ASRock Z490 Taichi - ISL69269 readings incorrect

Lukas0610

Member
Hey,

I recently noticed that the VRM sensor readings of the ISL69269 on my board are finally showing up, but, as the title says, are of no use.

I attached the debug file and to screenshots to show what's going on.

Thanks in advance
 

Attachments

  • hwinfo_isl69269_bugreport_2.png
    hwinfo_isl69269_bugreport_2.png
    23 KB · Views: 4
  • hwinfo_isl69269_bugreport_1.png
    hwinfo_isl69269_bugreport_1.png
    23.1 KB · Views: 4
  • HWiNFO64.7z
    189 KB · Views: 1
Are you perhaps running some other monitoring tool (i.e. ASRock A-Tuning or Motherboard Utility) along with HWiNFO?
 
No, no monitoring tools running besides HWiNFO, I also already tried closing every running program possible (and restarting HWiNFO afterwards), didn't fix the readings.
 
Now the ISL69269 isn't showing up at all, just on first start of your provided version it showed up twice, but the values were still incorrect.
 

Attachments

  • HWiNFO64-no-isl69269.DBG.7z
    168.7 KB · Views: 1
Thanks. Can you please try to reboot the machine and then run in Sensor-only mode?
 
After a reboot both ISL69269 show up again, only to disappear on every startup afterwards, plus I noticed the sensor detection takes a few moments longer than on the first startup after the reboot.
 

Attachments

  • HWiNFO64-with-isl69269-dup.DBG.7z
    196 KB · Views: 0
Here are both debug logs (with and without the ISL69269 showing up) with the new version you just sent.
 

Attachments

  • HWiNFO64-without-isl69269.DBG.7z
    325 KB · Views: 1
  • HWiNFO64-with-isl69269.DBG.7z
    251.7 KB · Views: 1
Works far better now, the values seem good (although they don't really add up, but I assume it's how the sensor reports it), don't need to reboot anymore, only that it says ISL69138 now and there's a second VRM with only temperatures and input voltage showing.
 

Attachments

  • 1608976435280.png
    1608976435280.png
    21.8 KB · Views: 3
  • HWiNFO64-working-but-isl69138-recognized.DBG.7z
    1.1 MB · Views: 3
Well, yes it could be a 269. However proper identification requires a certain function, which doesn't work in this case. I'll look into this a bit more.
 
Back
Top