Side note: If the latest version of Windows 10 is experiencing widespread problems, you may also want to wait before updating. I wrote gigabyte Support to report the problem with the official bios on their site for my motherboard.Īgain I apologize if I have not posted in the right place. The primary graphics card disappears and is no longer usable regardless of the settings that I can activate the newly flashed bios. Only the GPU 530 is present in the Windows 10 64-bit device manager, I have to move the HDMI on the motherboard so that the screen can turn on. Official I have no automatic detection of the primary graphics card in slot 1 of the motherboard, When I try to flash my motherboard with the new bios Small special request on my motherboard BIOS I F8C gigabyte updated a F20C BIOS for new processors and some updated module. The utility has yet correctly for module changesĬould you tell me what happens to the utility refuses to flash the bios newly amended. Not flashing my BIOS with the same utility that integrated with the motherboard. Runs the bat file administrator and change the module as shown irst stage 1.Įverything happens normally with OK at the end of process.īut when I try to flash the new BIOS I changed a mistake, I proceed in the following way I backup my BIOS I copy in the utility, With the procedure described in the tutorial. I use UBU_v1.65 version for changing the integrated Intel IRST Roma in the utility. I have a motherboard gigabyte Z170X-Gaming 3-EU “Z170” so I used the utility to modify the BIOS. I am new to this site I have come to ask for help. Please note this text is translated by a software please apologize for the possibility of a misunderstanding, I am just offering the theory, which required some brainstorming from my part the practice has to come from those with the hardware and bravery to test. I should state the obvious, that I haven’t tested any of the above methods, neither can I offer assurance that it would go risk-free. second and practical is to patch efiflash itself to ignore the check. You can also zero the checksum fields, if needed. But I only compared like 3 samples, it could have been a coincidence. The value 02 seems more appropriate, as FF was used in addition to offset 0Dh and offset C0h = 01. To remain on the safe side, I suggest the use of Gigabyte values: I have seen FF or 02. Thus it can be changed to any other value to avoid the check and error. Based on efiflash disassembly, the check only happens when that flag is 01, or $BDR + 63h = 1. first and safest is to switch the flag for Volumes check. I haven’t yet figured how the checksum of the volumes is obtained, but there are simpler alternatives: I have compared only a few samples, but the Other checks (imd$, $GCD, $TPM) are usually empty - that is, the GUIDs defined in those fields have no usable data. What triggers the error is the Volumes check. not important) or not immediately invoked (again not important). I managed to disassemble most of the content, the remaining bytes are either not invoked (i.e. The original post was the result of a single day work. I would have to compare more samples or do an in deep disassembly. Maybe C0h is a general toggle for checks. And 0Dh is not necessarily equal to C0h, but could still be related to FF value in flags. It seems Gigabyte specific and it was present in older platforms as well (checked and found at Z87 and X79), just that it isn’t/wasn’t always fully activated.Įdit: In Volume checks, the 4th block is not what I originally thought, but rather an order, always descending. It turns out Gigabyte is using a structure called BiosDataRecord to perform an integrity check. I decided to investigate the error “Invalid BIOS image” that plagued some Gigabyte users.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |