Monday, September 2nd 2024

AMD to Extend Warranty Coverage to Ryzen 9600X and 9700X with 105W BIOS Mods

by
btarunr
 Discuss (38 Comments)
Motherboard manufacturers are beginning to roll out UEFI firmware updates that not just patch the Sinkclose critical vulnerability, but enable an experimental "105 W TDP mode" option as part of the processor's custom BIOS settings (CBS). The mode elevates the power limits of the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X "Zen 5" desktop processors, with up to 13%" performance gains being reported by the motherboard vendors themselves. By default, your motherboard will run these processors at their original 65 W TDP, and you're supposed to manually enable the setting in the UEFI firmware setup program. It could either be found in the overclocking/tuning page, or the AMD CBS section.

To remove the last bit of hesitation among users go turn this setting on, AMD is working to extend its processor warranty to cover the 105 W TDP mode, reports Wccftech editor Hassan Mujtaba. Currently, the setting is being shipped with AM5 AGESA version 1.2.0.1, which includes the Sinkclose vulnerability patch, but will "officially" release it with AM5 AGESA 1.2.0.2, along with warranty coverage. Mujtaba reports that firmware updated with AGESA 1.2.0.2 are expected to begin rolling out in late-September.
Sources: Hassan Mujtaba (Twitter), VideoCardz

Related News

Add your own comment

38 Comments on AMD to Extend Warranty Coverage to Ryzen 9600X and 9700X with 105W BIOS Mods

#1
R0H1T
Was that ever in doubt?
Posted on Reply
#2
las
9700X launching as a 65W part was a huge f-up. There's literally 12-15% to be gained, when running at 105W like 7700X.

Clockspeeds are severely gimped at 65W in both single and multicore workloads.

They have no way to find out if a chip has been running at 65W or 105W anyway, so this is free advertising
Posted on Reply
#3
Carillon
To remove the last bit of hesitation among users go turn this setting on
AMD trying to create overclock addicts?
Posted on Reply
#4
napata
CarillonAMD trying to create overclock addicts?
Changing a power limit isn't really overclocking imo as you don't touch the v/f curve.
Posted on Reply
#5
ViperXZ
las9700X launching as a 65W part was a huge f-up. There's literally 12-15% to be gained, when running at 105W like 7700X.

Clockspeeds are severely gimped at 65W in both single and multicore workloads.
Fake Infos. You’re on a hardware review website, maybe read the reviews here and learn something instead of spreading nonsense which is simply false. It was more like 1-5% in practical usage. AMD did the absolute right thing making these 65W parts as the additional power rarely amounts to something. The 3700X was also a 65W part, this isn’t the 9800X.

www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9700x/27.html

Apps 5%, games 1%. A lot of power and efficiency waste for nothing. This 105W hype is nonsense spread by bad reviews or users who are badly informed.
Posted on Reply
#6
freeagent
My 65w 5600X has no problem doing 120w+ with a tuned PBO setup..

I am surprised they extended the warranty.. maybe the shrink cannot tolerate current as well?
Posted on Reply
#7
Suspecto
las9700X launching as a 65W part was a huge f-up. There's literally 12-15% to be gained, when running at 105W like 7700X.

Clockspeeds are severely gimped at 65W in both single and multicore workloads.

They have no way to find out if a chip has been running at 65W or 105W anyway, so this is free advertising
No, those 12-15% gains don't happen in gaming or most apps; they are very rare and sporadic.
Posted on Reply
#8
R0H1T
Maybe the latest windows update will allow that? I saw 2-4% difference in synthetic benches. For games you're not going to get that because "graphics" intensive task!
Posted on Reply
#9
HD64G
freeagentMy 65w 5600X has no problem doing 120w+ with a tuned PBO setup..

I am surprised they extended the warranty.. maybe the shrink cannot tolerate current as well?
They just address a typical issue with the warranty as the increased power limits mean more voltage and that can be called an oc.
Posted on Reply
#10
Shakallia
Next step, a price cut that will bring those at the same price of 7600x and 7700x, then Zen 5 "can" be considered interesting.
Posted on Reply
#11
Redwoodz
ShakalliaNext step, a price cut that will bring those at the same price of 7600x and 7700x, then Zen 5 "can" be considered interesting.
It's already interesting, always a premium for the lastest tech, followed by cuts after it matures. They would be complete idiots to sell it at the same price as Zen4 at release.
Posted on Reply
#12
ViperXZ
ShakalliaNext step, a price cut that will bring those at the same price of 7600x and 7700x, then Zen 5 "can" be considered interesting.
Right now it’s just interesting for people who profit from the extra app performance it has, especially in AVX512 . Gamers should wait for the X3D versions anyway.
Posted on Reply
#13
DemonicRyzen666
ViperXZApps 5%, games 1%. A lot of power and efficiency waste for nothing. This 105W hype is nonsense spread by bad reviews or users who are badly informed.
Considering most "triple A games" released are gpu bound even a RTX 4090 at 1080p on high or ultra settings lately. You end up getting a lot of tests where you only see 1% ro 5% difference because of that. & they start to look like the 1440p & 1216p/4K results
I think a revision of older games that aren't gpu bound are much better test for comparing cpu's.
Posted on Reply
#14
ViperXZ
DemonicRyzen666I think a revision of older games that aren't gpu bound are much better test for comparing cpu's.
Sure they are, but most people don’t use CPUs for a long time until they make a difference that is as huge as an artificial / scientific test. 720p tests in honor but they’re maybe 20-30% real life relevant, if not less. The real relevance will always lie in real world tests not 720p tests. And a few % extra perf still aren’t worth losing 80% efficiency on your CPU, AMD did the 100% right thing not overclocking them for 105W tdp out of the box, it’s called sweet spot.

When was the last time OC was worth it? That was before CPUs had intelligent boost algorithms like even Ryzen 1000 already had.
Posted on Reply
#15
Carillon
napataChanging a power limit isn't really overclocking imo as you don't touch the v/f curve.
It doesn't touch the curve, but directly increases both voltage and clocks, technically overclocking and overvolting the CPU. That is enough to void the warranty.
Posted on Reply
#16
RaphaelOne
las9700X launching as a 65W part was a huge f-up. There's literally 12-15% to be gained, when running at 105W like 7700X.

Clockspeeds are severely gimped at 65W in both single and multicore workloads.

They have no way to find out if a chip has been running at 65W or 105W anyway, so this is free advertising
It is good that there is a choice. There are people for whom 7-15% performance on modern powerful CPUs does not make a difference, while what does make a difference to them is the comfort of their work, including the noise level of the PC. Often these are audiophiles who value sound quality as much as silence. For such people are 65W Ryzen. I love 65W TDP class Ryzen, they have very high energy efficiency (ultra-high in the case of Ryzen9 in 65W mode), still high performance and yet are quiet even under full load.
Posted on Reply
#17
trsttte
lasThey have no way to find out if a chip has been running at 65W or 105W anyway
You don't know that, about a year ago AMD let loose that it has a fuse to detect overclocking, who's to tell if there's another one to detect PBO/changes in the max power level or if those changes are simply enough to trigger the OC fuse.
Posted on Reply
#18
chrcoluk
trsttteYou don't know that, about a year ago AMD let loose that it has a fuse to detect overclocking, who's to tell if there's another one to detect PBO/changes in the max power level or if those changes are simply enough to trigger the OC fuse.
Yeah, my b450 pro 4 has a big fat warning if you enable PBO, and if you disable it again the warning comes back which would suggest no one would ever know you enabled it. but that fuse? maybe yeah. :)
Posted on Reply
#19
Minus Infinity
ViperXZFake Infos. You’re on a hardware review website, maybe read the reviews here and learn something instead of spreading nonsense which is simply false. It was more like 1-5% in practical usage. AMD did the absolute right thing making these 65W parts as the additional power rarely amounts to something. The 3700X was also a 65W part, this isn’t the 9800X.

www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-9700x/27.html

Apps 5%, games 1%. A lot of power and efficiency waste for nothing. This 105W hype is nonsense spread by bad reviews or users who are badly informed.
Your right and this further highlights that Zen 5 is a very poor desktop update. Server optimisation not much useful for us plebs. Weakest update in Zen range. Lower power is good though.
Posted on Reply
#20
ViperXZ
Minus Infinityand this further highlights that Zen 5 is a very poor desktop update.
The uplift is roughly 5-10% depending which SKUS you compare. Considering it's not a new node (just improved same node), the upgrade is fine. The X3D parts could also be even better, possibly higher clocks compared to Ryzen 7000, on top of the 5-10% from IPC alone. The only "poor" Ryzen gen was Ryzen 2000, which was just the same architecture, Zen 1, optimised and on a slightly better node (12nm instead of 14nm), the slight performance bump of about 5% came from clocks alone, it was mainly better due to proper RAM support which was a issue with Ryzen 1st gen.
Posted on Reply
#21
Dr. Dro
Minus InfinityYour right and this further highlights that Zen 5 is a very poor desktop update. Server optimisation not much useful for us plebs. Weakest update in Zen range. Lower power is good though.
It's pretty much that. Bitter pill to swallow, though. Could have been a home run for AMD, but alas.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheinsanegamerN
Dr. DroIt's pretty much that. Bitter pill to swallow, though. Could have been a home run for AMD, but alas.
I highly suspect that zen 5 will make a much bigger splash in the mobile market, where the power draw improvements should be more evident.
Posted on Reply
#23
regs
BIOS mods aren't enough. It should be software easy on-the-fly single click solution. Or attached to power profiles.
Posted on Reply
#24
Minus Infinity
Dr. DroIt's pretty much that. Bitter pill to swallow, though. Could have been a home run for AMD, but alas.
Given the poor MB updates too, I'm thinking trying Arrow Lake 265KF to update my old 3700X rig.
Posted on Reply
#25
Dr. Dro
regsBIOS mods aren't enough. It should be software easy on-the-fly single click solution. Or attached to power profiles.
It's hardly a BIOS "mod"... it's more like "105W spec mode" toggle. Thing is completely useless anyway. Anyone thinking juicing these chips are gonna make them what they failed to become is delulu
Minus InfinityGiven the poor MB updates too, I'm thinking trying Arrow Lake 265KF to update my old 3700X rig.
I'll prob be waiting for Panther Lake at a minimum at this point :/
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 19th, 2024 00:21 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts