On March 6, 2018 1:33:54 PM EST, "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >| From: o1bigtenor via talk <email@example.com> >| >| On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:44 AM, Russell via talk <firstname.lastname@example.org> >wrote: >| >| > Apparently Coffee Lake CPU's power attributes can be reset by >overriding >| > the management engine on Skylake MB's. >| > >| > http://www.overclock.net/forum/8-intel-general/1665657- >| > >coffeelake-completely-working-100-200-series-chipsets.html#/topics/1665657 > > >This is definitely interesting. Peering into a box intended to be >black.
That's what piqued my interest. From my recent reading. I can't remember the exact number of undocumented intel features but I believe the count was 60-70. > >Why would Intel intentionally obsolete a bunch of boards? It would >seem to reduce the number of CPU sales. Perhaps there is something >inferior about a system where the two pins are ignored (or whatever >happens to the two pins after the hack). > >Intel might sell more support chips this way. But they have to split >the >proceeds of a motherboard sale with the motherboard manufacturer while >they get all the proceeds from a processor sale. > >I assume that the motherboards in question were meant for Kaby Lake >CPUs (Kaby Lake preceded Coffee Lake). After the firmware hack, could >you still use a Kaby Lake processor? Good question. It seems to be primarily a voltage hack, perhaps the overclockable K series could withstand the burn? > >| Your quoted info seems specifically for a MSI product. As they are >only one >| of more than a few mobo suppliers I'm wondering as to the possibility >of >| using this on other manufacturer's products. I haven't read the entire thread yet but I believe others have worked. > >My guess is that this blob within the firmware is supplied by Intel >and is the same for all motherboards. Except that Intel may make >changes over time but the copy in a particular firmware may not be the >latest. But I would not want to act on a guess. If I were trying >this on another board, I'd first verify that that board's initial blob >exactly matched MSI's initial blob. > >| Ideas, thoughts please? > >Why would you actually do this hack? Personally I like tinkering and extending the life of the tech I use. At this point its more about the possibility of frankensteining something when prices bottom out and new old stock makes the rounds. > >- this is from reverse engineering, not specification. There is no > guarantee that it is 100% functional. There are warnings about the possibility of burning the cpu. So not for prime time or the faint of heart. > >- hacking firmware is the last thing you should try UNLESS you find it > a fun challenge. It isn't usually an optimal route if there are > simpler choices. > >For example, buying a new motherboard and selling your old motherboard > and old processor is simpler and may not be expensive. > >- if a new firmware is released, you have to ignore it or hack it all > over again, with a new set of risks. This hack wouldn't be a production choice for any real enterprise. I just like the mix and match possibilities when the stuff hits salvage pricing. Definitely it's an end of life hail mary pass. >--- >Talk Mailing List >email@example.com >https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk -- Russell --- Talk Mailing List firstname.lastname@example.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk