Tuesday, March 30th 2021

The Latest BIOS of GIGABYTE B560 Motherboards Boosts i9 11900K CPU to All-cores 5.1 GHz

Gigabyte Technology, one of the top global manufacturers of motherboards, graphics cards, and hardware solutions, announces today the latest BIOS of B560 AORUS motherboards. Enhanced by the 12+1 phases DrMOS power stage with 60 Amps for each and full coverage VRM thermal design, B560 AORUS motherboards can support Intel Core i9 11900K (F) series processors overclocking to all cores 5.1 GHz. The exclusive anti-interference design of memory circuit enables DDR4 speed raising up to XMP 4800 MHz, and overclocking performance boost to DDR4 5300 MHz. which demonstrates GIGABYTE's strong R&D strength and persistence in quality. Users can enjoy the performance boost of time-limited overclocking by simply updating to the latest BIOS to meet their special needs.1

Intel B series chipset motherboards have been always excluded from overclocking due to the product positioning. Although the memory XMP overclocking is unlocked on 500 series, the processor frequency can only reach up to 4.8 GHz by Turbo Boost. Thanks to the efforts of Gigabyte's R&D team, the processor can be overclocked to 5.1 GHz and maintain low temperature under the Prime95 no AVX burn-in test. This powerful performance benefits from the top-quality materials of GIGABYTE AORUS motherboards and product design capabilities, which include 12+1 phases/ 60Apms DrMOS power stage, 6 layers 2Oz ultra-cool PCB, full-covered VRM thermal design, and the latest Smart Fan 6 technology for temperature control. These features allow processors to have a stable and pure power supply under ultra-high frequency operation, providing the most solid backing for the CPU limited-time overclocking.
Besides the unlocking of time-limited overclocking performance on B560 motherboards, GIGABYTE AORUS B560 series motherboards adopt Daisy Chain layout with memory anti-interference mask by embedding the memory circuits within the PCB ground layers while the metal outer layer of the PCB reduces electromagnetic interference, so the more purified memory signal can boost the memory XMP to DDR4 4800 MHz. By manually overclocking, the memory frequency can be further reached to DDR4 5300 MHz while competitors can only achieve the same speed with Z590 high-end motherboards. GIGABYTE B560 AORUS motherboards take a commanding lead on the CPU and memory overclocking of the same level rival products, and even can compete to high-end models.

Optimized by exclusive hardware design, GIGABYTE B560 AORUS motherboards unleash the bandwidth of VGA cards and storage devices with integrated PCIe 4.0 interface. With the PCIe 4.0 controller, it can perfectly release the extreme accessing performance to 7000 MB/s of the latest SSDs. Meanwhile, the 2.5GbE and WiFi 6 networking provides users with faster and more flexible connections, as well as USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 high-speed transmission and the front USB Type-C interface offers a faster and more convenient external expansion.

The latest BIOS of GIGABYTE B560 AORUS motherboards have been uploaded to GIGABYTE's website, and users can download the corresponding BIOS to further experience the various functions from the best choice of high-end PC and gaming console. For more information, please refer to GIGABYTE's official website:
https://www.gigabyte.com/tw/Motherboard/Intel-B560
1. The DDR4 5300 MHz, the operation time and range of CPU time-limited overclocking are laboratory data, The actual performance will vary depending on the processor configuration, motherboard hardware design, and related peripheral configurations and settings.
Add your own comment

24 Comments on The Latest BIOS of GIGABYTE B560 Motherboards Boosts i9 11900K CPU to All-cores 5.1 GHz

#1
ZoneDymo
ermm yeah ok? a mobo manufactuer kinda ignores specs/directions by intel and overclocks the cpu for you a bit, pretty basic stuff.
Posted on Reply
#2
Caring1
"time-limited overclocking"
So like turbo boost then. :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#3
Post Nut Clairvoyance
Caring1"time-limited overclocking"
So like turbo boost then. :shadedshu:
kinda depends, pretty much everyone choose to not follow intel spec, most boards has option to uh...perma turbo. if the vrm holds, you can maintain boost frequency indefinitely.
not bad really, considering the cooling needed to push past PL2.
Posted on Reply
#4
Gmr_Chick
Motherboard go BOOM!



But the real question is: why the hell would anybody in their right mind pair an 11900K with a b560 board? :wtf: :kookoo:
Posted on Reply
#5
londiste
ZoneDymoermm yeah ok? a mobo manufactuer kinda ignores specs/directions by intel and overclocks the cpu for you a bit, pretty basic stuff.
I guess Intel is the surprising or newsworthy part here. They have usually acted on this type of overclock or overclock-like shenanigans on non-Z boards.
Posted on Reply
#6
1d10t
Couple of second is enough to put ahead of benchmark, with indefinitely turbo duration now Intel can match their previous gen performance.
Posted on Reply
#7
owen10578
This is actually great stuff! No need to pair for a Z series board to get full performance out of the 11900K.
Posted on Reply
#8
ixi
Gmr_ChickMotherboard go BOOM!



But the real question is: why the hell would anybody in their right mind pair an 11900K with a b560 board? :wtf: :kookoo:
Don't see anything bad if they can deliver the required power and survive, hehe. Intel bringing back OC options on different chipsets? It is about god damn time, now they need improve ram OC as well on B560.
:)

I miss the times with P67 times. 2500k OC'ed to 4.5GHz. Good old days.
Posted on Reply
#9
Mussels
Moderprator
ixiDon't see anything bad if they can deliver the required power and survive, hehe. Intel bringing back OC options on different chipsets? It is about god damn time, now they need improve ram OC as well on B560.
:)

I miss the times with P67 times. 2500k OC'ed to 4.5GHz. Good old days.
i had my 2500k at 5.1 (i think i used 4.9 24/7?), still got that chip kept aside as a memento since its pretty useless these days
back then i only did air cooling, so it could have gone higher
Posted on Reply
#10
ixi
Musselsi had my 2500k at 5.1 (i think i used 4.9 24/7?), still got that chip kept aside as a memento since its pretty useless these days
back then i only did air cooling, so it could have gone higher
Mine was stable with 4.5. Dont remember anymore voltage, but it wasnt high, it was low. Cooler was coolermaster 212, hehe. Gaming in battlefield 3 temps were around 60, which are good.
Posted on Reply
#11
watzupken
owen10578This is actually great stuff! No need to pair for a Z series board to get full performance out of the 11900K.
Yes, but you can be sure that boards that supports an i9 running at 5.1Ghz across all cores are not going to be cheap, regardless whether its a mobo based on a cheaper B560.
Posted on Reply
#12
Mussels
Moderprator
watzupkenYes, but you can be sure that boards that supports an i9 running at 5.1Ghz across all cores are not going to be cheap, regardless whether its a mobo based on a cheaper B560.
more importantly, they'll only boost for very brief periods of time (VRM cooling)
Posted on Reply
#13
HenrySomeone
A simple glance at the multi thread results in that picture shows you how much of a turd the first Zen really was; 11900k gets basically the same result as the 1950x with half the cores and threads! And remember, this architecture was supposed to land back in 2017 in which case AMD would have been in just as bad of a position as with Bulldozer. They have only Intel's manufacturing node issues to thank for a couple years of breathing room, architecturally they are still notably behind (yes, even with Zen3).
Posted on Reply
#14
TheinsanegamerN
Gmr_ChickMotherboard go BOOM!



But the real question is: why the hell would anybody in their right mind pair an 11900K with a b560 board? :wtf: :kookoo:
Well I would say that there is 0 reason to go with a more expensive z590 board if a B560 can run your CPU at full performance, you still get PCie 4.0 to the first slot and M.2 slot, so it makes no difference unless you have a multi GPU setup (LMFAO) or tons of expansion cards for some specialty system, in which case you are more likely an HDET user.

But the i9 11900k exists solely to milk some $$$ out of consoomers who dont understand CPUs, or want that pretty intel i9 badge. So you may have a point, nobody with the thought process that leads to an i9 11900k purchase will be thinking sensibly enough to look at b560 boards.
HenrySomeoneA simple glance at the multi thread results in that picture shows you how much of a turd the first Zen really was; 11900k gets basically the same result as the 1950x with half the cores and threads! And remember, this architecture was supposed to land back in 2017 in which case AMD would have been in just as bad of a position as with Bulldozer. They have only Intel's manufacturing node issues to thank for a couple years of breathing room, architecturally they are still notably behind (yes, even with Zen3).
Yeah it only needs to boost to 5.1 GHz and consume the same amount of power as a local sun to do it :kookoo: :roll: :kookoo:
ixiMine was stable with 4.5. Dont remember anymore voltage, but it wasnt high, it was low. Cooler was coolermaster 212, hehe. Gaming in battlefield 3 temps were around 60, which are good.
My 3570k was stable at 4.7 GHz at only 1.075v; one of the last costa rican chips, used a coolermaster 212+ with dual fans. Those were the days, before everything was OCing out of the box.
Posted on Reply
#15
HenrySomeone
Because the threadrippers are so efficient in that regard, right (especially the first 2 series)?

:roll:
Posted on Reply
#16
TheinsanegamerN
HenrySomeoneBecause the threadrippers are so efficient in that regard, right (especially the first 2 series)?

:roll:
And intel is pulling that with half the cores on their "new" architecture :roll:

The difference here being that AMD actually improved. Zen 1 was a beta quality core, but the 2000 series was far better, and weve all seen what zen 2 and zen 3 have managed.

Intel's new architecture is a power hungry braphog, a true successor to netburst. the fact it cant keep up with zen 3 in many cases is damning enough, just wait until zen 4 shows up. Hope intels atom cores can do CPR to keep the big cores running long enough to finish a "real world benchmark".
Posted on Reply
#17
HenrySomeone
My, my, look at Mr. Big Brain here! It's power hungry because it's not on its intended node yet! And trust me, as soon as Alder Lake lands, it will be "just wait" for team red once again... :D
Posted on Reply
#18
AnarchoPrimitiv
HenrySomeoneMy, my, look at Mr. Big Brain here! It's power hungry because it's not on its intended node yet! And trust me, as soon as Alder Lake lands, it will be "just wait" for team red once again... :D
Actually, no it won't, because Alder Lake it going up against Zen4 which will be on 5nm and leaks from highly reputable sources that have been consistently correct, such as Mooreslawisdead. have already reported that the early engineering samples that have markedly lower clocks than finished products are already showing that Zen4 is demonstrating a 29% core-for-core performance increase while consuming less power. It's also been stated that with 5nm, Zen4 will be able to achieve stable 5Ghz....so the end Zen4 product could very easily achieve a 35%+ core for core performance increase over Zen3, while using less power than even Intel's 10nm.

Let me also reiterate, because too often is this fact of paramount importance either ignored or forgotten, that Intel has a net worth 258% greater than AMD's net worth and in the 2020 fiscal year, Intel spent 684% more on research and development than AMD, and in spite of intel's staggering advantage in resources, AMD is still managing not only to compete with Intel, but to beat them on all fronts. Based on the drastic differences in resources, not only is it incredibly impressive that AMD is able to outperform Intel, but even if AMD's CPUs were, for example, 10% behind in overall performance, it would still be impressive that AMD were able to achieve that with their comparatively shoestring budget. In other words, Intel has absolutely zero excuses for not crushing AMD and any attempts to be bragging about, for example, "Intel still able to compete with 14nm", should be framed against these drastic financial disparities between the two companies.
Posted on Reply
#19
HenrySomeone
AnarchoPrimitivActually, no it won't, because Alder Lake it going up against Zen4 which will be on 5nm and leaks from highly reputable sources that have been consistently correct, such as Mooreslawisdead.
YouTube AMD fanboy supreme? A highly reputable source? Bwahahahahaha! :roll: :roll: :roll:
Posted on Reply
#20
Unregistered
HenrySomeoneYouTube AMD fanboy supreme? A highly reputable source? Bwahahahahaha! :roll: :roll: :roll:
You speak like that but you're potentially the biggest Intel fanboy on this site.

Discuss the topic, not two companies who don't give a damn about your existence.

--

Has Gigabyte solved the issue where the BIOS would go "ight, imma head out" whenever you changed a DRAM timing wrong?
#21
watzupken
HenrySomeoneBecause the threadrippers are so efficient in that regard, right (especially the first 2 series)?

:roll:
While I know you are cherry picking test results to substantiate how good Intel chips are, at least pick one in the same alley. The difference in specs is astounding, i.e. 16 vs 8 cores. Moreover, Threadripper is not even in the same target market and known to consume more power. If your comparison is the Threadripper, then the Intel processor to match should be the i9 7960X with the same number of cores and target market, which by the way fare worst in power consumption.

www.techspot.com/review/1678-amd-ryzen-threadripper-2990wx-2950x/page7.html
AnarchoPrimitivActually, no it won't, because Alder Lake it going up against Zen4 which will be on 5nm and leaks from highly reputable sources that have been consistently correct, such as Mooreslawisdead. have already reported that the early engineering samples that have markedly lower clocks than finished products are already showing that Zen4 is demonstrating a 29% core-for-core performance increase while consuming less power. It's also been stated that with 5nm, Zen4 will be able to achieve stable 5Ghz....so the end Zen4 product could very easily achieve a 35%+ core for core performance increase over Zen3, while using less power than even Intel's 10nm.

Let me also reiterate, because too often is this fact of paramount importance either ignored or forgotten, that Intel has a net worth 258% greater than AMD's net worth and in the 2020 fiscal year, Intel spent 684% more on research and development than AMD, and in spite of intel's staggering advantage in resources, AMD is still managing not only to compete with Intel, but to beat them on all fronts. Based on the drastic differences in resources, not only is it incredibly impressive that AMD is able to outperform Intel, but even if AMD's CPUs were, for example, 10% behind in overall performance, it would still be impressive that AMD were able to achieve that with their comparatively shoestring budget. In other words, Intel has absolutely zero excuses for not crushing AMD and any attempts to be bragging about, for example, "Intel still able to compete with 14nm", should be framed against these drastic financial disparities between the two companies.
Actually while AMD is chipping away at Intel's market share and profit, I feel the biggest threat for Intel is actually ARM. There are already a lot of big clients who have moved away from the Intel chips and diversified with their own custom chips. This is where Intel actually makes the most money and with them losing sales over time, it will hit Intel hard at some point. With ARM chips making waves in the form of Apple's M1, Intel is also under attack in the retail market now. Frankly Intel still have the deep pockets to compete effectively, but its no more a cake walk for them nowadays.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheinsanegamerN
HenrySomeoneMy, my, look at Mr. Big Brain here! It's power hungry because it's not on its intended node yet! And trust me, as soon as Alder Lake lands, it will be "just wait" for team red once again... :D
Yes, throwing some Atom cores in there will make AMD quake in their boots!
Posted on Reply
#23
Solid State Soul ( SSS )
Motherboard vendors ignoring intel specs on B and H boards should be prohibited, most people who buy those boards just want to put something and have it work without problems, let those MCE nonsense drive crazy CPU voltages on Z boards and keep that shit out of B and H boards.

Intel should put restrictions on motherboard vendor to follow specs on all there chip sets, other wise most people would notice high power draw and Tepretures at """STOCK""" then blame intel.
AleksandarKEnhanced by the 12+1 phases DrMOS power stage with 60 Amps for each
Also am pretty sure Gigabytes high end B boards are 50 Amps stages

Yup
Posted on Reply
#24
AleksandarK
Solid State Soul ( SSS )Motherboard vendors ignoring intel specs on B and H boards should be prohibited, most people who buy those boards just want to put something and have it work without problems, let those MCE nonsense drive crazy CPU voltages on Z boards and keep that shit out of B and H boards.

Intel should put restrictions on motherboard vendor to follow specs on all there chip sets, other wise most people would notice high power draw and Tepretures at """STOCK""" then blame intel.


Also am pretty sure Gigabytes high end B boards are 50 Amps stages

Yup
It is a press release, so i doubt they would display wrong info.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment