normal. Free disk space is identical on both tests, around 50GB used of 500GB. TRIM was also used before test.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

OK got off work earlier and used flashback to redo 3902 BIOS. Nope, still BSOD looping. Gonna try to replace the file @MrGenius said earlier. Now I need to use my Mac to make a bootable Linux drive.  All it takes is just one f*cking update to f*ck up everything.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Sep 14, 2018)

I've been screwed over by stuttering in windows - gotta fix that now, stupid ass nvidia modern driver screwed it up maybe.


----------



## Solaris17 (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> OK got off work earlier and used flashback to redo 3902 BIOS. Nope, still BSOD looping. Gonna try to replace the file @MrGenius said earlier. Now I need to use my Mac to make a bootable Linux drive.  All it takes is just one f*cking update to f*ck up everything.



huh? I thought it was inferred that re-flashing might fix your OC issue. Your OS being broken was due to the updates removal. Of course the flash wont fix it.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 14, 2018)

YESSS! Swapped the file with Mint on a USB drive and I can get back in system now. Thank you so much @MrGenius
Life Saver.

Backing up my important data now. I will deal with the code/update headache later. Whew.


----------



## Solaris17 (Sep 14, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> YESSS! Swapped the file with Mint on a USB drive and I can get back in system now. Thank you so much @MrGenius
> Life Saver.
> 
> Backing up my important data now. I will deal with the code/update headache later. Whew.



glad you got it working!


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 14, 2018)

You're more than welcome. I'm glad it worked for me too!


----------



## phill (Sep 14, 2018)

Just Googled the KB number, came back with a fix - here...  There's a few command line based tasks to do so hopefully if anyone else is having any issues with the update this will help   It's pretty shitty of MS to do this.....  I can't see the update on my 1803 install just yet...


----------



## hat (Sep 15, 2018)

Geez... quite a nasty update. I'm glad I didn't upgrade to anything newer. Now rather than upgrading for more performance, I'm just gonna wait this spectre/meltdown/etc crap out...


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 15, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Well f*uck me. Forced uninstalled that update in safe mode and now system is stuck in BSOD loop and can’t even get into recovery mode!
> 
> Thanks a bunch Microsoft  for mess up my work computer with your “Intel validated” microcode update.


This kind of thing is the very reason why I run Ubuntu exclusively on my tower. The sad reality is that I can't be bothered to drop everything I'm doing because a freaking update destroyed my system. After happening twice, I said enough is enough.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 15, 2018)

AsRock said:


> Never liked the idea of UEFI and how Microsoft\Intel could just change shit. just to much control over some thing you payed good money for.



Microcode updates were possible on conventional bios as well.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Microcode updates were possible on conventional bios as well.


Not with the same invasiveness seemingly. It's actually a bit better now that with modern platforms MEI/AGESA and the base BIOS code are separate, but yeah, you've always been able to reboot the system to a BIOS/firmware installer... that installer might have run off DOS before tho, while now UEFI makes DOS obsolete.

My Surface has done BIOS, MEI updates, as well as TPM firmware updates, all with no issues, all pushed via Windows update, and you know, I really like that it does. But I understand that when issues like this occur, it seems like a big pain in the ass. It does also highlight how easy it could be to compromise a system... someone just needs to write code to take over Windows Update . I wonder what sort of CRC or whatever checks it does....


----------



## hat (Sep 15, 2018)

I remember a time when such updates would have to be applied "manually", with some sort of winflash program at best (read: easiest) or a DOS bootable USB or something at worst. You could then, before applying the update, see if there are any comments like "this update wrecked my system!" and avoid if you so choose.

Now these updates just sneak in your system at night and wreck up the place.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 15, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Not with the same invasiveness seemingly.



Exactly the same.  The procesor provides the ability to install microcode updates via an OS driver, and I know even XP had facilities for it.  It has nothing to do with UEFI vs BIOS.

The difference is in the BIOS era there were few incidents in which they were used.  But the facilities have existed since that awful pentium bug whose name escapes me.

Case in point:  Nearly every LGA1366 system is BIOS code based, but they are getting mc updates including this one today.  Did someone miss this fact?


----------



## Flyordie (Sep 15, 2018)

I'm just here for the horror stories.

AMD user here. 

XKM, I'd maybe clarify..  I don't think its your overclock. It says the clock speeds are the same? Just a lower score.  Or am I missing something?

Planning to get started on the Threadripper transplant this weekend. :-o

"Your license is attached to your microsoft account"

I just hope my Windows 10 Pro re-activates once I swap over on a fresh install on the NVMe drive.


----------



## Candor (Sep 15, 2018)

I guess I dodged a bullet here.

No system problems or performance degradation after the update. (Strix X99 Gaming & 5820K (Haswell-E))


----------



## AlwaysHope (Sep 15, 2018)

This thread's topic is ANOTHER reason update to Zen+ goodness... 

Win10, fully updated on both my AMD systems here... all good!


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> The difference is in the BIOS era there were few incidents in which they were used.


Well that's it. That's why I said "seemingly".  ASUS manipulated this long ago with their e-OS or whatever it was called to create a "pre-OS OS". That was some brilliant engineering on their part.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 15, 2018)

*grabs popcorn*

I wanna see how this turns out


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 15, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Well that's it. That's why I said "seemingly".  ASUS manipulated this long ago with their e-OS or whatever it was called to create a "pre-OS OS". That was some brilliant engineering on their part.



That was kinda just a bios module set to execute and doesn't use the microcode facilities at all...  but yeah.  Basically os in rom.  You can still do this today in uefi with some knowhow.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Sep 15, 2018)

Mussels said:


> *grabs popcorn*
> 
> I wanna see how this turns out


Pass the popcorn. 

Gee, there was an update today? Never noticed. #tinywall


----------



## JorgeRod (Sep 15, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Need another Broadwell-E owner to check this.



Confirmed
Broadwell-E owner here, overclock 4.3ghz 
CINEBENCH fell from 2188 to 1839


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 15, 2018)

Mussels said:


> *grabs popcorn*
> 
> I wanna see how this turns out



Probably the way it did for my A9-9420 APU... 2 months of relentless bitching to MS and then they finally fixed it. Except, in my case, the performance drop was astronomical as I could literally see things move in slideshows. Where with these, most of clueless people won't even notice and report it. And MS will be like "ALL IS FINE!"


----------



## Assimilator (Sep 15, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> That would makes no sense. I have been using beta 3902 BIOS for a few months now and it has been perfect.



I'm wondering if your problem isn't that beta BIOS - maybe with beta microcode - conflicting with this KB.

Would be interested to see what happens if you go back to a stable BIOS and reapply the KB.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Sep 15, 2018)

ohhh that's great ... i just noticed my 6600K is back at 3.9ghz stock frequencies ... 

dunno if it's related to that ... 

tho ... well, i might push a Zen update sooner than later ... Intel is dead for me ... that's the last drop.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 15, 2018)

So, is this an update that will affect all HEDT, because the wife has X79?


----------



## GreiverBlade (Sep 15, 2018)

rtwjunkie said:


> So, is this an update that will affect all HEDT, because the wife has X79?


seemingly also normal one ... read above ...

although i have to check to be sure... nonetheless, a R5 2600X or a R7 2700X set will be due before the end of the year 

check your 4790K ... just in case (if it affect Skylake and above only, lucky for you   ... well, they've still done it for me )

are you freaking kidding me??? i re establish the OC, since i didn't see the KB4100347 update in the list so i thought i just did reset my bios by accident, and :



then it does a memtest ...


i couldn't boot at all until i set the BIOS on default ...
all i can do now is forcing 3.9 turbo instead of OC 4.4 or above (well not even 3.95 OC works either )


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 15, 2018)

It doesn't seem to affect my 5820K from the looks of it, at least testing with CPU-Z benchmark which is a basic way of spotting broken CPU performance. Didn't evaluate performance of other subsystems like storage IO and memory IO...


----------



## GreiverBlade (Sep 15, 2018)

funny how every little underhanded tricks from Intel that made them faster than AMD counterpart are falling appart ...
melted-down, spectered out and now ... dodgy microcode update that disable OC on CPU that are bought because they are K or X ...

i am fed up.

update .... oh ... now 41° idle instead of the 26° i had before with OC and the exact same cooling...



Spoiler: basicaly it's affecting all their CPU



*Product name (CPU)
Public name
CPUID
Intel Microcode update revision*
Skylake H/S
6th Generation Intel Core Processor Family
506E3
0xC2
Skylake U/Y & Skylake U23e
6th Generation Intel Core m Processors
406E3
0xC2
Skylake Server SP (H0, M0, U0)
Intel® Xeon® Bronze Processor 3104, 3106,
Intel® Xeon® Gold Processor 5115, 5118, 5119T, 5120, 5120T, 5122, 6126, 6126F, 6126T, 6128, 6130, 6130F, 6130T, 6132, 6134, 6134M, 6136, 6138, 6138F,
6138T, 6140, 6140M, 6142, 6142F, 6142M, 6144, 6146, 6148, 6148F, 6150, 6152, 6154,
Intel® Xeon® Platinum Processor 8153, 8156, 8158, 8160, 8160F, 8160M, 8160T, 8164, 8168, 8170, 8170M, 8176, 8176F, 8176M, 8180, 8180M,
Intel® Xeon® Silver Processor 4108, 4109T, 4110, 4112, 4114, 4114T, 4116, 4116T
00050654
0x2000049
Skylake D (Bakerville)
Intel® Xeon® Processor D-2123IT, D-2141I, D-2142IT, D2143IT, D-2145NT, D-2146NT, D-2161I,
D-2163IT, D2166NT, D-2173IT, D-2177NT, D-2183IT, D-2187NT
00050654
0x2000049
Skylake X (Basin Falls)
Intel® Core™ i9 79xxX, 78xxX
00050654
0x2000049
Kaby Lake U
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processors
000806E9
0x84
Kaby Lake U23e
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processors
000806E9
0x84
Kaby Lake Y
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processors
000806E9
0x84
KBL-R U
8th Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processor Family
000806EA
0x84
Kaby Lake G
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906E9
0x84
Kaby Lake H
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906E9
0x84
Kaby Lake S
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906E9
0x84
Kaby Lake X
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906E9
0x84
Kaby Lake Xeon E3
7th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906E9
0x84
Coffee Lake H 6+2
8th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906EA
0x84
Coffee Lake S 6+2
8th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906EA
0x84
Coffee Lake S 6+2 Xeon E3
8th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906EA
0x84
Coffee Lake S 6+2 x/KBP
8th Generation Intel® Core™ Processor Family
000906EA
0x84
Coffee Lake S (4+2)
8th Generation Intel® Core™ Desktop Processor Family
000906EB
0x84
Broadwell DE A1
Intel® Xeon® Processor D-1513N, D-1523N, D-1533N, D-1543N, D1553N
50665
0xE000009
Broadwell DE V1
Intel® Xeon® Processor D-1520, D-1540
50662
0x15
Broadwell DE V2,V3
Intel® Xeon® Processor D-1518, D-1519, D-1521, D-1527, D-1528, D-1531, D-1533, D-1537, D-1541, D-1548,
Intel® Pentium® Processor D1507, D1508, D1509, D1517, D1519
50663
0x7000012
Broadwell DE Y0
Intel® Xeon® Processor D-1557, D-1559, D-1250, D-1571, D-1577, D-1581, D-1587
50664
0xF000011
Broadwell H 43e
Intel® Core™ Processor i7-5950HQ, i7-5850HQ, i7-5750HQ, i7-5700HQ,
Intel® Core™ Processor i5-5575R, i5-2505C, i5-2505R, i7-5775C, i7-5775R,
Intel® Core™ Processor i7-5700EQ, i7-5850EQ
40671
0x1D
Broadwell U/Y
Intel® Core™ Processor i7-5650U,i7-5600U, i7-5557U, i7-5550U, i7-5500U,
Intel® Core™ Processor i5-5350U, i5-5350,i5-5300U, i5-5287U,i5-5257U, i5-5250U, i5-5200U,
Intel® Core™ Processor i3-5157U, i3-5020U, i3-5015U, i3-5010U, i3-5006U, i3-5005U, i3-5010U, i5-5350U, i7-5650U,
Intel® Core™ Processor M-5Y71, M-5Y70, M-5Y51, M-5Y3, M-5Y10c, M -5Y10a, M-5Y10,
Intel® Pentium® Processor 3805U, 3825U, 3765U, 3755U, 3215U, 3205U,
Intel® Celeron® 3765U
306D4
0x2A
Broadwell Xeon E3
Intel® Xeon® Processor v4 E3-1258L, E3-1265L, E3-1278L, E3-1285, E3-1285
40671
0x1D
Broadwell Server E, EP, EP4S
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2603V4, E5-2609V4, E5-
2620V4, E5-2623V4, E5-2630LV4, E5-2630V4, E5-
2637V4, E5-2640V4, E5-2643V4, E5-2650LV4, E5-
2650V4, E5-2660V4, E5-2667V4, E5-2679V4, E5-2680V4, E5-2683V4, E5-2690V4, E5-2695V4, E5-2697AV4, E5-2697V4, E5-2698V4, E5-2699AV4, E5-2699V4
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2608LV4, E5-2618LV4, E5-
2628LV4, E5-2648LV4, E5-2658V4, E5-2699RV4, E5-
4628LV4406F10xB00002CBroadwell Server EX
Intel® Xeon® Processor E7-4809V4, E7-4820V4, E7-
4830V4, E7-4850V4, E7-8855V4, E7-8860V4, E7-8867V4, E7-8870V4, E7-8880V4, E7-8890V4, E7-8891V4, E7-8893V4, E7-8894V4406F10xB00002C
Haswell (including H, S), Xeon E3
4th Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processor Family,
Intel® Pentium® Mobile Processor Family,
Intel® Celeron® Mobile Processor Family
306C3
0x24
Haswell Perf Halo
Intel® Core™ Extreme Processor (5960x, 5930x, 5820x)
40661
0x19
Haswell Server E, EP, EP4S
Intel® Xeon® Processor v3 E5-1428L, E5-1603, E5-1607, E5-1620, E5-1630,
E5-1650, E5-1660, E5-1680, E5-2408L, E5-2418L, E5-2428L, E5-2438L, E5-2603, E5-2608L, E5-2608L, E5-2609, E5-2618L, E5-2620, E5-2623, E5-2628L, E5-2630, E5-2630L, E5-2637, E5-2640, E5-2643, E5-2648L, E5-2650, E5-2650L, E5-2658, E5-2660, E5-2667, E5-2670, E5-2680, E5-2683, E5-2685, E5-2687W,E5-2690, E5-2695, E5-2697, E5-2698, E5-2699, E5-4610, E5-4620, E5-4627, E5-4640, E5-4648, E5-4650, E5-4655, E5-4660, E5-4667, E5-4669
306F2
0x3C
Haswell ULT
4th Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processor Family,
Intel® Pentium® Mobile Processor Family,
Intel® Celeron® Mobile Processor Family
40651
0x23
Ivy Bridge
3rd Generation Intel® Core™ Mobile Processor Family,
Intel® Pentium® Mobile Processor Family, and Intel® Celeron® Mobile Processor Family
306A9
0x1F
Ivy Bridge Xeon E3
Intel® Core™ Processor Extreme Edition i7-4960X Intel® Core™ Processor i7-4820K, i7-4930K
306A9
0x1F
Ivy Bridge E, Ivy Bridge Server E, EN, EP, EP4S
Intel® Xeon® Processor v2 E5-1428L, E5-1620, E5-1650, E5-1660, E5-2403, E5-2407, E5-2418L, E5-2420, E52428L, E5-2430, E5-2430L, E5-2440, E5-2448L, E5-2450, E5-2450L, E5-2470, E5-2603, E5-2609, E5-2618L, E52620, E5-2628L, E5-2630, E5-2630L, E5-2637, E5-2640, E5-2643, E5-2648L, E5-2650, E5-2650L, E5-2658, E52660, E5-2667, E5-2670, E5-2680, E5-2687W, E5-2690, E5-2695, E5-2697, E5-4603, E5-4607, E5-4610, E5-4620, E5-4624L, E5-4627, E5-4640, E5-4650, E5-4657L
000306E4
0x42C
Ivy Bridge Server EX
E5-4610, E5-4620, E5-4624L, E5-4627, E5-4640, E54650, E5-4657L
000306E7
0x713
Sandy Bridge
Intel® Core™ i3-21xx/23xx-T/M/E/UE Processor,
Intel® Core™ i5-23xx/24xx/25xx-T/S/M/K Processor,
Intel® Core™ i7-2xxx-S/K/M/QM/LE/UE/QE Processor,
Intel® Core™ i7-29xxXM Extreme Processor,
Intel® Celeron® Desktop G4xx, G5xx Processor,
Intel® Celeron® Mobile 8xx, B8xx Processor,
Intel® Pentium® Desktop 350, G6xx, G6xxT, G8xx Processor,
Intel® Pentium® Mobile 9xx, B9xx Processor
206A7
0x2D
Sandy Bridge Xeon E3
Intel® Xeon® Processor E3-1200 Product Family
206A7
0x2D
Sandy Bridge Server EN/EP/EP4S
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2620, E5-2630, E5-2630L, E52640,
E5-2650, E5-2650L, E5-2660, E5-2667, E5-2670, E5-2680, E5-2690
206D6
0x61C
Sandy Bridge Server EN/EP/EP4S
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-1428L, E5-1620, E5-1650, E51660, E5-2403, E5-2407, E5-2418L, E5-2420, E5-2428L, E5-2430, E5-2430L, E5-2440, E5-2448L, E5-2450, E52450L, E5-2470, E5-2603, E5-2609, E5-2620, E5-2630, E5-2630L, E5-2637, E5-2640, E5-2643, E5-2648L, E52650, E5-2650L, E5-2658, E5-2660, E5-2665, E5-2667, E5-2670, E5-2680, E5-2687W, E5-2690, E5-4603, E54607, E5-4610, E5-4617, E5-4620, E5-4640, E5-4650,E5-4650L
Intel® Pentium® Processor 1405
206D7
0x713
Knights LandingIntel® Xeon® Phi™ Processor 72xx506710x1B6Knights MillIntel® Xeon® Phi™ Processor Family806500x18



edit ... i still fail to find KB4100347 in the installed update list ...


----------



## Candor (Sep 15, 2018)

Although my system wasn't impact by this, I put this little package together with details on how to remove and block update KB4100347 (Sept 2018).

I hope it is helpful to someone.


----------



## AsRock (Sep 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Exactly the same.  The procesor provides the ability to install microcode updates via an OS driver, and I know even XP had facilities for it.  It has nothing to do with UEFI vs BIOS.
> 
> The difference is in the BIOS era there were few incidents in which they were used.  But the facilities have existed since that awful pentium bug whose name escapes me.
> 
> Case in point:  Nearly every LGA1366 system is BIOS code based, but they are getting mc updates including this one today.  Did someone miss this fact?



But they did not do this shit before, simple fact is that a bios update is all ways a risk and did it when you thought it was  the best time to do so ( like reseting the bios with no overclock ).  Like hell a storm could be rolling in and Windows decides to update.

Storm hits system shuts down maybe a 30 minute UPS was not long enough and POOF systems screwed and NO one to take blame for it.


----------



## dorsetknob (Sep 15, 2018)

AsRock said:


> Storm hits system shuts down maybe a 30 minute UPS was not long enough and POOF systems screwed and NO one to take blame for it.


 that's it You should only update on a full moon and Clear skys 
This Micro code update is Really Screwing people over.
Since Sandy Intel seem to hate overclockers   and this seems to be the latest Action ( and it retrospectivle effects earlier CPU's ).


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 15, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> that's it You should only update on a full moon and Clear skys
> This Micro code update is Really Screwing people over.
> Since Sandy Intel seem to hate overclockers   and this seems to be the latest Action ( and it retrospectivle effects earlier CPU's ).


Playing fair , over locking is niche ,but i don't think they did this knowingly and willingly to mess with over clocker's , just an unfortunate aside partially blameable on the mother board makers Not releasing bios updates beyond a year, looking in asus direction here especially.

Good luck with this though genuinely @xkm1948


----------



## jsfitz54 (Sep 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Case in point: Nearly every LGA1366 system is BIOS code based, but they are getting mc updates including this one today. Did someone miss this fact?




See post # 25


----------



## GLD (Sep 15, 2018)

That is some BS hosiery you Intel guys got with the forced update.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 15, 2018)

GLD said:


> That is some BS hosiery you Intel guys got with the forced update.


AMD's is coming, unfortunately. Too many people only think about Ryzen/TR/EPYC when it comes to AMD, but there are plenty of systems with early AMD designs that are having ALL SORTS of problems. Board makers have to work on BIOSes on all platforms or this is going to get even worse over the coming months as newer systems start to see problems as well. I mentioned some time ago that what people were complaining about for Spectre/Meltdown was far from over, and this is yet another impact for users with older stuff. AMD and Intel have no choice but to force these updates on users because they aren't updating their systems against these vulnerabilities on their own, for whatever reason. We've got at least another 5 years before this all melts into the background.

My systems do not have this problem, but they are as up-to-date as can be.


----------



## dorsetknob (Sep 15, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> We've got at least another 5 years before this all melts into the background.


Spotted that sly sense of humour


----------



## AsRock (Sep 15, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> that's it You should only update on a full moon and Clear skys
> This Micro code update is Really Screwing people over.
> Since Sandy Intel seem to hate overclockers   and this seems to be the latest Action ( and it retrospectivle effects earlier CPU's ).



Well you live in the UK so yeah storms and power outages are like a blue moon happening.  a lot of parts of America i can tell you power outages are much more common more so in summer.

In the UK i think over the 30 years of living their only remember 1 power outage but here in the US i am talking several a year, a UPS should be a requirement in the US.  The other reason i run every thing on UPS's is were we live as it's classed as a industrial area so when all the businesses are closed our mains jumps from a average of 119v to127v which can course all kinds of issue's.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 15, 2018)

AsRock said:


> But they did not do this shit before



Well, mc updates have been done via Windows in the past if that's what you mean.  Just less frequently, and less... destructively.  You probably did not even notice them.

My point is uefi has nothing to do with it.


----------



## AsRock (Sep 15, 2018)

No just were able to disable it, and enable when it was best for me.  With the home version od Win10 disabling updates has not been possible.


----------



## unclewebb (Sep 15, 2018)

AsRock said:


> With the home version od Win10 disabling updates has not been possible.


Have you tried using this script?

WUMT Wrapper Script 2.5.2
https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/wumt_wrapper_script.html







There is that nasty KB4100347.  Thanks but no thanks.  






Bye Bye KB4100347.


----------



## phill (Sep 15, 2018)

Still waiting for the update at the moment...  I've done a base line and nothing has changed so far....


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 15, 2018)

AsRock said:


> No just were able to disable it, and enable when it was best for me.  With the home version od Win10 disabling updates has not been possible.



ah, gotcha.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Sep 15, 2018)

This is downloading on my updates right now, any issues with Ryzen systems that anyone has heard of?


----------



## AsRock (Sep 15, 2018)

unclewebb said:


> Have you tried using this script?
> 
> WUMT Wrapper Script 2.5.2
> https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/wumt_wrapper_script.html
> ...




Tried W1zzard's script from his thread and O&O program and still updates. Will try that too and see what happens.

EDIT: it's already disabled, and i am trying to just update when I want to not when MS wants to do it.

Normally ened up finding the system wanting to update though shutdown menu so will it disable it that late on ?.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 15, 2018)

NdMk2o1o said:


> This is downloading on my updates right now, any issues with Ryzen systems that anyone has heard of?


Nothing happened for me. If you moved your boot drive to an Intel build then you might run into the issue.


----------



## unclewebb (Sep 15, 2018)

@AsRock - Run the script when you want to check Windows Update.
Windows Update will be disabled after you close WUMT until the next time you run the script.

You get to pick and choose what you want to install.  Not Microsoft. 

This tool also has an uninstall feature so you can uninstall bad updates once you become aware how bad they really are.

Edit- Not sure if uninstalling a microcode update will revert you back to the previous microcode version.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Sep 15, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> If you moved your boot drive to an Intel build then you might run into the issue.


Blasphemer!  

Afaik from some googling as it's an intel mc update only then on Ryzen systems even though the update is downloaded and "applied" I'm assuming it will look for an Intel CPU once downloaded and install, in the case of Ryzen it would see the AMD CPU and just ignore even though it does download.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 15, 2018)

It's on the drive waiting for any Intel CPU


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 15, 2018)

jsfitz54 said:


> X58:  No issues so far on my i7 970.


Same here no problem with my Asus P6X58D Premium&6-Core E5645......


----------



## mkdr (Sep 16, 2018)

Did someone else notice an issue with the last Windows 10 updates with Optimus laptops? I have an issue right now that my Nvidia GPU doesnt clock up anymore, and I have not changed anything but Windows 10 updates of the past days.


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 16, 2018)

I installed KB4100347  just now on my gtx 1070 laptop. and I have 0 changes or issues in any game. 

lulz. the hype is real


----------



## AsRock (Sep 16, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> I installed KB4100347  just now on my gtx 1070 laptop. and I have 0 changes or issues in any game.
> 
> lulz. the hype is real



Hype ?, so because it's been ok for you it's ok for everyone ?.  Wow were not talking consoles here.


----------



## notb (Sep 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Well f*uck me. Forced uninstalled that update in safe mode and now system is stuck in BSOD loop and can’t even get into recovery mode!


You've tried to uninstall a microcode update. This is the expected result.
This is basic stuff guys.


> Thanks a bunch Microsoft  for mess up my work computer with your “Intel validated” microcode update.


And also just another argument in the "overclocking work PCs" discussion...


cadaveca said:


> My systems do not have this problem, but they are as up-to-date as can be.


Because this is the only proper approach, obviously. At least people are learning from whom to take advice...


AsRock said:


> Hype ?, so because it's been ok for you it's ok for everyone ?.  Wow were not talking consoles here.


No. Because the only problem that anyone had in this thread is @xkm1948 and that was because he uninstalled the update, not installed it.


----------



## hat (Sep 16, 2018)

notb said:


> You've tried to uninstall a microcode update. This is the expected result.
> This is basic stuff guys.



Because such updates, or any software for that matter, should be carved into the eternal, never to be removed again...



notb said:


> And also just another argument in the "overclocking work PCs" discussion...



Work PC or not... I'd be uber pissed if I had a 6950x, whose MSRP is north of $1700, and suddenly not only be unable to overclock it but also have diminished performance (even if it were left at stock) thanks to a crappy update. And hey... maybe he needs those additional clock cycles for his work?



notb said:


> Because this is the only proper approach, obviously. At least people are learning from whom to take advice...



In a perfect world, yes. In the actual, not so perfect world we all live in... updates can and do wreck havoc from time to time, hence thread. Evidently cadaveca was one of the luckier ones who selected hardware that actually got proper support from the manufacturer. From what I gather, this microcode update can really fuck shit up without a proper BIOS update backing it.



notb said:


> No. Because the only problem that anyone had in this thread is @xkm1948 and that was because he uninstalled the update, not installed it.



wat

No... just... no. xkm1948 is not the only user in this thread complaining about the update. Secondly, he uninstalled the update not because he went about deleting things all willy nilly, he did so because the update caused problems in the first place.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2018)

notb said:


> You've tried to uninstall a microcode update. This is the expected result.
> This is basic stuff guys.



Uh, no.  There is no reason microcode updates should not be able to be uninstalled.  I mean, they don't even persist across reboots, depending on a driver to load them everytime.  They are about as "persistent" as RAM.

You may want to brush up on them "basics."


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 16, 2018)

notb said:


> No. Because the only problem that anyone had in this thread is @xkm1948 and that was because he uninstalled the update, not installed it.


Yes. Because the update caused performance loss with my 3770K. I have a problem with that. And I think it's bullshit that I had to find a workaround, instead of being given the option of whether or not to accept that performance loss as a trade for added security(that I don't particularly want or feel any particular need for). They're forcing this shit on everyone. Whether you like it or not. Which...IMO...is fucked up. I have every other Meltdown/Spectre protection(exc. L1T fault, since I haven't figured out how yet) disabled ON PURPOSE! WhyTF would I want a microcode update for it?


----------



## hat (Sep 16, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Yes. Because the update caused performance loss with my 3770K. I have a problem with that. And I think it's bullshit that I had to find a workaround, instead of being given the option of whether or not to accept that performance loss as a trade for added security(that I don't particularly want or feel any particular need for). They're forcing this shit on everyone. Whether you like it or not. Which...IMO...is fucked up. I have every other Meltdown/Spectre protection(exc. L1T fault, since I haven't figure out how yet) disabled ON PURPOSE! WhyTF would I want a microcode update for it?


Can't wait for the day these bugs are squashed in hardware and all this nonsense goes away...


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 16, 2018)

AsRock said:


> parts of America i can tell you power outages are much more common


This is likely to be correct.


unclewebb said:


> Have you tried using this script?


I find much more effective disabling the Windows Update service and it's dependent service, Background Intelligent Transfer Service(BITS) and then installing updates manually as needed.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> WhyTF would I want a microcode update for it?



Just FYI if you've disabled the mitigations the microcode should behave as stock performance, providing what you want.  Those keys exist for a reason you know...


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 16, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> I installed KB4100347  just now on my gtx 1070 laptop. and I have 0 changes or issues in any game.
> lulz. the hype is real


This statement shows clearly that your understanding of how software and hardware work together needs improvement. There are so many fine-grained complexities involved that to make such a blanket statement is astonishing.


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 16, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Just FYI if you've disabled the mitigations the microcode should behave as stock performance, providing what you want.  Those keys exist for a reason you know...


I thought the same thing. So I made sure to test the theory by disabling the Spectre protection, that was suddenly enabled, after the update. Then running benchmarks to compare against pre-update records. There was still a significant amount of performance loss. Which I proved was due to the updated microcode by replacing it with microcode that wasn't, and rerunning those benchmarks. After which the numbers fell back in line with where they'd been.

I don't claim that I even fully understand the whats/wheres/whys. But I wouldn't have bothered finding a way to undo it if I could have proved to myself I didn't need to. Fact is, I did prove I needed to. If I wanted my CPU to perform as it did before the update. Which I've also admitted was not a huge difference in performance. But it was real. It was measureable. It was definite loss(not a gain). And I did not want it. Maybe there's more to why it turned out the way it did for me. But I don't think I need to know any more than I already do. Didn't like it. Don't want it(at the moment). Got rid of it. Plain and simple.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> I thought the same thing. So I made sure to test the theory by disabling the Spectre protection, that was suddenly enabled, after the update. Then running benchmarks to compare against pre-update records. There was still a significant amount of performance loss. Which I proved was due to the updated microcode by replacing it with microcode that wasn't, and rerunning those benchmarks. After which the numbers fell back in line with where they'd been.
> 
> I don't claim that I even fully understand the whats/wheres/whys. But I wouldn't have bothered finding a way to undo it if I could have proved to myself I didn't need to. Fact is, I did prove I needed to. If I wanted my CPU to perform as it did before the update. Which I've also admitted was not a huge difference in performance. But it was real. It was measureable. It was definite loss(not a gain). And I did not want it. Maybe there's more to why it turned out the way it did for me. But I don't think I need to know any more than I already do. Didn't like it. Don't want it(at the moment). Got rid of it. Plain and simple.



Fair enough.  I just read the ingredients list, I didn't do a chemical confirmation...  good on you doing field research.


----------



## Fangio1951 (Sep 16, 2018)

unclewebb said:


> Have you tried using this script?
> 
> WUMT Wrapper Script 2.5.2
> https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/wumt_wrapper_script.html
> ...


hi m8,

Appreciate your help.

But, I have a few questions.

Have downloaded the package and unzipped the contents.

Do you create a short cut to the script file - say on the desktop and then ad it as an item in the windows start up ??

Also, should I deactivate the deferred windows update in the advanced sections ??

regards


----------



## unclewebb (Sep 16, 2018)

Fangio1951 said:


> Do you create a short cut to the script file - say on the desktop and then ad it as an item in the windows start up ??


I just run the script when I want to check for updates.  The important updates are usually only released by Microsoft once a month on "patch Tuesday" so manually checking for updates once a week or once a month is reasonable.  Adding this script to your Windows startup and checking for updates every time Windows boots up sounds overkill to me.  

Some of these patches break more things than they fix.  I have never had a virus that left my computer in a BSOD loop.  Forcing untested garbage like this onto everyone's computer is unethical.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Sep 16, 2018)

***_looks down at the empty popcorn bucket_***



dorsetknob said:


> that's it You should only update on a full moon and Clear skys


you forgot to lay down salt in a circle around the PC and do the chicken dance until you pass out.

Win10 was updated? really? #tinywall


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2018)

Another victim:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ers-watch-out-for-Windows-10-KB4100347-update

And more
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1601679-broadwell-e-thread-191.html


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Another victim:
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ers-watch-out-for-Windows-10-KB4100347-update


of you under another UID....  LOL. Gonna bug ya on this one, yep. Don't take it too personal.


It's fine that you guys want to avoid spectre fixes, but you'll find you'll constantly have problems like this. Properly patching this insane vulnerability is a multi-faceted thing that requires OS, driver, BIOS and nearly everything else to be patched. It fundamentally changes how the CPU and OS interact with each other. The performance loss is real, but its also really minor, and personally, I'll take slightly less performance on an overclocked system in order to have security. It's quite possible that those with issues have these issues because they are missing other spectre fix vectors, while those that are making these patches do not, so they don't see these issues when making these patches.

I've done extensive testing in the Windows environment about performance loss, as you'll note that most people that originated the performance loss aspect were NOT in Windows.. they were in Linux. It's quite different, and with all these Windows updates in place, the impact is minimal, and in the order of 3-5%.

@xkm1948 I pulled out my X99 delixe, and did not find any problems, so I wonder where your system really lost its OC-ability. It doesn't seem to be this update... as much of a problem it might have been for you.


----------



## Aquinus (Sep 16, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> I've done extensive testing in the Windows environment about performance loss, as you'll note that most people that originated the performance loss aspect were NOT in Windows.. they were in Linux.


...and not with every application either I might add. There are some very specific cases where performance is meh but, it's actually not terrible most of the time. I/O constrained situations seem to be hit the worst by these mitigations it seems. If you're mostly testing things that hit the CPU hard alone, it's unlikely to surface as a major performance hit. Tests targetting databases like PostgreSQL or Redis are likely going to show more of a hit than testing games or compression speeds; things that aren't I/O constrained.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2018)

@cadaveca

I don't know I have so many alias with different systems. Must be nice to love X99 so much by buying multiple system of them



Nothing personal. I am just annoyed it hits Broadwell-E particularly somehow. And it hits me when I had least amount of energy to deal with crap like this. You know my history on X99 and another round of problem I will be flipping out.







Aquinus said:


> ...and not with every application either I might add. There are some very specific cases where performance is meh but, it's actually not terrible most of the time. I/O constrained situations seem to be hit the worst by these mitigations it seems. If you're mostly testing things that hit the CPU hard alone, it's unlikely to surface as a major performance hit. Tests targetting databases like PostgreSQL or Redis are likely going to show more of a hit than testing games or compression speeds; things that aren't I/O constrained.




Noticed some slow-downs when I do SQL queries for RNASeq. Not terribly slow but noticeable.


----------



## Nokiron (Sep 16, 2018)

5960X here.

No issues, no performance loss either.


----------



## yotano211 (Sep 16, 2018)

I'm happy to say that with a i7 8850h processor
In my laptop, no issues so far.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Nothing personal. I am just annoyed it hits Broadwell-E particularly somehow. And it hits me when I had least amount of energy to deal with crap like this. You know my history on X99 and another round of problem I will be flipping out.



I actually think you are dealing with multiple issues and not just one. I understand that its frustrating, for sure. You haven't had a lot of luck with that platform at all. I wish it was easy to find the commonality that causing these issues, and I'm afraid this Windows update isn't exactly the true cause.

At least you got your system up, but getting that OC back would be ideal, of course. How do we do that?


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2018)

No it just the issue of this update. Not multiple issue.

Uninstalled the update. reflashed with 3902 BIOS used @MrGenius file to get in system. I used this tool to block that update
https://www.digitalcitizen.life/how-block-unwanted-windows-driver-updates-installing-windows-10

Now system OC is back online. So control all variables, that update was the only cause for all this shit storm.

Without the update my Microcode is now back at B00002A.




This MS update has the version number here





https://support.microsoft.com/en-us...or-windows-10-version-1803-and-windows-server


The two conflicting microcode is what has been causing havoc on the Broadwell-E systems. Not sure about Haswell-E at this point as it seems to be unaffected.


Also BIOS showing current microcode version. I don't think this was changed even during the update


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 16, 2018)

So we need to push the microcode into BIOS, and then the update wouldn't be an issue...


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2018)

And to add to that. Even with microcode B00002A everything seems to be patched according to InSpectre. Granted it probably does not guard against some of the latest discovered vulnerabilities but for my usage it should be secure enough.





Now the question is: what was Microsoft update doing? Security patch over already patched system? Or patching the newest vulnerabilities?


https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/sa00115-microcode-update-guidance.pdf
Intel listed their most recent Microcode for Broadwell-E will be B00002E. This MS update was on 2C. I am on 2A. So it seems more than likely the upcoming Windows 10 Fall 2018 update will have all these incorporated

, meaning I will probably have to delete that freaking file after the update.







cadaveca said:


> So we need to push the microcode into BIOS, and then the update wouldn't be an issue...



I have already called ASUS customer serivce. Big help. Their tech over the phone replied "We'll look into that"

Their ROG forum engineer PMed me the chance of ASUS supporting X99 with even more microcode updated BIOS is "very slim" 

So yeah, I am gonna need to learn on how inject updated Microcode myself somehow now.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> So yeah, I am gonna need to learn on how inject updated Microcode myself somehow now.



My ASUS knowledge isn't as up to speed as it could be, but I do believe I remember it's easier if you have that "USB flashback" feature as it doesn't check the bios for integrity the same way the software flasher does.  Do you have that per chance?


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> My ASUS knowledge isn't as up to speed as it could be, but I do believe I remember it's easier if you have that "USB flashback" feature as it doesn't check the bios for integrity the same way the software flasher does.  Do you have that per chance?




Yes it has. At the same time i have 0 knowledge modding a system BIOS. So yeah, fat chance of me messing something up again.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Yes it has. At the same time i have 0 knowledge modding a system BIOS. So yeah, fat chance of me messing something up again.



I can cover the other base if you need help.  Just tell me what image you want modded.

I'm more worried that it's not a "conflict" though because such a thing shouldn't be possible (only one microcode runs at a time I think).  It sounds more like Intel just screwed something up in newer revisions.  But we can always try it if your game.  PM me.


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 16, 2018)

I still say the best answer is just to replace the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll after the update(with the file dated 4/11/18). That way the system still thinks the update(the *September 13* KB4100347, not the *May 17* KB4100347, there's 2 with the same name) is installed. And it won't try to reinstall it(I've tested this theory and it's true). Then you don't need to uninstall the update or do whatever to prevent it from (re)installing. Or do any BIOS modding. You're done with it. And you keep a copy of both the pre and post update mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll files so you can manually control the microcode that the OS uses(if you decide you aren't done with it). I realize it's not the best answer in every circumstance. But it's pretty close if not.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 16, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I can cover the other base if you need help.  Just tell me what image you want modded.
> 
> I'm more worried that it's not a "conflict" though because such a thing shouldn't be possible (only one microcode runs at a time I think).  It sounds more like Intel just screwed something up in newer revisions.  But we can always try it if your game.  PM me.



Awesome! Thanks Froggie! I will dig around Win-RAID forum and see if I am conformable with modding.


@MrGenius I am definitely saving that file for the upcoming Fall Windows 10 update.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Awesome! Thanks Froggie! I will dig around Win-RAID forum and see if I am conformable with modding.
> 
> 
> @MrGenius I am definitely saving that file for the upcoming Fall Windows 10 update.



Look for UBU, the universal bios updater.  After a few scary Ruski links it's actually a pretty easy to use tool.  You will also probably need a copy of mmtool.exe which I can help with if need be, since that is...  controlled or whatever.  Not sure it's story, honestly.



MrGenius said:


> I still say the best answer is just to replace the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll after the update(with the file dated 4/11/18). That way the system still thinks the update(the *September 13* KB4100347, not the *May 17* KB4100347, there's 2 with the same name) is installed. And it won't try to reinstall it(I've tested this theory and it's true). Then you don't need to uninstall the update or do whatever to prevent it from (re)installing. Or do any BIOS modding. You're done with it. And you keep a copy of both the pre and post update mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll files so you can manually control the microcode that the OS uses(if you decide you aren't done with it). I realize it's not the best answer in every circumstance. But it's pretty close if not.



It would drive me nuts not being able to depend on sfc /scannow.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> It would drive me nuts not being able to depend on sfc /scannow.


That can be solved by also replacing or deleting the offending dll file(s) in the system repository which will prevent it from being restored but will not jack with anything else.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 17, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> That can be solved by also replacing or deleting the offending dll file(s) in the system repository which will prevent it from being restored but will not jack with anything else.



It'll make sfc /scannow give a clean positive?

My OCD requires this. 

*pets computer while mumbling in golem voice*

"Fast computer, clean computer, really really quick..."


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> It'll make sfc /scannow give a clean positive?
> 
> My OCD requires this.
> 
> ...


LOL! That's a good question. Likely not. I only run it once in a while and specifically with the " /verifyonly " switch which only reports what files it finds problematic. The reason I do this is that I fully remove[physically delete] Windows Defender, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player and a few other things and customize a few system files. I don't want them automatically restored. Thus when it generates a list of files I know what I'm looking for and will see anything out of sorts.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 17, 2018)

Yeah, I can't call it a fix, if it breaks other things, either.


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 17, 2018)

It doesn't break anything. You just need to keep it in mind, and be prepared to do it over again if/when necessary. Like after you run sfc /scannow, or when Windows 10 updates itself to a new version. I guess I'm used to it because I've been doing it with the imageres.dll(s) for quite a while now.

EDIT: An in-place upgrade will also reset the installed updates list. So it will attempt to reinstall it. I found that out yesterday when I did one. Well, not so much found out as expected it to happen, and verified it. I also found out that dism /online /cleanup-image /restorehealth will leave it as is.


----------



## Athlonite (Sep 17, 2018)

Well atleast you have an Intel CPU installed in your machine I don't but was forced to install it anyways like an Intel Micro Code update is going to do a damn thing for my AMD CPU based system


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 17, 2018)

Athlonite said:


> like an Intel Micro Code update is going to do a damn thing for my AMD CPU based system


True. The patch for Intel CPU's will not be loaded or accessed in an AMD based system.


----------



## freeagent (Sep 17, 2018)

All of my overclocks went to hell, I noticed a few days ago. I thought it was ram, played with it, tried different sets, went back to 7, nothing helped. I turned off hyperthreading, and am running at 4600 1.275v. It passes that new linpack extreme.. If I turn ht back on it fails. I thought I had 4400 nailed down with ht on, until it blue screened. My x5690 seems to be ok still, for now. I will probably turn ht off on that too. Bummer dude. It was fun while it lasted.


----------



## mkdr (Sep 17, 2018)

@xkm1948 Windows cant nor wont flash/update your bios/UEFI with a MC update.

0. CPU contains hard coded MC
1. UEFI contains MC patch => loades it into CPU.
2.  Windows/Linux/OS contains MC patch => loades it into CPU (overwrites the UEFI one)

=> removing/deinstalling the Windows MC file leads to just 1. The MC patch is loaded every time into the CPU the UEFI and OS boots. The loaded MC in the CPU is lost everytime the PC reboots.

You can hide the update with http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/2/2/f22d5fdb-59cd-4275-8c95-1be17bf70b21/wushowhide.diagcab after removing it.


----------



## Assimilator (Sep 17, 2018)

Athlonite said:


> Well atleast you have an Intel CPU installed in your machine I don't but was forced to install it anyways like an Intel Micro Code update is going to do a damn thing for my AMD CPU based system



Assuming Microsoft only pushed Intel microcode updates to Intel systems: what would happen if you switch out your AMD CPU and motherboard for an Intel pair, but keep the current OS? Boom, your OS is fubbernucked unless you're able to flash a BIOS with most up-to-date microcode, which for people with X99 systems isn't an option since their mobo vendors no longer issue BIOS updates.

Before you say "holy hell why would you even do that": I had an old AMD S939 system running Windows 7, and the board died and I wasn't able to source a replacement, so I substituted in a spare Intel LGA775 system because I couldn't be a**ed to reinstall all the software. Everything worked fine afterwards (apart from having to install new drivers and reactivate the OS). It's not technically a supported scenario, but it definitely works, and microcode updates help make it work.


----------



## rkt (Sep 17, 2018)

X99 Extreme4 I7 6850k - after update I cannot overclock cpu through bios, it always at default values, but it possible through software... Before it was overclocked at 4,4 ghz. Bios update not helped.
Do not know what to do.


----------



## Papahyooie (Sep 17, 2018)

Well I don't know if this is related, but I got home yesterday, and my wife's Asus 970 pro gaming/aura with AMD FX 8370's windows install is pretty much bricked after having taken the update over the weekend. Can't boot, can't repair, even the usual CMD fixes won't work because bootrec doesn't even see that there's a windows installed. 

Like I said, no idea if this is related, as you guys are all talking about Broadwell, and this is an older AMD. But... How are they still in business??? Seriously considering going to linux full time.


----------



## Assimilator (Sep 17, 2018)

@W1zzard Not sure what connections you have in the industry, but I'm certain an Intel rep would be interested to hear about this SNAFU.


----------



## mkdr (Sep 17, 2018)

Assimilator said:


> Assuming Microsoft only pushed Intel microcode updates to Intel systems: what would happen if you switch out your AMD CPU and motherboard for an Intel pair, but keep the current OS? Boom, your OS is fubbernucked unless you're able to flash a BIOS with most up-to-date microcode, which for people with X99 systems isn't an option since their mobo vendors no longer issue BIOS updates.



No.... that's not how it works... Every CPU is identified as Intel, AMD whatever by the Kernel at Windows boot and therefor only Intel CPUs get Intel MC and only AMD get AMD MC loaded into it at boot time...


----------



## HeavyHemi (Sep 18, 2018)

6850K on an EVGA X99 FTW K is affected as well.


----------



## Candor (Sep 18, 2018)

rkt said:


> X99 Extreme4 I7 6850k - after update I cannot overclock cpu through bios, it always at default values, but it possible through software... Before it was overclocked at 4,4 ghz. Bios update not helped.
> Do not know what to do.



This thread is only 6 pages long at this point and there are at least three solutions already stated here.

Have you read it?


----------



## HeavyHemi (Sep 18, 2018)

Candor said:


> This thread is only 6 pages long at this point and there are at least three solutions already stated here.
> 
> Have you read it?



Fortunately while this update did some weird shizz when it updated on the first restart to a bluescreen then a lock...I just did a power off, then rebooted. That seems to have saved me from anything getting corrupted.  Uninstalled the update using Windows Add/Remove then hide and disabled the update service with WUMTminiTool. I'll have to pester EVGA to see if they will fix us up.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 18, 2018)

HeavyHemi said:


> Fortunately while this update did some weird shizz when it updated on the first restart to a bluescreen then a lock...I just did a power off, then rebooted. That seems to have saved me from anything getting corrupted.  Uninstalled the update using Windows Add/Remove then hide and disabled the update service with WUMTminiTool. I'll have to pester EVGA to see if they will fix us up.



Another BSOD victim. Good to know. BTW you are not another alias of me I assume? I was told this is just my particular problem lol @cadaveca 


More than likely they won't. X99 is EOL for support, at least for ASUS.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 18, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> More than likely they won't. X99 is EOL for support, at least for ASUS.


SO can we confirm that the microcode update killed your OC inh windows?

The OS not booting was because of the update removal?


OR did the update bork the OS too?


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> SO can we confirm that the microcode update killed your OC inh windows?
> 
> The OS not booting was because of the update removal?
> 
> ...




No idea. Sounds like the update messed up something in Windows that caused loss of overclocking. Removal of it in safe mode (uninstall updates from Windows options) caused BSOD upon restart. So yeah, no idea.


----------



## HeavyHemi (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> SO can we confirm that the microcode update killed your OC inh windows?
> 
> The OS not booting was because of the update removal?
> 
> ...




Hard to say what we can confirm. Now that I think about it, I think I had two blue screens trying to reboot, until I went into the BIOS on boot, didn't change anything, continued the boot and it completed.
Maybe I didn't have the other issue because I removed the update normally. Safe mode uninstalls are  usually a last resort. Kinda digging the purple H avatar...it's Heavy man.


----------



## freeagent (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> ASUS has this recurring problem where the BIOS shits the bed if your OC isn't quite stable, so its possible. I've had users report a stable OC not working, when pushing memory, reflash somehow fixes it. What other use is USB BIOS Flashback? Its like they know and then that's the fix...



I was pushing my ram, and didn't get the results I was looking for.. normally, if there is a problem I lose the multi, and memory speed control. None of that happened this time, none of my overclocks  would stabilize even with added vcore. So I read this thread and your comment stuck out. I just reflashed about 20 minutes ago and booted at 4600 with ht no problem. Ran some quick tests and thought I would report back.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 18, 2018)

freeagent said:


> I was pushing my ram, and didn't get the results I was looking for.. normally, if there is a problem I lose the multi, and memory speed control. None of that happened this time, none of my overclocks  would stabilize even with added vcore. So I read this thread and your comment stuck out. I just reflashed about 20 minutes ago and booted at 4600 with ht no problem. Ran some quick tests and thought I would report back.


Losing OC on ASUS boards when pushing the limits IS normal and has been a thing for many generations now. Not that big of a deal, if you know how to deal with it.


----------



## hat (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Losing OC on ASUS boards when pushing the limits IS normal and has been a thing for many generations now. Not that big of a deal, if you know how to deal with it.


Sounds like something pulling the cmos battery/shorting clr cmos pins might solve... but it also seems like a weird design flaw (choice)?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 18, 2018)

I had to downgrade my MSI X99A Gaming 7 bios because it was pissing its own pants non stop. After downgrade, problems were gone. No more random bsod-less crashes and random startup bsods.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 18, 2018)

hat said:


> Sounds like something pulling the cmos battery/shorting clr cmos pins might solve... but it also seems like a weird design flaw (choice)?


Unfortunately, no, CMOS clear does not help. Something gets corrupted (microcode, or MEI perhaps?), and the only way to fix it is to reflash the BIOS. Tested with my own review sample boards, with retail boards in my possession, other users out there on the internet into memory clocking... and several users here on TPU. That's why, as soon as I hear OC not working any more, I suggest reflash BIOS, and a fresh OS install.

Think about that for a second though, and what I am saying... how could an OC affect BIOS? What part of reading a BIOS to boot corrupts it? Should this not be impossible?

Give me nearly any ASUS motherboard, and I can force this to happen, and you can search yourself and find users that have a seemingly perfectly working board, but things like MEI version listed in BIOS disappears... I've been almost a singular voice about CPU OC degradation, and many people have discounted the idea, but this is something I have spent hundreds if not thousands of hours testing and investigating.

I'm not the only person aware of this specific issues with ASUS boards though.... and the idea that Windows cannot force a BIOS flash in incorrect.

But lets start with someone else who knows about this too... such as this thread from 5 years ago that describes a recovery method if gone too far:

https://www.overclockers.com/forums...o-fix-your-BIOS-if-there-is-corrupted-ME-area

There is much more to this topic that can be discussed, but I'm not sure this thread is that place.


----------



## hat (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Unfortunately, no, CMOS clear does not help. Something gets corrupted (microcode, or MEI perhaps?), and the only way to fix it is to reflash the BIOS. Tested with my own review sample boards, with retail boards in my possession, other users out there on the internet into memory clocking... and several users here on TPU. That's why, as soon as I hear OC not working any more, I suggest reflash BIOS, and a fresh OS install.
> 
> Think about that for a second though, and what I am saying... how could an OC affect BIOS? What part of reading a BIOS to boot corrupts it? Should this not be impossible?
> 
> ...



Something to keep in mind in case I ever happen across such weirdness.


----------



## rkt (Sep 18, 2018)

Candor said:


> This thread is only 6 pages long at this point and there are at least three solutions already stated here.
> 
> Have you read it?


After the update KB4100347 was uninstalled - the system was recovered (also overclocking ability), so I paused windows updates for 35 days, but what next? Try to hide this update?


----------



## Candor (Sep 18, 2018)

rkt said:


> After the update KB4100347 was uninstalled - the system was recovered (also overclocking ability), so I paused windows updates for 35 days, but what next? Try to hide this update?



Use this tool to hide the update (will prevent it from being re-downloaded).

http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/2/2/f22d5fdb-59cd-4275-8c95-1be17bf70b21/wushowhide.diagcab

Instructions...

https://www.thewindowsclub.com/block-unwanted-windows-updates-in-windows-10


----------



## rkt (Sep 18, 2018)

Candor said:


> Use this tool to hide the update (will prevent it from being re-downloaded).
> 
> http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/2/2/f22d5fdb-59cd-4275-8c95-1be17bf70b21/wushowhide.diagcab
> 
> ...


Thank you! Done. Till next malicious update


----------



## Candor (Sep 18, 2018)

You're welcome. Begone crappy update.


----------



## R0H1T (Sep 18, 2018)

That's like delaying the inevitable, will any of you skip the entire RS5 or RS6 updates next?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 18, 2018)

Use Feedback Hub in Win10 to report this in detail. Then we can upvote the issue to make it noticeable. That's the best way. Also mention KB number in the title as a reason of problem.


----------



## freeagent (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Unfortunately, no, CMOS clear does not help. Something gets corrupted (microcode, or MEI perhaps?), and the only way to fix it is to reflash the BIOS. Tested with my own review sample boards, with retail boards in my possession, other users out there on the internet into memory clocking... and several users here on TPU. That's why, as soon as I hear OC not working any more, I suggest reflash BIOS, and a fresh OS install.
> 
> Think about that for a second though, and what I am saying... how could an OC affect BIOS? What part of reading a BIOS to boot corrupts it? Should this not be impossible?
> 
> ...



Clearing the cmos had no effect, even pulling the battery only partially clears the cmos, This is the first board that I've had that does that.. For me the timing was weird, the update, pushing my mems, and then no stable oc.  My R3F would never think of shenanigans like that lol. Well maybe it would, it can be a bitch to.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 18, 2018)

This update seems to be the gift that keep on giving.


----------



## DRDNA (Sep 18, 2018)

7700HQ and GTX1070 with 16 GB ram all current patches to my unnamed and mystery built laptop ( this make of laptop is not aloud to be mentioned on the TPU website )  are working 100% with no slow downs.Benched before and after installs and all is with in margin of error.




BEFORE PATCH Benches



AFTER PATCH



BEFORE PATCH



AFTER PATCH



Before PATCH



AFTER PATCH




Also worth a mention is *XTU *was *NOT *affected and the undervolting is still working fine with no issues and the patches installed with out any issues either and all restarts for installation completion were also 100% successful.


----------



## bug (Sep 18, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Well f*uck me. Forced uninstalled that update in safe mode and now system is stuck in BSOD loop and can’t even get into recovery mode!
> 
> Thanks a bunch Microsoft  for mess up my work computer with your “Intel validated” microcode update.


They never claimed they have validated the downgrade


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 18, 2018)

all those updates got me worried,to the point that I decided to dig out an old thread and test my 5775c in the heaviest gaming scenario I can think of. Happy to report no perf was lost.
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...ct-on-gaming-performance.236514/#post-3716262

now I get the same 118 fps



http://imgur.com/a/SIy6nJ0


----------



## rkt (Sep 18, 2018)

R0H1T said:


> That's like delaying the inevitable, will any of you skip the entire RS5 or RS6 updates next?


Maybe it’s time to switch to AMD?


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 18, 2018)

rkt said:


> Maybe it’s time to switch to AMD?


In HEDT it's a no brainer.


----------



## rkt (Sep 18, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> In HEDT it's a no brainer.


But there is no clear way how to avoid such serious system damage?


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 18, 2018)

rkt said:


> But there is no clear way how to avoid such serious system damage?


X299 is not affected by this problem that I can tell, but BIOS development for that platform is still active at most brands.



rkt said:


> Maybe it’s time to switch to AMD?



That's really not an easy question to answer. I have been running HEDT both platforms side-by-side since last year and there are benefits to each.


----------



## rkt (Sep 18, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> X299 is not affected by this problem that I can tell, but BIOS development for that platform is still active at most brands.
> 
> 
> 
> That's really not an easy question to answer. I have been running HEDT both platforms side-by-side since last year and there are benefits to each.


Maybe to wait for refresh (due to overheating)?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 18, 2018)

Lets all remember this gem I've encountered some time ago:
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...or-deliberate-performance-degradation.246065/

Basically same scenario and how everyone got all sorts of ideas and theories that it's "because that A9 is just crap" and how  somehow didn't know something even though I had numbers plain visible even in something as basic as CPU-Z benchmark. History repeats and will continue to repeat apparently.


----------



## adamwzl (Sep 19, 2018)

I have to agree with the OP. Using a ASUS Rampage V Edition 10 and 6950x with update KB4100347 installed causes Overclock to disappear. Only way I was able to get it back with the update installed was to use Intel XTU and set my core clock there. All voltages and DRAM settings stayed from BIOS only difference was the core clock values. But with doing that it introduced stability issues. Overwatch and CSGO keep crashing consistently causing suspensions and rank loss on competitive. Once I removed the update all those problems went away. I'm still using the BETA 1902 bios from ASUS and my Overclock is staying just fine @ 4.3. 

Hopefully ASUS reverses it's decision and releases a non BETA version of BIOS to support the latest Intel microcode update. X99 is not that OLD yet, all processors are still capable workhorses.


----------



## mkdr (Sep 19, 2018)

@DRDNA ... you already had a MC and Meltdown+Spectre protections enabled, so of course, there is no effect on you on this update...


----------



## remixedcat (Sep 20, 2018)

even disabling service does nothing it reinitializes itself in a day


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 20, 2018)

This is why the Windows Update Management Tool is such a good little program.  It allows you to block updates just like previous Windows versions.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 20, 2018)

rtwjunkie said:


> This is why the Windows Update Management Tool is such a good little program.  It allows you to block updates just like previous Windows versions.



When it works. There are also situations where something will get installed regardless. It's especially bad with drivers that seem to be pulled from some parallel channel...


----------



## remixedcat (Sep 20, 2018)

rtwjunkie said:


> This is why the Windows Update Management Tool is such a good little program.  It allows you to block updates just like previous Windows versions.


does it work on home editions? I found a tool like that but it won't work on home editions. My tablet has home. This is why I can't use the registry or the GPO.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 20, 2018)

remixedcat said:


> does it work on home editions? I found a tool like that but it won't work on home editions. My tablet has home. This is why I can't use the registry or the GPO.


That I do not know the answer to at this moment.  @Mussels has the link in his signature.  Maybe he knows or the link has info.  Probably not, though. 

I can test it out on my HTPC this evening, since it is W10 home, and it hasn’t been turned on since this month’s updates came out.


----------



## remixedcat (Sep 20, 2018)

rtwjunkie said:


> That I do not know the answer to at this moment.  @Mussels has the link in his signature.  Maybe he knows or the link has info.  Probably not, though.
> 
> I can test it out on my HTPC this evening, since it is W10 home, and it hasn’t been turned on since this month’s updates came out.



well the app works itself. le's see if keeping that service disabled works the trick. Hope so!!


----------



## freeagent (Sep 20, 2018)

Well, I spoke too soon, I found out yesterday that my oc with ht is not stable. If I turn ht off then its fine. That blows. I swear it was good to go when I ditched 10 and put 7 back on, but the next day it was back to its shenanigans. Not sure what to say! Havent had a real good look at AMD in about 10 years.. Looks like I maybe picking one up soon. At least the guys running newer Intel hardware have some hope left.

Edit:

I've got 4.4 nailed down with ht, 4500 and up is pretty difficult, it seems like it needs more voltage, but when it gets it, it becomes unstable. So, I've got 4.4 nailed down with ht, and with ht off I can do 4700. Not the doom and gloom I thought. But its not all sunshine and lollipops either. My x5690 is purring away just another day.


----------



## fullinfusion (Sep 21, 2018)

Download this stand alone tool and run it before windows updates.. http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/2/2/f22d5fdb-59cd-4275-8c95-1be17bf70b21/wushowhide.diagcab

Google how to use it properly.

Also you need to be aware the little tool will sometimes let M$ sneak a hidden update through so to have better control set your network connection to metered, that way it will prompt you about the update and you can then go and run the tool and block it again.. Trust me I have my system locked down from M$ bullshit firmware patches..


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 22, 2018)

After update, interesting thing happend : AIDA64 cache benchmark isn't detecting OC... UNLESS Windows is put into "High Performance" power plan (I made 100% core clock as minimum) :




^"Balanced"



^"High Performance", OC was done from BIOS level (FYI).
I was using latest microcode for IB-E : _0x42D_ (thank you R-T-B !), before update got downloaded/installed.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 23, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> After update, interesting thing happend : AIDA64 cache benchmark isn't detecting OC... UNLESS Windows is put into "High Performance" power plan (I made 100% core clock as minimum) :
> View attachment 107337
> ^"Balanced"
> View attachment 107338
> ...


It's kinda sad that an OC is needed just to get back up to the level of performance it had before a software update.


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 23, 2018)

WELL... I tested this on my new CPU 
"RTX Off" :




"RTX On" :




Basicly, it's 75-100MHz perf. drop in my case (for Cinebench R15 multi score).
Interesting bit is that it made this CPU stable on a bit lower Vcore (which is good, when cooling high Vcore is a problem). I think reason for this is CPU does less stuff per cycle, so it's easier to stabilise.
Additional testing must be done to confirm that...


----------



## hat (Sep 23, 2018)

lol @ RTX off/on

Though, again, these patches mostly impact performance in very specific applications. Cinebench isn't one of them.


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 23, 2018)

Catch is, Ivy and earlier CPUs don't have the tech needed for low perf. impact of these patches (invpcid instruction if I remember correctly). That's why I get "Slower" perf. in InSpectre program, and why Cinebench score is indeed affected in my case (small impact of ~1,5%, but it's there).


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 23, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> Basicly, it's 75-100MHz perf. drop in my case (for Cinebench R15 multi score).
> Interesting bit is that it made this CPU stable on a bit lower Vcore (which is good, when cooling high Vcore is a problem). I think reason for this is CPU does less stuff per cycle, so it's easier to stabilise.
> Additional testing must be done to confirm that...


Have you also tested drive access performance?


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 23, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Have you also tested drive access performance?








AS SSD : ~7% slower read time, and ~5% slower write time.

If anyone wants to test this :
To disable fix, use this command in cmd prompt (with *admin* rights) :


> reg add "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management" /v FeatureSettingsOverride /t REG_DWORD /d 3 /f
> 
> reg add "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management" /v FeatureSettingsOverrideMask /t REG_DWORD /d 3 /f


To enable it, use this (cmd with admin is again required) :


> reg add "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management" /v FeatureSettingsOverride /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f
> 
> reg add "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management" /v FeatureSettingsOverrideMask /t REG_DWORD /d 3 /f


In both cases a *RESTART* is required for changes to take effect ("shuting down" and pressing power button, usually doesn't count as restart in Win 10).


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 23, 2018)

spectatorx said:


> How windows can disable something what is set in bios/uefi? Windows should have no access to bios settings.


Pentium G3258.. Even with Z87 board it forced itself to stock clocks, had to delete the microcode update file manually.



Candor said:


> I just installed this update with an i7-5820K on Asus ROG Strix X99 Gaming.
> 
> The update had no effect my overclock of 4.5ghz.


Same here, 5820K @ 4.5GHz & Rampage V Extreme.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 23, 2018)

hat said:


> lol @ RTX off/on
> 
> Though, again, these patches mostly impact performance in very specific applications. Cinebench isn't one of them.


Yep...agree,I noticed that on my old X58 platform with updated microcode performance lost in cinebench is almost negligible but for example in 3d mark Firestrike physics test performance lost is around 10%.....
Here I just do the Firestrike testing to make sure what is the exact lost in performance


----------



## cucker tarlson (Sep 23, 2018)

Contrary to what I wrote earlier,I do have some spectre/meltdown impact on my pc,so let me break it down.
My method of comparing it to older results was flawed,and since inspectre can enable or disable them at request,I could do some relevant testing.

so first let's start with cdm ssd perfromance,4K r/w is the only one I test.
on my adata 128gb: 30/85 with patch on, 34/118 patch off
on samsung 850s:32-34/88 patch on,35-39/122 patch off

difference is not noticeable on windows boot,but games do load faster and I'm not dreaming it.

watch dogs 2 - my go to game for cpu testing. note that what I achieved was in an extremely cpu heavy game with low settings and temporal filtering on,a scenario that is likely never actually used for gaming,but relevant for cpu testing

patch on: 100-102 fps patch off: 112-116 fps, 13% performance lost.

so great job intel,you done fucked up. I'll be running with patches off since I don't really care and there's nothing for me to lose except for performance,but AMD got themselves a new customer when 7nm Ryzen drops. New intel cpus like 9700k will probably take less (if any) of a hit since they're newer and bios support is better too, but my points stands unless they offer me a free replacement.
From e6300,through q6600,2500k,3570k,4790k to 5775c,thank you for your service intel,you are dismissed.Time to go back to AMD


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 23, 2018)

Zyll Goliath said:


> Yep...agree,I noticed that on my old X58 platform with updated microcode performance lost in cinebench is almost negligible but for example in 3d mark Firestrike physics test performance lost is around 10%.....
> Here I just do the Firestrike testing to make sure what is the exact lost in performance
> 
> View attachment 107405


I got +3,4% with my setup without Meltdown update active :


Comparison : https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/16451213/fs/16450669


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 23, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> I got +3,4% with my setup without Meltdown update active :
> View attachment 107409
> View attachment 107410
> Comparison : https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/16451213/fs/16450669


Well....then good seems like X79 handling better changes in microcode at least when it comes to this specific apps(FirestrikePhysics)


----------



## Gripen90 (Sep 23, 2018)

I have an MSI X99S Gaming 7 (BIOS from 25th of may 2016) and a Core i7 5960X@4.1GHz and it isn't affected by this update. 
*However *my main rig with MSI X99S Krait Edition (BIOS from 7th of july 2016) with a Core i7 6900K@4.2GHz is affected by this update. Installing it and I'm down to 3.7GHz. I have blocked the windows update with the MS tool and the CPU is running 4.2GHz again.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 23, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> AS SSD : ~7% slower read time, and ~5% slower write time.


Ok, not as some. I've seen as bad as 20% degradation.


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 23, 2018)

Maybe updated microcode in UEFI makes drop less apparent ?
I did not checked how my disk behaves with Windows before I updated the UEFI...


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 23, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> Ok, not as some. I've seen as bad as 20% degradation.



Nehalem and chips on lga1366 seem hit the worst, which makes sense I suppose.


----------



## Zyll Goliat (Sep 23, 2018)




----------



## cadaveca (Sep 24, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> After update, interesting thing happend : AIDA64 cache benchmark isn't detecting OC... UNLESS Windows is put into "High Performance" power plan (I made 100% core clock as minimum) :
> View attachment 107337
> ^"Balanced"
> View attachment 107338
> ...



Oh, so power plans affect OC now... so the OS offer dynamic overclocking. Interesting. Funny how no one noticed this, and everyone thought things we just broken... and see to be ignoring the fact you said as much. I mentioned I wasn't having any problems myself...and I'm pretty sure I have high performance already selected. So this is all a bunch of drama for no reason...? Well, I guess it's not "no reason"... people simply didn't understand what actually changed. Myself included.


----------



## hat (Sep 24, 2018)

You shouldn't need a high performance power plan to OC. If you do that you throw idle power saving features out the window. Most of us probably don't want our over clocked chips running north of 5GHz 24/7. Smells like a bug to me if that is indeed the case.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 24, 2018)

hat said:


> You shouldn't need a high performance power plan to OC. If you do that you throw idle power saving features out the window. Most of us probably don't want our over clocked chips running north of 5GHz 24/7. Smells like a bug to me if that is indeed the case.


Yeah, it does, but it might also explain why some are seeing issues, and others are not. It'd also be nice if there was simpler ways to change these power plans... but in the grand scheme of things, this is something I would like to see developed further.


----------



## agent_x007 (Sep 24, 2018)

High Performance plan can be set to "0" for minimum CPU clock.

Plan itself also doesn't "switch off" idle CPU states.
Even on it, my CPU Vcore can go lower than 1V (according to CPU-z).

Settings of plan can be changed in it's options, and switching between plans is a simple left click in Control Panel/Power Options (where you can create your own plan, if you want).

I'm really not 100% conviced this OC lock is only that... a power plan "snafu".


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 24, 2018)

Plus people would want their CPU to idle down in between work sessions for power saving. Why should I set it to high performance mode to keep CPU 100% when it works perfectly in power saving mode before?


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 24, 2018)

hat said:


> You shouldn't need a high performance power plan to OC. If you do that you throw idle power saving features out the window. Most of us probably don't want our over clocked chips running north of 5GHz 24/7. Smells like a bug to me if that is indeed the case.


Intel's recent chips drop down to the supported C-states irrelevant to Windows power plan.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 24, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Plus people would want their CPU to idle down in between work sessions for power saving. Why should I set it to high performance mode to keep CPU 100% when it works perfectly in power saving mode before?


Read the post above your last one. Set "o" as the plan minimum and the clocks will drop, as well as voltage? Also, I thought that power-saving mode was only for laptops...? Power Saver mode specifically states that it reduces CPU performance to save power as much as possible...?

So if you've got the right windows options here.. then this is much ado about nothing? 

If you ask me, sounds like the windows update actually fixed things to be the way they were supposed to be, and before, Windows was broken, but people got used to it. Makes for one hell of a hilarious story that went all over.


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 24, 2018)

Well, that's ignoring the sub-topic of the thread. Which is the performance loss attributable to the forced microcode update. Which requires a bit more of a workaround to "fix" than the overclocking thing(evidently). So it might also be about how you define "broken". Your definition might not match mine.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 24, 2018)

OK to clarify I reinstalled the freaking update. Then no matter what ever power options I set in UEFI the overclocking is not applied. So as far as this is concerned, the causation is crystal clear:

Microcode conflict between OS and UEFI *WILL* cause the loss of overclocking.

Now I am going to uninstall that freaking update and hopefully I am not going into a BSOD loop again. All for the sake of satisfying @cadaveca curiosity


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 24, 2018)

@xkm1948 The update applied by the OS overwrites the EFI microcode update on the CPU. No conflict can occur.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 24, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> @xkm1948 The update applied by the OS overwrites the EFI microcode update on the CPU. No conflict can occur.



No. Check my post before. Even after the update my UEFL microcode remains the 2A version


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 24, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Nehalem and chips on lga1366 seem hit the worst, which makes sense I suppose.


Can anyone confirm this?


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 24, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> No. Check my post before. Even after the update my UEFL microcode remains the 2A version


What he is saying is that the OS microcode supercedes the one from the BIOS when the OS is active. It shouldn't matter what's in the BIOS... yet seemingly in some situations it does? No idea. This is a very interesting situation.


----------



## MrGenius (Sep 24, 2018)

Essentially, yes. However...


biffzinker said:


> The update applied by the OS overwrites the EFI microcode update on the CPU.


No. It does not.

1. If the microcode in the BIOS/UEFI has been updated for the Spectre vulnerability the microcode update in the OS does not apply. The purpose of the OS microcode update is to widely distribute the mitigation for Spectre. As BIOS updates to deal with it are not being widely distributed. Too many CPUs, too many motherboards. That's the "problem" it's intended to solve. So you don't need a BIOS update now. You just need this Windows update(in theory anyway).

2. The OS, once booted, loads the microcode from the file in System32(if necessary for Spectre mitigation). Overriding(overwrite is bad terminology) the microcode loaded by the motherboard BIOS/UEFI. The microcode is not permanently  stored/written on the CPU. It disappears when the CPU is powered off.


----------



## kastriot (Sep 24, 2018)

You should publish book based on this thread..


----------



## Candor (Sep 26, 2018)

So I heard that the microcode updates will be integrated within the Windows 10 October Update, creating another shitstorm for broadwell-e users.

This means there will be no KB update to remove or block.

So I suppose replacing the dll with an earlier version will be the only fix then?


----------



## hat (Sep 26, 2018)

Candor said:


> So I heard that the microcode updates will be integrated within the Windows 10 October Update, creating another shitstorm for broadwell-e users.
> 
> This means there will be no KB update to remove or block.
> 
> So I suppose replacing the dll with an earlier version will be the only fix then?



Sounds about right... unless it's "fixed" better in the October update.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 26, 2018)

I am blocking all new Windows 10 updates now. Seriously considering going Linux main now


----------



## Gripen90 (Sep 26, 2018)

Candor said:


> So I heard that the microcode updates will be integrated within the Windows 10 October Update, creating another shitstorm for broadwell-e users.
> 
> This means there will be no KB update to remove or block.
> 
> So I suppose replacing the dll with an earlier version will be the only fix then?



If that happens I'll get hold on a Core i7 5960X instead and sell my Core i7 6900K.


----------



## Candor (Sep 27, 2018)

Some people have installed Windows 10 (1809) Build 17763.1 - considered to be RTM.

Microcode updates integrated within the Windows 10 October Update seems confirmed at this stage.

Using InSpectre tool to disable spectre and meltdown protections does not fix the issue.

Replacing "mcupdate_genuineintel.dll" with version prior to Sept 2018 does work.


----------



## adamwzl (Sep 28, 2018)

Update to my post earlier, just uninstalling the KB update does not fix the crashing. Just lost over 400 SR in Overwatch troubleshooting this problem. Had to revert back to a August snapshot for my machine to get rid of all the problems. Microsoft is seriously getting lazy with it's testing.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Oct 1, 2018)

This update has also bugged out Microsoft Security Center -- It keeps telling me that my kaspersky firewall is disabled when it clearly is not.


----------



## Sawyer86 (Oct 2, 2018)

Hi everyone, with windows 1803 version i have solved this overlock issue by uninstalling the update kz100347 and hidding this one from windows update using Wrapper Script.
Today windows updated to 1809 october and the overclock issue is back.
I have i7 6900k 4.4ghz (100x44) asus x99 deluxe II. Now im back to 100x37@3700mhz...
In this case i cannot uninstall kz100347. So i don't know how i can return to my overclock.
Can you please help me? Tnx


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 3, 2018)

Sawyer86 said:


> Hi everyone, with windows 1803 version i have solved this overlock issue by uninstalling the update kz100347 and hidding this one from windows update using Wrapper Script.
> Today windows updated to 1809 october and the overclock issue is back.
> I have i7 6900k 4.4ghz (100x44) asus x99 deluxe II. Now im back to 100x37@3700mhz...
> In this case i cannot uninstall kz100347. So i don't know how i can return to my overclock.
> Can you please help me? Tnx


Read the thread. It's only 9 pages. The answer's in there. Hell...the answer's 3 posts above yours actually. The dll you need is towards the beginning. Page 2 or 3 IIRC...

Edit: Yep. Page 2. This post here.


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 3, 2018)

I am blocking Windows 10 updates so someone brave need to try the new 1809 update and report the results for all of us.


----------



## hat (Oct 3, 2018)

Upon updating to 1809*







*Not to be taken seriously. I haven't even received 1809 yet.


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 3, 2018)

My Windows 10 rig is down ATM. Mobo died(or rather got killed by me ) the day before I was going to upgrade to 1809. I should have it up and running again in about a week.


----------



## Gripen90 (Oct 3, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Read the thread. It's only 9 pages. The answer's in there. Hell...the answer's 3 posts above yours actually. The dll you need is towards the beginning. Page 2 or 3 IIRC...
> 
> Edit: Yep. Page 2. This post here.



The new 1809 update borks it  
I tried it with the new build and replacing the dll just screws up the whole boot with no boot at all. I had to replace it with the original 1809 update again to get windows started again.


----------



## Sawyer86 (Oct 3, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Read the thread. It's only 9 pages. The answer's in there. Hell...the answer's 3 posts above yours actually. The dll you need is towards the beginning. Page 2 or 3 IIRC...
> 
> Edit: Yep. Page 2. This post here.



Hi, i already read, but i was not sure that it would work correctly on 1809 version.
What this solution do exactely? I stay with 1809 (and all the future update) ?
Or with this old dll i return to 1803?
I'm disconcerted that microsoft doesn't solve in official way.
tnx


----------



## Candor (Oct 3, 2018)

It now seems that replacing the dll from version 1803 does not work on the released 1809 Windows 10 update.

Doing so will break your Windows install. Don't do it.


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 3, 2018)

Gripen90 said:


> The new 1809 update borks it
> I tried it with the new build and replacing the dll just screws up the whole boot with no boot at all. I had to replace it with the original 1809 update again to get windows started again.




Good to know. So all X99 with Broadwell-E users should block 1809 until Microsoft or Intel get their shit straightened up


----------



## cadaveca (Oct 3, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> Good to know. So all X99 with Broadwell-E users should block 1809 until Microsoft or Intel get their shit straightened up



Nope, just those with crap BIOSes. updated last night, still clocking fine.


----------



## Gripen90 (Oct 3, 2018)

cadaveca said:


> Nope, just those with crap BIOSes. updated last night, still clocking fine.



How do you differentiate between boards with crap BIOS and those not? I've seen EVGA, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI X99 users with latest and even beta BIOS' where the issue persists.


----------



## cadaveca (Oct 3, 2018)

Gripen90 said:


> How do you differentiate between boards with crap BIOS and those not? I've seen EVGA, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI X99 users with latest and even beta BIOS' where the issue persists.


I know. Sad state of affairs, this one. One user posted a page or two back that using high performance power plan restored his OC, and I always run that power plan, so... only hope for those with issues is to try that and see if it works. If it doesn't... then it seems the board is the culprit. Something in the new microcode isn't interfacing with the BIOS clock controls it seems.


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 3, 2018)

Well...I'm a bit surprised at this turn of events. BUT...all hope is not lost...just yet. As it seems as though I may have just pulled another proverbial rabbit out of my hat. Which might just do the trick. What's that you ask? Just delete the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. Sounds crazy right? How would that possibly work? Because, as I previously mentioned, there's a useable CPU microcode that's also in the motherboard BIOS. So if there's no file for Windows to override it with, it(the CPU) will just use that microcode instead.

Anyhow. I just tried it with Windows 7 and it worked just fine. Booted right up without the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll no problem. Pic for proof provided. Notice that mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll is not shown just below mcupdate_AuthenticAMD.dll as it normally would be. That's no trickery either. It's not there because it's no longer in the system(System32 folder or elsewhere).


----------



## John Naylor (Oct 3, 2018)

Is this problem related to the KB via WU only ?

Does Intel / MoBo Vendor offer the same fix thru their web site ... and, if so, does smme problem result ?


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 4, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Well...I'm a bit surprised at this turn of events. BUT...all hope is not lost...just yet. As it seems as though I may have just pulled another proverbial rabbit out of my hat. Which might just do the trick. What's that you ask? Just delete the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. Sounds crazy right? How would that possibly work? Because, as I previously mentioned, there's a useable CPU microcode that's also in the motherboard BIOS. So if there's no file for Windows to override it with, it(the CPU) will just use that microcode instead.
> 
> Anyhow. I just tried it with Windows 7 and it worked just fine. Booted right up without the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll no problem. Pic for proof provided. Notice that mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll is not shown just below mcupdate_AuthenticAMD.dll as it normally would be. That's no trickery either. It's not there because it's no longer in the system(System32 folder or elsewhere).
> View attachment 107989




Now we need a brave soul to try this on 1809


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

Has anyone tried overriding the MC the proper way, like with this VMWare driver?

https://labs.vmware.com/flings/vmware-cpu-microcode-update-driver#summary

I can cook up a package if someone can name an unaffected microcode revision.

EDIT:  Here one is, if someone is up to trusting a random internet frog.  Extract somewhere you can keep it permanently, and run install.bat as administrator.  DO THIS ONLY ON A BW-E NON-XEON BASED SYSTEM, OR YOU MAY HAVE A VERY TOUGH BSOD TO GET OUT OF.

Heck, you may anways.  Needless to say, very experimental.


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 4, 2018)

I wasn't even aware of that idea. What I've been trying to figure out is how to mod a .dll file. I figured out how to extract the contents with 7-zip. But I have no idea what needs done with them. I'm hoping it's something easy like swapping out some bits and pieces from an older .dll. There's a text file in there that says what OS version it's for. Maybe you can just change that info to say it's for 1809. Then figure out how to "unextract" it, or compile it, or compress it, or whatever it...I'm not a software guy...back into a .dll. I tried modding it without extracting the guts and that's a no go. So basically the getting it back to a .dll is all that's got me stumped really. If I can just figure that much out I can start doing some kind of modding to it.


xkm1948 said:


> Now we need a brave soul to try this on 1809


I'm getting ready to. I'm too curious to wait for my new motherboard. I'm just gonna do a quick clean install on one of my backup drives. Should have it done in a couple hours.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> I wasn't even aware of that idea. What I've been trying to figure out is how to mod a .dll file. I figured out how to extract the contents with 7-zip. But I have no idea what needs done with them. I'm hoping it's something easy like swapping out some bits and pieces from an older .dll. There's a text file in there that says what OS version it's for. Maybe you can just change that info to say it's for 1809. Then figure out how to "unextract" it, or compile it, or compress it, or whatever it...I'm not a software guy...back into a .dll. I tried modding it without extracting the guts and that's a no go. So basically the getting it back to a .dll is all that's got me stumped really. If I can just figure that much out I can start doing some kind of modding to it.
> I'm getting ready to. I'm too curious to wait for my new motherboard. I'm just gonna do a quick clean install on one of my backup drives. Should have it done in a couple hours.



Try my package.  What is the worst a frog can do to your computer? 

EDIT:  Actually, it could be install wrecking.  So despite my eagerness, best be cautious.  I'm especially unsure how it will function if Windows looks for a new spectre protection function that is not there.


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 4, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Has anyone tried overriding the MC the proper way, like with this VMWare driver?
> 
> https://labs.vmware.com/flings/vmware-cpu-microcode-update-driver#summary
> 
> ...


Hey Frog lol, I liked that comment, forgive me but im tired, had a long week and don't feel like reading pages of pages. What is this thing you concocted?


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

fullinfusion said:


> Hey Frog lol, I liked that comment, forgive me but im tired, had a long week and don't feel like reading pages of pages. What is this thing you concocted?



Might fix ocing issues on BWe x99 boards w/ latest W10 patches (It loads an older broadwell-e microcode firmware after boot, every boot).  If you have issues, it's worth a try, but it has the potential to bsod loop, so best be prepared for a reinstall or system-restore in that event.


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 4, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Might fix ocing issues on BWe x99 boards w/ latest W10 patches (It loads an older broadwell-e microcode firmware after boot, every boot).  If you have issues, it's worth a try, but it has the potential to bsod loop, so best be prepared for a reinstall or system-restore in that event.


Done and done, I checked the link and checked it out.. Will let you know if shat happens.. Thanks R-T-B


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 4, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Try my package.  What is the worst a frog can do to your computer?
> 
> EDIT:  Actually, it could be install wrecking.  So despite my eagerness, best be cautious.  I'm especially unsure how it will function if Windows looks for a new spectre protection function that is not there.


Well it can't be any worse than it already is. Holy crap what a shitfest nightmare!! Did the clean install of 1809...and WOW...WHAT A POS!!! BSOD after BSOD, lockup after lockup.  Goddamn thing doesn't barely work at all on my system. I thought maybe it's that fricken .dll. Got that deleted, which works so far as I can tell. By which I mean it booted without it. But it didn't make any difference as far as the massive instability. So no, it ain't that. Then I spent the last half hour just trying to get a proof screenshot with the snipping tool. Just kept freezing up on me to the point that I had to hit the reset button. Finally gave up and grabbed my phone for a pic.


----------



## hat (Oct 4, 2018)

And this is what they're releasing to the masses?  1809 crashes/BSOD/other issues seem far too common.


----------



## fullinfusion (Oct 4, 2018)

hat said:


> And this is what they're releasing to the masses?  1809 crashes/BSOD/other issues seem far too common.


Not here, it actually went fine and fast, boot time is way faster but I have a question for @R-T-B I see 1809 snuck in the specter patch, any way to remove it?


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

fullinfusion said:


> Not here, it actually went fine and fast, boot time is way faster but I have a question for @R-T-B I see 1809 snuck in the specter patch, any way to remove it?



I would just opt out via a tool like InSpectre.  Otherwise, you'd have to revert to very old microcode.  It's possible using my tool above, with a diferent microcode dat, but I personally don't see it as recomendable, so won't do it (at least not as a public release for free at any rate).

...Or maybe I will.  Dunno.  Ask me later.  No time right now, is the honest truth.  Just finished my 1809 deployment which went smooth but it's late here.


----------



## quimsy (Oct 4, 2018)

ok am running 1809 on an i7-6800K, the baked-in microcode breaks my overclock. Swapping out the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll for an older pre KB4100347 version fixes the overclock on reboot. SFC /verifyonly will now show the replaced mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll file as corrupt but is not repaired in verify mode. Be prepared to replace the file again if a full sfc /scannow is run. As mentioned u must take ownership of the file first before editing. I renamed the 1809 version to .old in case needed. 
Until a permanent solution is found I'd recommend checking ur OC's after every Windows Update.


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 4, 2018)

@MrGenius i have a friend doing some microcode modified BIOS for me. Only for ASUS Motherboards though. @R-T-B examined one and it seems fine by him. If you are interested let me know if you dare to give this a try. I just need your ASUS X99 model for my friend to mod the BIOS


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

quimsy said:


> ok am running 1809 on an i7-6800K, the baked-in microcode breaks my overclock. Swapping out the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll for an older pre KB4100347 version fixes the overclock on reboot. SFC /verifyonly will now show the replaced mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll file as corrupt but is not repaired in verify mode. Be prepared to replace the file again if a full sfc /scannow is run. As mentioned u must take ownership of the file first before editing. I renamed the 1809 version to .old in case needed.
> Until a permanent solution is found I'd recommend checking ur OC's after every Windows Update.



I thought that bsod'd?

Guess not.  Still, my way is technically the right way to do things (and will work with sfc) if anyone is willing to risk a test...


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 4, 2018)

Ok. So here's a little update on my sitiation. 1809 is suddenly working almost perfectly for me today(only froze up once so far). So I decided to do some more experimenting. I ran sfc /scannow so the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll got reinstalled. Then I checked with InSpectre to see if it was working as it should. It indicated "System is Spectre protected: *YES*". It says "*NO!*" without the updated .dll. As you'll soon see. Then I wanted to confirm for myself whether or not replacing the .dll with the one from 4-11-18 actually does work. Due to the conflicting reports. Some are saying it does work, others are saying it doesn't. Come to find out *it does work*...on my system anyway. I'm currently running on my backup Z77 based system(Z77A-GD65 Gaming + i5 3570K). Since I just killed my Z77 MPower(but I've got a new one on the way).

Anyway. To summarize, my options as far as running without the Spectre microcode update(in the form of the latest mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll) on Windows 10 Version 1809, are to either delete the .dll or replace it with the one from 4-11-18. Either way appears to work just fine...for me at least.

One more pic for proof. Notice InSpectre says "System is Spectre protected: *NO!*" and the "Enable Spectre Protection" button is greyed out(not useable). That's because I've replaced the .dll with the older, non-Spectre microcode updated, version. It's dated as having been modified today(I guess because that's when I saved it to the USB drive I used to install it). But in the Properties > Details window you can clearly see it's for version 17134.1(not 17763.1).


----------



## Gripen90 (Oct 4, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Ok. So here's a little update on my sitiation. 1809 is suddenly working almost perfectly for me today(only froze up once so far). So I decided to do some more experimenting. I ran sfc /scannow so the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll got reinstalled. Then I checked with InSpectre to see if it was working as it should. It indicated "System is Spectre protected: *YES*". It says "*NO!*" without the updated .dll. As you'll soon see. Then I wanted to confirm for myself whether or not replacing the .dll with the one from 4-11-18 actually does work. Due to the conflicting reports. Some are saying it does work, other are saying it doesn't. Come to find out *it does work*...on my system anyway. I'm currently running on my backup Z77 based system(Z77A-GD65 Gaming + i5 3570K). Since I just killed my Z77 MPower(but I've got a new one on the way).
> 
> Anyway. To summarize, my options as far as running without the Spectre microcode update(in the form of the latest mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll) are to either delete the .dll or replace it with the one from 4-11-18. Either way appears to work just fine...for me at least.
> 
> ...



Are you sure the same will apply to X99 platforms with Broadwell-E CPUs, since they are the configurations to be mostly affected by the KB4100347 update and the Windows 10 1809 October build.


----------



## Kissamies (Oct 4, 2018)

Installed the October update yesterday and still everything is like always.






People have said that they have problems with BW-E *AND* HW-E processors, but I have no problems.


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 4, 2018)

Gripen90 said:


> Are you sure the same will apply to X99 platforms with Broadwell-E CPUs, since they are the configurations to be mostly affected by the KB4100347 update and the Windows 10 1809 October build.


No. I'm not sure at all about that. But there's also another method to try(R-T-B's package) for those CPUs.


----------



## quimsy (Oct 4, 2018)

The most recent BIOS for my Asus X-99 is dead stable & protects against Spectre/Meltdown without slowdown.
So mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll surplus to requirements on machines with updated BIOSs, worse it slows ur machine down.
I get that most windows users will have outdated BIOSs & _'need'_ the microcode updates but for punters that don't an option to override from MS would of saved hours of headache.


----------



## Gripen90 (Oct 4, 2018)

*I can CONFIRM that the latest BIOS update for my MSI X99S SLI KRAIT Edition board the overclocking with KB4100347 and Windows 10 Build 1809 WORKS !*. I wrote to MSI support and they confirm that for their X99 platforms all  BIOS's dated back to June 2018 are equipped with the latest Intel microcode update


----------



## dorsetknob (Oct 4, 2018)

*Day two – and Windows 10 October 2018 Update trips over Intel audio*
link
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/04/microsoft_windows_10_1809_audio/

and the Beta testing goes on


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> *Day two – and Windows 10 October 2018 Update trips over Intel audio*
> link
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/04/microsoft_windows_10_1809_audio/
> 
> and the Beta testing goes on



Unrelated to the OCing woes my friend.


----------



## dorsetknob (Oct 4, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Unrelated to the OCing woes my friend.



Related to the latest update tho............ and we know how these updates bork some peoples system's


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 4, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> Related to the latest update tho............ and we know how these updates bork some peoples system's



We have the update news thread for that.  Just trying to keep the topic focused.


----------



## catch36 (Oct 4, 2018)

There is a incompatibility with the Itel microcode used in Windows 10 and the microcode in the bios if it has not been updated. This can be fixed by updating the the latest Intel uCode into the bios. You do not have to modify anything at the Windows OS level like modifying the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll.  

A user at the Win-Raid forums (Sylar) has modified the latest bioses for the Asus Rampage V Extreme and Ed. 10 x99 motherboard with the latest Intel microcode. 2E for Broadwell-e and 3D for Haswell-e. I have used his modified 1902 bios with a i7-6950 with no problems and does not break my overclock. There are also instruction by a user at the Asus Rog forums on how to modified a x99 bios to include the the lastest Ucode using a toll called UBU. 

Win-Raid Forum link:
https://www.win-raid.com/t1893f44-OFFER-ASUS-Rampage-V-Extreme-modded-BIOSes.html

Asus Rog Forum Link: 
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ions-for-updating-the-BIOS-file-CPU-microcode


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 5, 2018)

catch36 said:


> There is a incompatibility with the Itel microcode used in Windows 10 and the microcode in the bios if it has not been updated. This can be fixed by updating the the latest Intel uCode into the bios. You do not have to modify anything at the Windows OS level like modifying the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll.
> 
> A user at the Win-Raid forums (Sylar) has modified the latest bioses for the Asus Rampage V Extreme and Ed. 10 x99 motherboard with the latest Intel microcode. 2E for Broadwell-e and 3D for Haswell-e. I have used his modified 1902 bios with a i7-6950 with no problems and does not break my overclock. There are also instruction by a user at the Asus Rog forums on how to modified a x99 bios to include the the lastest Ucode using a toll called UBU.
> 
> ...



That is the approach I would use, but many are hesitant to mod a bios.  Hence my attempts to find a software solution that does not break sfc /scannow.


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 5, 2018)

It's a matter of what's easier to do...for me. I have no idea how to mod a motherboard BIOS. If I did...I would. But if learning how is anywhere near as complicated/difficult as modding a graphics card BIOS...I don't want no part of it. I mean I'd love it if someone could teach me all I needed to know about it. But when it comes down to teaching myself...as it usually does with these types of things...forget about it. I don't see the time and effort involved being worth the potential benefits. How many times have I, personally, ever had any real need for a modded motherboard BIOS? Answer = 0 times to date. This is the only time I've even had to find a workaround. And I've been messing around with computers pretty much my entire life. More or less. Started at age 9, and I'll be 43 in about a week.


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 5, 2018)

I am blocking the update for now. Work is too valuable to have any down time.


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 5, 2018)

It's actually easy to do a microcode update with UBU Tool, I've done it a few times in past for the Xeon 1240 V2, don't remember the brand for the board. As rock? 

https://www.win-raid.com/t154f16-Tool-Guide-News-quot-UEFI-BIOS-Updater-quot-UBU.html


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 5, 2018)

Nope! I clicked the link and glanced over the first post. Not having it. Gave me an instant brainache. NOT AT ALL what I call easy. None of that shit over on win-raid is IMO.


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 5, 2018)

I'm fairly certain you could handle just updating the microcode yourself. I was a bit unsure of it myself but managed from starting to finish. The batch file does walk you through the process.

Helps to have a flasher on hand just in case.


----------



## Gripen90 (Oct 5, 2018)

It really sucks that Asus don't update their BIOS to the X99 platform 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





... or EVGA for that matter. 

MSI wrote to me that the new Intel Microcode was implemented into all X99 BIOS versions from June 2018, so users shouldn't experience any issues.


I checked some Gigabyte board and it is not all boards that have a new Intel microcode BIOS update available.
Heres a handfull of Gigabyte boards that I checked have the latest Intel microcode BIOS update to download.
GA-X99P-SLI
GA-X99-SOC Champion
GA-X99-UD3
GA-X99M-Gaming 5
GA-X99-Designare EX
GA-X99-Ultra Gaming
GA-X99-UD4P
GA-X99-SLI
GA-X99-Phoenix SLI
GA-X99-UD5 WIFI

As for ASRock all X99 boards should have updated Intel microcodes ready for download. These boards I have checked have new BIOS microcode updates.
X99 Extreme3
X99 Extreme4
X99 Extreme6
X99 WS
X99 OC Formula/3.1
X99 Taichi
Fatal1ty X99 Professional/3.1
X99 Extreme11
Fatal1ty X99M Killer
Fatal1ty X99X Killer


----------



## rkt (Oct 5, 2018)

I have the latest bios 3.80 (2018-04-10 Update Haswell-E CPU Microcode to revision 3C and Broadwell-E CPU Microcode to revision 0B00002A.)  on my Asrock x99 extreme4, but the update KB4100347 destroys my overclock on I7 6850k. Still waiting fo October update...


----------



## Gripen90 (Oct 5, 2018)

rkt said:


> I have the latest bios 3.80 (2018-04-10 Update Haswell-E CPU Microcode to revision 3C and Broadwell-E CPU Microcode to revision 0B00002A.)  on my Asrock x99 extreme4, but the update KB4100347 destroys my overclock on I7 6850k. Still waiting fo October update...


Hmm that sucks though - it should have been resolved in that update.


----------



## Sawyer86 (Oct 5, 2018)

Waiting for a correction from Asus, or Intel, or Microsoft, i solved by using a different oc :
I was 100x44 multiplier and this "bug" puts me in 100x37.
So i set in the bios 125x35 and i run at 4375 without problems.
It seems a microcode bug about multiplier.
bye


----------



## xkm1948 (Oct 5, 2018)

Sawyer86 said:


> Waiting for a correction from Asus, or Intel, or Microsoft, i solved by using a different oc :
> I was 100x44 multiplier and this "bug" puts me in 100x37.
> So i set in the bios 125x35 and i run at 4375 without problems.
> It seems a microcode bug about multiplier.
> bye




Good work around for people confident in BCLK overclocking


----------



## erpguy53 (Oct 12, 2018)

rkt said:


> I have the latest bios 3.80 (2018-04-10 Update Haswell-E CPU Microcode to revision 3C and Broadwell-E CPU Microcode to revision 0B00002A.)  on my Asrock x99 extreme4, but the update KB4100347 destroys my overclock on I7 6850k. Still waiting fo October update...



which version of KB4100347?  there were at least 3 revisions of this update; the V3 revision of KB4100347 was released in September 2018.

and KB4100347 is for the v1803 edition of Win10 only


----------



## rkt (Oct 12, 2018)

erpguy53 said:


> which version of KB4100347?  there were at least 3 revisions of this update; the V3 revision of KB4100347 was released in September 2018.
> 
> and KB4100347 is for the v1803 edition of Win10 only



This issue appeared in the beginning of September, I suspected a windows update - searching I found this forum and blocking KB4100347 saves my overclock. My Win 10 pro is v1803. Don’t know what will happen after October update.


----------



## MrGenius (Oct 13, 2018)

travissimons said:


> In my opinion just updating the operating system should not be able to affect your overclocked BIOS settings, but if your overclock was not 100% stable you probably have Data file corruption, that's why I suggested a reinstall of the graphics drivers.  You possibly could have file corruption in the downloaded update and if you do you could try doing a restore back before the update to get rid of it. Hope it helps.


What? No. That's definitely not it. It's not a mystery what's really going on here BTW. We've got it all figured out. So why don't you try reading the thread next time...before posting random nonsense? Thanks!


----------



## Mussels (Oct 14, 2018)

sorry trav, but you're made a very strange claim about something we clearly know the reasons for.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 14, 2018)

Mussels said:


> sorry trav, but you're made a very strange claim about something we clearly know the reasons for.



and now has a banner advertisement in his sig...  is that even allowed?


----------



## Mussels (Oct 14, 2018)

he's gone - banners and weblinks were pure advertising


----------



## GoldenX (Oct 14, 2018)

So, we can blame Intel for their security flaws, the MoBo maker for dropping support even for something so crucial, and Microsoft for their stupid automatic delivery of updates.
I think it's time to go ARM and never look back.


----------



## CybrFace (Oct 17, 2018)

Perfectly put.....


----------



## Frick (Oct 17, 2018)

GoldenX said:


> So, we can blame Intel for their security flaws, the MoBo maker for dropping support even for something so crucial, and Microsoft for their stupid automatic delivery of updates.
> I think it's time to go ARM and never look back.



I wish Intel had greater success with their mobile x86 stuff, because then we could have had run proper Linux stuff and Wine on phones and tablets.


----------



## rkt (Dec 18, 2018)

Today received October update - the overclock is broken. Planning to switch to Ryzen


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 18, 2018)

there's probably security patches that slow down your cpu, but it's just a wild guess...

and im also reading ryzen has even more security flaws then intel


----------



## dorsetknob (Dec 18, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> and im also reading ryzen has even more security flaws then intel


Sources Please or People are going to  call you out as a trash poster ( Oops FUD)


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 18, 2018)

sorry, here you go










or read here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-flaws-ryzenfall-masterkey-fallout-chimera,36656.html


----------



## jboydgolfer (Dec 18, 2018)

Is this platform specific?   My overclock is fine.  I keep up-to-date. I did todays security update a couple hours ago 

8600k


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 18, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Is this platform specific?   My overclock is fine.  I keep up-to-date. I did todays security update a couple hours ago
> 
> 8600k



Not sure if it's worse to brag how good windows you got, or to not have anything to nag about


----------



## jboydgolfer (Dec 18, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> Not sure if it's worse to brag how good windows you got, or to not have anything to nag about



I dont know what you mean

Im asking if its platform specific. I have 5 operating intel pc's, 4 of which are unaffected, & 1 that cannot OC,so im curious if its a specific socket


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 18, 2018)

well, you can do cpu-z validation on them and click the given link...it usually states there if they are vulnerable and/or patched

Or skip all that and update all bioses to newest, that's hardware level protection, microsoft probably just now issued software level protection.


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 18, 2018)

jboydgolfer said:


> Is this platform specific?   My overclock is fine.  I keep up-to-date. I did todays security update a couple hours ago
> 
> 8600k



If I recall it affects only some Broadwell-E chips.  This specific OC issue I mean.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Dec 18, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> If I recall it affects only some Broadwell-E chips.  This specific OC issue I mean.


That's a significant number of users out there who have no real need to upgrade. This kind of thing is exactly why I actively block Windows update.


----------



## Gorstak (Dec 18, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> That's a significant number of users out there who have no real need to upgrade. This kind of thing is exactly why I actively block Windows update.



I would have agreed some time ago, but lately I'm voting for up to date machines. Besides, microsoft likes to deny service to users of their older software. On 10 RTM you can't download kodi from store, need at least 1703 I think.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Dec 18, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> On 10 RTM you can't download kodi from store


Who cares about Microsoft's store? It's a sad, me-too attempt at Apple and Google platforms. Download Kodi the normal way, directly from the web site..


----------



## rkt (Dec 18, 2018)

I was blocking this evil update, but it was not effective.


----------



## unclewebb (Dec 18, 2018)

@rkt - What CPU do you have?  How were you blocking this evil update?  How about a CPU-Z screenshot that shows your broken overclock?

Edit - I had a look through your previous posts.  I assume you are talking about your X99 - 6850K. 
I am using the Windows Update Mini Tool Wrapper Script and have not had any MS trash updates come my way.

https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/wumt_wrapper_script.html


----------



## rkt (Dec 18, 2018)

Please read the thread from the beginning


----------



## jboydgolfer (Dec 18, 2018)

rkt said:


> Please read the thread from the beginning



12 pages is a long read. Answers are easier


----------



## rkt (Dec 18, 2018)

Summary: the ms update KB4100347 was blocking an overclock through bios on i7 6850k, but this problem was was solved temporarily by blocking this update, but finally I suppose it was it was installed


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 18, 2018)

What are you going to do? Stay on version 1803 or earlier...forever?


----------



## rkt (Dec 18, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> What are you going to do? Stay on version 1803 or earlier...forever?


Planning to switch to Ryzen


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 18, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> What are you going to do? Stay on version 1803 or earlier...forever?



Someone could try that package I made a million pages ago, never got feedback...

Ah, here it is:

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...crosoft-and-intel.247595/page-10#post-3915860



R-T-B said:


> Has anyone tried overriding the MC the proper way, like with this VMWare driver?
> 
> https://labs.vmware.com/flings/vmware-cpu-microcode-update-driver#summary
> 
> ...


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 18, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Someone could try that package I made a million pages ago, never got feedback...
> 
> Ah, here it is:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...crosoft-and-intel.247595/page-10#post-3915860


I'm still using my method of manually replacing the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll with one from before the September KB4100347 update.

Here's that one more time too.


			
				MrGenius said:
			
		

> Well, not only have I done it before and had it work(replaced imageres.dll in System32 and SysWOW64 with a hacked version to remove the blue and yellow UAC shield icons from shortcuts), but I just did it again, and it worked again!!! So much for that theory!!! You are half-right though. If you run sfc /scannow the files will be detected as corrupt and replaced. The process is not automatic however.
> 
> So yes, as stated...PROBLEM SOLVED. All you need to do is replace mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll in System32 with an earlier version of the file. The one installed by this update is dated 9/4/18. Which I replaced with the same file dated 4/11/18. Not as easy as it sounds. But totally doable.
> First I made sure Spectre protection was disabled. Then copied mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll from an earlier backup/clone of Windows 10 version 1803. Then booted WinPE with Active@ Boot Disk from a USB drive with a copy of the older version of mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. And used that copy to replace the updated version. Easy fricken peasy, lemon fricken squeezy.
> ...



Side note: You can also just delete the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll from System 32. It doesn't need to be there. The system will run just fine with the BIOS microcode. Albeit without Spectre protections(if the microcode in the BIOS hasn't been updated with said protections).


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 19, 2018)

Gorstak said:


> sorry, here you go
> 
> 
> 
> ...



did you watch any other videos on this as most of these were either proven to hard to implement (extensive knowledge of the hardware and alot of time for actual access to that hardware) or just down right BS claims by CTS labs (Who on their own web-page stated they were in it for monetary gain) in order to gain access to cheap AMD shares by dirtying their name in public


----------



## Freeze87 (Dec 20, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Side note: You can also just delete the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll from System 32. It doesn't need to be there. The system will run just fine with the BIOS microcode. Albeit without Spectre protections(if the microcode in the BIOS hasn't been updated with said protections).



Deleted it. Can confirm: overclocking works again. 

System:
x99 gaming
i7 6800k @ 4.0ghz again (undervolted) 

Thank you very much


----------



## rkt (Dec 20, 2018)

Overclocked my i7 6850k to 4.4 ghz by changing bclk - it seems stable. 
Calmed down for a moment...


----------



## Gasaraki (Dec 20, 2018)

xkm1948 said:


> KB4100347
> 
> *Summary*
> 
> ...



Which doesn't affect overclocking which is done in the BIOS settings. Windows can't stop you overclocking in your BIOS.


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 20, 2018)

Gasaraki said:


> Which doesn't affect overclocking which is done in the BIOS settings. Windows can't stop you overclocking in your BIOS.


You can hypothesize all you want. It doesn't make you right. Especially when real world evidence suggests otherwise.

Look. The scenario is this. The motherboard BIOS has a microcode for the CPU. Windows also has a microcode for the CPU in System 32. Windows will not use the microcode in the motherboard BIOS unless that's all there is for it to use. Windows does this because the microcode it has in System 32 is updated with Spectre protection(via the September KB4100437 update), or for whatever other reason it deems the microcode in System 32 to be superior to(or even just as good as) the microcode in the motherboard BIOS. Which is a "good" thing. Except when it breaks CPU overclocking and/or causes significant performance loss. Then it's not such a "good" thing.

None of this is even debatable. It just is what it is. And that's that.


----------



## Darmok N Jalad (Dec 24, 2018)

Athlonite said:


> did you watch any other videos on this as most of these were either proven to hard to implement (extensive knowledge of the hardware and alot of time for actual access to that hardware) or just down right BS claims by CTS labs (Who on their own web-page stated they were in it for monetary gain) in order to gain access to cheap AMD shares by dirtying their name in public


Hers my favorite page on the reputable CTS-labs website:
http://cts-labs.com/past-publications
Clearly, this security company is hard at work finding hardware/software flaws for our protection! Can’t wait for them to publish their findings on the AMD issues they went public with over 9 months ago.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Dec 26, 2018)

Darmok N Jalad said:


> Hers my favorite page on the reputable CTS-labs website:
> http://cts-labs.com/past-publications
> Clearly, this security company is hard at work finding hardware/software flaws for our protection! Can’t wait for them to publish their findings on the AMD issues they went public with over 9 months ago.


Not only is this completely off-topic, but it is needless as this has been discussed, at serious length, in other areas of the forum.


----------



## kime01 (May 22, 2019)

thank you all for everything you discussed here about this annoying problem.
I always have been just a reader of this thread, now I should intervene, registering me, only to add an info could be useful for many here.

AFTER updating yesterday to *Windows 10 1903, *changing (or deleting) mcupdate_genuineintel.dll won't work anymore (BSOD if the new file is not  in system32 folder). Until 1809 that solution worked great.

SOLUTION: run Inspectre (as administrator) and click on "disable Spectre Protection": OCing returns to work perfectly (i also deleted the file but I think it could be useless). Tested on X99 6850K processor and ASUS X99 STRIX Gaming Mobo (4.3GHz OC'ed)


----------



## MrGenius (May 23, 2019)

kime01 said:


> AFTER updating yesterday to *Windows 10 1903, *changing (or deleting) mcupdate_genuineintel.dll won't work anymore (BSOD if the new file is not  in system32 folder). Until 1809 that solution worked great.


I just did a clean install of 1903 and deleted the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. No issues here.






I haven't tried replacing it with the 1803 version yet. I'll post results when I do.

BTW...you're welcome.


----------



## Fangio1951 (May 23, 2019)

hi MrGenius,

Quick question - did you delete the file AFTER you did the 1903 install ??

regards


----------



## Eskimonster (May 23, 2019)

Im so glad my system aint overclocked atm, this is just another thing that makes me wanna go AMD:


----------



## Space Lynx (May 23, 2019)

some people have 0 issues overclocking with latest updates and microcodes.  /shrug


----------



## MrGenius (May 23, 2019)

Fangio1951 said:


> hi MrGenius,
> 
> Quick question - did you delete the file AFTER you did the 1903 install ??
> 
> regards


R U serious?

Better question would be...how could I possibly have deleted it before actually installing it? I did mention "clean install". And, even if I updated/upgraded to it, it would still be replaced in the process(even if I deleted it prior).


----------



## Eskimonster (May 23, 2019)

lynx29 said:


> some people have 0 issues overclocking with latest updates and microcodes.  /shrug


i use


I-7 3770k


----------



## kime01 (May 23, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> I just did a clean install of 1903 and deleted the mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. No issues here.
> 
> View attachment 123515
> 
> ...


In my personal case I tried both:
- replacing with old file (4/11/2018 version, page 2 of this thread) -> BSOD (fixable deleting the old and renaming the .bak but no OC working);
- deleting the new file  -> Windows 10 boots but without OC (standards 3.8 frequencies).

The curious thing this is one of the few places on www where you can read news and info on this issue, I really love you guys!


----------



## unclewebb (May 23, 2019)

Has anyone with a 6800K tried using Intel XTU or ThrottleStop to get their overclock back after they boot up?  ThrottleStop does not fully support Turbo Boost 3.0 but it might be good enough to get your overclock back.  Post some pics so I can have a look.



Eskimonster said:


> i use I-7 3770k


This is only a problem for CPUs running on the X99 chipset.


----------



## xkm1948 (May 23, 2019)

unclewebb said:


> Has anyone with a 6800K tried using Intel XTU or ThrottleStop to get their overclock back after they boot up?  ThrottleStop does not fully support Turbo Boost 3.0 but it might be good enough to get your overclock back.  Post some pics so I can have a look.
> 
> 
> This is only a problem for CPUs running on the X99 chipset.




X99 is a cursed platform


----------



## MrGenius (May 24, 2019)

kime01 said:


> - replacing with old file (4/11/2018 version, page 2 of this thread) -> BSOD (fixable deleting the old and renaming the .bak but no OC working);


I just tried the old file method and it didn't work for me either. I didn't get a BSOD. But it refused to boot into Windows with it. I had to use used startup repair to fix it. Which, for whatever reason, deleted it. So I'm still running without any mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll. And I still haven't experienced any issues running with it like that.

EDIT: Turns out startup repair just did a system restore with my latest restore point. Which makes sense as to why the file vanished in the process. Didn't know that's something it could/would do. Learn something every day...


----------



## R-T-B (May 24, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> Better question would be...how could I possibly have deleted it before actually installing it? I did mention "clean install". And, even if I updated/upgraded to it, it would still be replaced in the process(even if I deleted it prior).



Imageprep, dism, or one of those MS service tools.



xkm1948 said:


> X99 is a cursed platform



You should call a priest with all the trouble you've had on that board.  I believe it's got the devil inside.


----------



## kime01 (May 24, 2019)

unclewebb said:


> Has anyone with a 6800K tried using Intel XTU or ThrottleStop to get their overclock back after they boot up?  ThrottleStop does not fully support Turbo Boost 3.0 but it might be good enough to get your overclock back.  Post some pics so I can have a look.
> 
> 
> This is only a problem for CPUs running on the X99 chipset.



I've installed Intel ITU to test. It replaces the working ASUS ITU (my mobo is ASUS') but doesn't start (stuck in the main window for minutes).

However, ASUS ITU (before being replaced) said OC is working even without applying the solution discussed here (deleting/disableSpectre) but checking with other SW (e.g. CPUID HWmonitor) CPU freqs are blocked to non OCed ones. 
So I'd say ITU doesn't fix.


----------



## shamus21 (May 24, 2019)

Well i am running an Asus x99 with a 5820k  lastest Bios  about 2 years, old not the beta Bios  and still have my 4.5 overclock running with out issues and this is with the update method not the Usb clean install which i had to do with last years update after it locked up the system.


----------



## Candor (May 24, 2019)

It's been mentioned several times that haswell-e is not affected, only broadwell-e


----------



## HUSKIE (May 24, 2019)

As above mentioned...


----------



## SoNic67 (May 24, 2019)

I have Ivy Bridge-EP generation CPUs (two of E5-2630 V2 on one board) and I didn't get the update. Last OS update was yesterday an I am still at version 1809, build 17763.529


----------



## HUSKIE (May 24, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> I have Ivy Bridge-EP generation CPUs (two of E5-2630 V2 on one board) and I didn't get the update. Last OS update was yesterday an I am still at version 1809, build 17763.529



You are not affected anyway.


----------



## John Naylor (May 24, 2019)

If users don't like being on the bleeding edge .,,. would suggest not being the 1st one on your block to install new updates.   Ask Woody has probably the biggest collection of "warnings" ... .    When discussing preview rollups, I always respond "What advantage is there to installing this today ?   Whether the chance is 10, 25, 50, 100% of having a problem why take the chance  ?   Wait 30 days and see if you are affected, by what and if it's been fixed when the next month rolls around."


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (May 27, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> If users don't like being on the bleeding edge .,,. would suggest not being the 1st one on your block to install new updates.   Ask Woody has probably the biggest collection of "warnings" ... .    When discussing preview rollups, I always respond "What advantage is there to installing this today ?   Whether the chance is 10, 25, 50, 100% of having a problem why take the chance  ?   Wait 30 days and see if you are affected, by what and if it's been fixed when the next month rolls around."


There a bunch of ways to delay updates in windows, the sad part is m$ doesnt always respect the users choices and updates anyways. Using 3rd party apps are the preferred method of preventing windows from phoning home to check for said update.


----------



## CloudXPS (Jun 8, 2019)

Just wanted to say thanks to all the fellow nerds in here. Just deleting the microcode dll in System32 will get things smooth again. Regained control of my FSB and overclocking from the BIOS. X99 with a 6800k. Very cool, I had noticed it being weird after every update.


----------



## 1stFalloutboy (Jul 16, 2019)

Hi there, realize that this is a month old but needed to ask has anyone attempted to patch the microcode on the CPU on the Rampage V Edition 10, my flatty has done it for the Rampage V and his older intel CPU 5960X I think he's running, I have the 6900K and noticed that 1903 bjorked overclocking so deleted the microcode update from microsoft which fixed the overclock issue but not the security flaw. I would be interested to know if applying the microcode fix direct from intel would fix the Spectre problem and  still allow overclocking.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 16, 2019)

1stFalloutboy said:


> Hi there, realize that this is a month old but needed to ask has anyone attempted to patch the microcode on the CPU on the Rampage V Edition 10, my flatty has done it for the Rampage V and his older intel CPU 5960X I think he's running, I have the 6900K and noticed that 1903 bjorked overclocking so deleted the microcode update from microsoft which fixed the overclock issue but not the security flaw. *I would be interested to know if applying the microcode fix direct from intel would fix the Spectre problem and  still allow overclocking.*


No, but if you are gaming as a primary usage, you can disable hyperthreading to nullify the vulnerability. However, you shouldn't really be worried. These vulnerabilities are *very* difficult to take advantage of in a real-world attack.


----------



## 1stFalloutboy (Jul 16, 2019)

I agree with the fact that they are very difficult to take advantage of in a real world attack but I also feel it is the duty of the manufacturers in this case ASUS and Intel to fix things correctly without negatively impacting the user experience which was something that was quoted directly by Microsoft themselves as being "virus activity".  When it comes down to it my board is still under warranty and I expect ASUS to patch the BIOS which they are responsible for doing.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 16, 2019)

AsRock said:


> Never liked the idea of UEFI and how Microsoft\Intel could just change shit. just to much control over some thing you payed good money for.



external MC loading has been around since BIOS (since the Pentium Pro, to be precise).  UEFI has nothing to do with it.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 16, 2019)

1stFalloutboy said:


> I agree with the fact that they are very difficult to take advantage of in a real world attack but I also feel it is the duty of the manufacturers in this case ASUS and Intel to fix things correctly without negatively impacting the user experience which was something that was quoted directly by Microsoft themselves as being "virus activity".  When it comes down to it my board is still under warranty and I expect ASUS to patch the BIOS which they are responsible for doing.


While that is true, none of these vulnerabilities were intentional and we the public are expected to protect ourselves. If you have a DSL/Cable/Fiber modem that has a router built into it, enable the firewall and NAP. Those two settings alone will keep 99.997% of remote attacks out, including what would be needed to take advantage of the vulnerabilities in question. If you don't have a modem with a builtin router and you don't have one already, get one and enable the settings described above. Next, get into your Services manager and disable anything to do with "Remote Desktop". The next is simple, *DON'T* download anything that you don't know something about.


----------



## 1stFalloutboy (Jul 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> While that is true, none of these vulnerabilities were intentional and we the public are expected to protect ourselves. If you have a DSL/Cable/Fiber modem that has a router built into it, enable the firewall and NAP. Those two settings alone will keep 99.997% of remote attacks out, including what would be needed to take advantage of the vulnerabilities in question. If you don't have a modem with a builtin router and you don't have one already, get one and enable the settings described above. Next, get into your Services manager and disable anything to do with "Remote Desktop". The next is simple, *DON'T* download anything that you don't know something about.



Been into computers since I was six years old and am TCP/IP network engineer, been in the industry 43 years and know about security. The point I am trying to make though is that if you buy a car and it has a serious fault that say could let someone take control of the steering and control it remotely and note I said COULD the problem would be fixed the same thing should apply to people expensive computers as a matter of principle, my Car wasn't cheap but my computer cost more. There is a moral obligation on behalf of the manufacturers to fix vulnerabilities in their products it shouldn't be up to end users no matter how talented they are and manufacturers should not be allowed to get away with half assed fixes which break usability, especially when that usability was part of the reason for purchasing the products in the first place.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 16, 2019)

The thing you are missing is that short of a recall, there really can't be a "better fix."  These vulnerabilities exist in the silicon, and can only be worked around at expense of perfomance, not truly "patched."


----------



## 1stFalloutboy (Jul 16, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> The thing you are missing is that short of a recall, there really can't be a "better fix."  These vulnerabilities exist in the silicon, and can only be worked around at expense of perfomance, not truly "patched."



If that is indeed the case how is it my flatmate managed to patch his CPU microcode with a file supplied by Intel for Linux patches on his 5960X and have it both still overclock and Spectre protected? The way I see it my CPU is just a later refresh gen of his so the board supplier should be able to do this too and are just choosing not to and letting microsoft and intel provide the bjorked fix that kills the overclock.. That's just lazy, irresponsible, unreasonable and not beneficial to maintaining your customer base.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 16, 2019)

1stFalloutboy said:


> Been into computers since I was six years old and am TCP/IP network engineer, been in the industry 43 years and know about security.


Then you shouldn't need help from us. I offered you confirmed working solutions. Take it or leave it, I'm out.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 16, 2019)

1stFalloutboy said:


> If that is indeed the case how is it my flatmate managed to patch his CPU microcode with a file supplied by Intel for Linux patches on his 5960X and have it both still overclock and Spectre protected?



Because I did not say anything about overclocking, only general performance loss.  The microcode windows uses is the issue regarding overclocking.  It's an older, earlier fix.  Updating your bios mcode may help but is hardly simple.


----------



## 1stFalloutboy (Jul 16, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Because I did not say anything about overclocking, only general performance loss.  The microcode windows uses is the issue regarding overclocking.  It's an older, earlier fix.  Updating your bios mcode may help but is hardly simple.



Fully aware of that and fully aware of your ability to bjork your board completely which is why the manufacturer should be fixing the problem not the end user.



lexluthermiester said:


> Then you shouldn't need help from us. I offered you confirmed working solutions. Take it or leave it, I'm out.


No need to be rude, simply stating the facts and I know despite what microsoft says about security on it's systems that the only way to have a system fully secure is to never connect it to anything, USB, internet or network but these days that sort of likely not to happen. Confirmed working solutions however is not would should be coming down the pipeline - when the board is still under warranty the manufacturer has an obligation under law to fix the problem. In this case they are simply ignoring it and that is unacceptable.


----------



## rkt (Aug 26, 2019)

Finally went to Ryzen


----------



## FragManSaul (Sep 27, 2019)

instead of changing any Windows 10 setting I downloaded a new bios for the Rampage V edition and this sorted it, overclocking back to normal. EZ update is poo





						ROG RAMPAGE V EDITION 10 | ROG Rampage | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG USA
					

ASUS ROG Rampage V Edition 10 EATX extreme-gaming board outshines the competition with best-in-class overclocking, Aura RGB lighting and flawless Hi-Fi audio.



					www.asus.com


----------



## basco (Jun 23, 2020)

i know its an old thread but the win10 microcode update KB4497165  breaks my memory overclock on x99 with 5960x.
took me a month to find why its not working. thx ms.

ucode 0x40 was last good for me\newer one is ucode 0x43     easy to see in throttlestop under the FIVR tab


----------



## ThrashZone (Jun 23, 2020)

Hi,
Which bios are you using ?
I'm still on old 2101 released 1-6-2016 lol for x99 sabertooth and didn't notice anything at 3200c14 being killed
This system was torn down couple weeks ago for a z490 build though so no way to test anymore until I get another gpu.


----------



## basco (Jun 28, 2020)

i am on 3801 since 2017- last bios before spectre fix


----------



## ThrashZone (Jun 28, 2020)

basco said:


> i am on 3801 since 2017- last bios before spectre fix


Hi,
I'd try 2101 and see what happens
MS installs micro codes so no advantage of newer bios on haswell-e if anything broadwell-e bios exaggerates vccio to 1.25v+ which is way more than it needs which is 1.05v it's default.


----------



## basco (Jun 28, 2020)

no auto volts for me - never.


----------



## ThrashZone (Jun 28, 2020)

Hi,
Good policy 
Soon as memory frequency is raised from 2133 default broadwell-e bios shoots vccio through the roof
Haswell-e bios never did that always hair above 1.05v even at 3200c14 xmp.
Think most say safe limit on vccio on haswell-e chips is 1.15v
Lots toasted as well as some broardwell-e chips on oc.net reported all were on auto vccio and xmp.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 28, 2021)

Bump for relevancy!

Was fixing a family members PC (full of dust), which was my old Z77 system. 3770k @ 4.5GHz, 16GB DDR3 R2400 C11, RX580 (My god that hardware aged so well)
Except... it was running 3.5Ghz, 1333. Every BIOS setting, even fan speeds, was totally ignored - like it was reading from another, second set of settings. CMOS clear, reset to defaults - no change.


Remembered this thread and checked the similar posts elsewhere, and found one suggestion "Intel management engine corrupted by windows update, reflash the BIOS"

Found one mystery BETA update from 2019, flash it... and bam. All settings working again.
These spectre and meltdown "Fixes" are still breaking things in 2021


----------

