Intel 13th Gen. Bios Update & Photoshop/Lightroom Issues

[Jp42nca]

Just completed a build last month that I began working on since February. (ASUS z690i, i9-13900k) In June I started reading about the voltage issues, high temps, BSOD (Blue Screen of Death), & crashes during gaming. I'm a content creator/real estate photographer, not a gamer. I do not tax my system as hard as someone who uses it for gaming. Haven't used the pc much, loaded apps and did some light editing & temps only went as high as 52C, @idle it 39C. Both way within operational limits.

 

Haven't done the bios update as yet that Intel has advised to curb these high voltages & temps. I did read that benchmark tests were done to see if the update affected games & some creator editing programs, (lagging issues) the bios update did affect Adobe Premiere Pro by 42% in one of the tests, that's a big hit. Also some games took a hit as well. But most popular games were unaffected or took a slight hit of 2-4%. The article also went on to say that it could have just been an anomaly at the time of testing, they did not go back & retest.   

 

Has anyone done the update & experienced a workflow issue with Lr & Ps? I want to do the update to protect my cpu long term but hoping it doesn't affect my workflow in Lr & Ps. Just can't have any lagging when importing or exporting multiple images between Lr>Ps (Luminosity Blending)>Lr, or blending multiple images in Ps, etc... I also have some large PSD files that I use for advertising, mailers, & postcards.

 

As a side note, since my highest temps are around 52C & way within operational norms maybe I should hold off and not do the update as advised unless I see temps & voltages go higher. I monitor my temps & core voltages in my taskbar using HWiNFO64 so I always have a visual. Average voltage is 1.38 & hits 1.4 once in awhile, again where its safe to be.  

 

Looking forward to hearing anyone's experiences &/or suggestions. 

 

[Tetras]

18 minutes ago, Jp42nca said:

Haven't done the bios update as yet that Intel has advised to curb these high voltages & temps. I did read that benchmark tests were done to see if the update affected games & some creator editing programs, (lagging issues) the bios update did affect Adobe Premiere Pro by 42% in one of the tests, that's a big hit. Also some games took a hit as well. But most popular games were unaffected or took a slight hit of 2-4%. The article also went on to say that it could have just been an anomaly at the time of testing, they did not go back & retest.    

These tests are pretty unreliable because the way that a BIOS applies these changes and even just the simple numbers they apply can be very different, for example, with long-run multithreaded workloads on a 13900K, if you cap the power at 125 watt that would have a pretty large difference in performance, over a long period of time.

 

Intel have clarified that you don't have to use baseline profiles (and should not have to), so if your CPU is capped at the "stock" (whatever the heck stock means nowadays) power limits and turbo duration, short burst workloads should be minimally affected and longer-run workloads mostly unaffected.

[Bjoolz]

  

3 hours ago, Jp42nca said:

I do not tax my system as hard as someone who uses it for gaming.

Doing a render, if you render on the CPU, it probably hits it harder than gaming.

 

With the CPU microcode fix (If it's actually fixed, not sure how much people trust Intel at this point), you should be able to run quite a bit more power through it than the 125W smallest baseline value. 

[Alex Atkin UK]

2 hours ago, Tetras said:

Intel have clarified that you don't have to use baseline profiles (and should not have to), so if your CPU is capped at the "stock" (whatever the heck stock means nowadays) power limits and turbo duration, short burst workloads should be minimally affected and longer-run workloads mostly unaffected.

I'm curious what they mean by this as there have been examples shown that you do have to use Intel Default Settings or the voltage cap does not apply.

 

[Bjoolz]

2 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

I'm curious what they mean by this as there have been examples shown that you do have to use Intel Optimised Settings or the voltage cap does not apply.

Just follow this simple diagram. ^/s

[Tetras]

1 hour ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

I'm curious what they mean by this as there have been examples shown that you do have to use Intel Default Settings or the voltage cap does not apply.

 

I was only referring to the baseline profile because the performance difference the OP quoted was enormous and I can only imagine they were using the baseline profile for that testing, or even something worse than that. From what I recall, Gigabyte's baseline was also significantly lower than the one Asus used.

 

It is hard to give an exact reply, because every workload is different, but I can't imagine that the profile Intel expects the majority of boards to use would cause a 42% loss in performance.

[Alex Atkin UK]

35 minutes ago, Tetras said:

I was only referring to the baseline profile because the performance difference the OP quoted was enormous and I can only imagine they were using the baseline profile for that testing, or even something worse than that. From what I recall, Gigabyte's baseline was also significantly lower than the one Asus used.

 

It is hard to give an exact reply, because every workload is different, but I can't imagine that the profile Intel expects the majority of boards to use would cause a 42% loss in performance.

Indeed, I believe there is usually a Performance profile under Intel Default Settings.  The confusion is at which point the microcode fix is disabled when manually tuning.

 

Even on ASUS the default profile on CMOS reset is very conservative now, I lost that 42% even on a 12700 and I had to go switch profiles to get the performance back.

[Jp42nca]

6 hours ago, Tetras said:

These tests are pretty unreliable because the way that a BIOS applies these changes and even just the simple numbers they apply can be very different, for example, with long-run multithreaded workloads on a 13900K, if you cap the power at 125 watt that would have a pretty large difference in performance, over a long period of time.

 

Intel have clarified that you don't have to use baseline profiles (and should not have to), so if your CPU is capped at the "stock" (whatever the heck stock means nowadays) power limits and turbo duration, short burst workloads should be minimally affected and longer-run workloads mostly unaffected.

Thanks for responding, always good get perspectives from those more advanced then myself.

[Jp42nca]

3 hours ago, Bjoolz said:

  

Doing a render, if you render on the CPU, it probably hits it harder than gaming.

 

With the CPU microcode fix (If it's actually fixed, not sure how much people trust Intel at this point), you should be able to run quite a bit more power through it than the 125W smallest baseline value. 

I don't feel comfortable enough to run Cinebench R24, not sure exactly how to read all the calculations & how it pertains since this is my weak point. Still learning as I go. I do know that editing photos is more gpu intensive then cpu.  Thanks for your insight. 

[Jp42nca]

2 hours ago, Tetras said:

I was only referring to the baseline profile because the performance difference the OP quoted was enormous and I can only imagine they were using the baseline profile for that testing, or even something worse than that. From what I recall, Gigabyte's baseline was also significantly lower than the one Asus used.

 

It is hard to give an exact reply, because every workload is different, but I can't imagine that the profile Intel expects the majority of boards to use would cause a 42% loss in performance.

Yeah I agree with that, like the article said it could have been an anomaly while testing Adobe Premiere Pro, glitch while testing.  

[Jp42nca]

4 hours ago, Bjoolz said:

Just follow this simple diagram. ^/s

Lots of videos from techy people on YT I follow saying the same thing. You must do the update & use the Intel Default Settings if you want to not fry your cpu. 

[Jp42nca]

4 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

I'm curious what they mean by this as there have been examples shown that you do have to use Intel Default Settings or the voltage cap does not apply.

 

Thanks, I'll check out this video & see what it has to offer. So much out there about this issue.