Return to Level1Techs.com

Weird ASRock BIOS statement

Hey, I’ve noticed the following statement on two ASRock BIOS versions (5.80, 5.99) for the X370 Taichi:

Does this simply mean that these two versions were not tested (and will not be tested) or something different? Also, as a consequence does ASRock no longer release new BIOS version for this board with Zen/Zen+ CPUs? Which would be a shame, considering the newest AGESA does have improvements for Zen/Zen+ as well.

I’m in the same boat, my x470 Taichi hasn’t received a bios update in some time due to that warning. Subscribed for more informations.

1 Like

Maybe more here have this issue. If we are many enough, maybe @wendell could reach out to ASRock for further clarification…

1 Like

Guessing its not an improvement for those chips and might cause some instability with some OC stuff or something 100% guess tho

Also bios chips are only so big so maybe they are concerned about that (maybe it can only fit the new one and if it bricks during update = bad)

1 Like

Just hypothetical here, sounds like sour grapes from ASRock. AMD didn’t lock out older board owners, like they did for Threadripper… So manufacturers only recourse is to stall bringing new updates to older customers.

1 Like

I would guess ASRock just doesn’t have infinite time to test everything. They are probably just making sure the new stuff improves and give us old customers the disclaimer. And, to be fair, my 2700x was running perfectly fine with the older BIOS versions. If I didn’t upgrade to 3000 series, I just would have stayed on what I had before.

1 Like

I upgraded to Bios 3.60 from August 2019 for AsRock x470 Tai Chi and it is running Ryzen 3900X solid with 32Gb ram at 3200 speed.

The x570 Tai Chi board has much newer December 2019 Bios that brings AMD AGESA 1.0.0.4. B ram timings.

I have to believe that AsRock is limited in their resources to test Bios on all boards and is underpromising and I will just have to wait patiently until their testers work their way to down to older boards.

1 Like

Unless I read it wrong, the warning is for customers running older Zen 1 and 1.5 processors? 1000 and 2000 series.

2 Likes

The question is will they work their way down or have these CPUs reached end-of-life for ASRock? Also, some AGESA improvements help Zen/Zen+ as well, since one updates fixes a boot-hang issue and also improves boot times.

2 Likes

Okei I might be late on the train here. But I have a 1700x running on the Fatal1ty X370 Gaming-ITX/ac
Stable with the p5.70 Bios Agesia 1.0.0.1

Should I not update the bios to the newest 6.50 Version ???

Do you have any problems? Are you ok with getting into some?
If you answer both questions with a strong no, then don’t do it.

3 Likes

The annoying thing is that we do not know what’s going on. Are they just not testing on these CPUs? Did the remove something due to BIOS size constraints?
I think they should be clearer on why they do not recommend updating…

ASUS boards on the other hand are not limited by these constraints. In hindsight purchasing a premium ASRock board might not have been the best idea in this regard :frowning:

Well … or they just don’t tell you that they haven’t tested the older stuff a lot on the newer BIOS versions. ASRock is not without fault but they seem to be pretty open and honest about their products. That doesn’t always seem to be the case with Asus. I mean, if the same PR team that handled the 5700XT cooler thing would be asked if Asus should put a recommendation on their website not to update … what do you think would be the answer? :wink:

In the end ASRock is simply stating the obvious: Never change a running system.

Point taken.

I was protesting in sympathy. 2700X owners are not the only ones being abused by ASRock UEFI updates.

I think this part has nothing to do with that, since the new AGESA version still offer improvements for Ryzen 1 an 2.

Really? … I’m a bit skeptic on that to be honest.

How do you benefit from the new version compared to the latest recommended BIOS? Are those improvements actually measurable or more theoretical in nature, like “it should improve”? And has anyone tried to test that in a meaningful way?

1 Like

Don’t quote me on this but if I remember correctly the reason for discluding some of the APUs is the fact that with new models the microcode would have become too large had the bits for said CPUs been kept

2 Likes

that’s exactly it.

I just stumbled over the following thread and a GN video:

Both argue that the reason for this statement could very well be the restricted ROM size. However, what I’m wondering is what parts of the code have been removed. I could for example very well live without Athlon and Raid support. Unfortunately, in ASRock’s case this is not known.
So, in my opinion an inquiry concerning this would be especially interesting.

What is not known? I fail to see a question here, I think.

1 Like