Question B550 chipset, so AMD joins the dark side after all.

[Shivansps]

I just read the article...

So let me get this straight, this chipset is coming out like a year later, they did not even bother to add CPU PCI-E 4.0 uplink support or to increase the number of sata ports that is ALREADY a problem on every 6 sata B450 motherboard (NVME x4 disables the 2 SOC Sata, thus 6 sata B450 mbs losses 2 sata if NVME is used), and they even dare to futher reduce backguard compatibility?

I was not expecting for the PCI-E lanes FROM the chipset to be 4.0, but only USB 3.2 G2, no more satas, CPU link still 3.0 and the PCI-E lanes 3.0 is beyond disappointing.

 

[PingSpike]

Seriously, this is the worst whine I have seen. Intel doesn't even get this much whining with all the crap they do.

People expect it from Intel at this point and the ones that don't like it were buying AMD.

 

[AtenRa]

[/QUOTE]

That's NOT what has happened in this situation.
Yes, a company is entitled to change a roadmap - cancel or delay some future product, change the specs etc. Absolutely.
The key word here is: future.

But this slide isn't just about future. It's also about the present.
It's about AM4 motherboards that you can buy at given time and that - according to this slide - should support all AM4 CPUs.
That's how I can understand it. And that's how AMD fans understood it until recently - praising how fantastic it will be to put a Zen3 in their 2018 motherboard and so on.

But of course you're right. There is the "subject to future modifications" footnote.
More importantly, AMD has never explicitly said what "upgrade" and "support" means.

Because even if each chipset worked with just a single CPU generation, I could still replace my Ryzen 1500 with 1800X, right? Is it an upgrade? Yes. They just need to make that 1800X until 2020.

Until an actual legal agreement happens (e.g. buying a CPU), pretty much nothing is legally binding. AMD could have written:
Vega will be as efficient as Nvidia Pascal*
or
Zen3 will guess lottery numbers with 97% success*
Absolutely no consequences. They tried, but it didn't work.

In essence, this is exactly what we're talking about: how AMD designs their marketing materials and campaigns. And how it affects users' choices.
But some will keep defending AMD no matter what.

Im not trying to defend AMD here or any other company , but what you or any other consumer interpret that slide has nothing to do with the fact that roadmaps can change and companies always put a subject to change asterisk on them.
Pay attention where that asterisk is on the slide and whats written.

Im also disappointed that 4xx chipsets will not support ZEN 3 , but buyers should always remember the rule, roadmaps are subject to change.

If consumers believe they were been mislead/deceived by AMD, they should talk with their wallets next

 

[piokos]

People expect it from Intel at this point and the ones that don't like it were buying AMD.

Precisely. This was the key differentiating factor - repeated and stressed at every occasion.

AMD behaved like a political party. They made a campaign around being different than current rulers.
And just like with political parties, these slogans usually don't stand the test of time.

 

[Gideon]

Pinned comment from a new HWUnboxed video:

Updates: AMD has refrained from commenting and therefore addressing any of our questions at this point, but we have had some interesting conversations with a few of their partners.

Again to be perfectly clear on this point, board partners cannot support Ryzen 4000 series processors on 400-series motherboards without AMD’s help, it’s simply not possible. So don’t expect an AIB to crack the code and open up support, again without AMD’s support it’s not going to happen.

It does seem as though this was a recent decision by AMD and their partners found out the same time we did, so that’s truly bizarre, but then given the last few product releases from AMD it’s getting harder and harder to be suprised by this stuff.

I’ve also had industry contacts confirm that the AMD BIOS excuse is rubbish and that simple workarounds are possible, just like the one I discussed. In one example there would be a single large BIOS file that you download, then upon flashing you select the CPU series you want to support and it flashes the appropriate code.

So at this point it’s now up to the rest of the community to pressure AMD into changing this decision and to open up support for 400-series boards. You guys had better believe that if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile and we’ll be back to where we were just a few years ago.

So it's probably not the evil board partners conspring to sell more boards as some speculated. This was a very recent change from AMD and the partners themselves were surprised. They agree that the BIOS excuse is BS and they could easily make a workaround but AMD refuses to play ball (release AGESA for old boards).

 

[DrMrLordX]

So it's probably not the evil board partners conspring to sell more boards as some speculated. This was a very recent change from AMD and the partners themselves were surprised. They agree that the BIOS excuse is BS and they could easily make a workaround but AMD refuses to play ball (release AGESA for old boards).

That's interesting, and certainly doesn't gel with what Hardware Unboxed was telling us about OEMs wanting to support Matisse on older chipsets.

 

[maddie]

Pinned comment from a new HWUnboxed video:

So it's probably not the evil board partners conspring to sell more boards as some speculated. This was a very recent change from AMD and the partners themselves were surprised. They agree that the BIOS excuse is BS and they could easily make a workaround but AMD refuses to play ball (release AGESA for old boards).

Watched and not sure about the board partners interpretation. They do say board partners in the video, but only mention MSI. It sounds to me as if they're generalizing after speaking to one. We don't know about the others and what they wanted.

In any case, this will mostly affect the people who came last to the AMD party, recent buyers of B450. The absolute worst set of customers to alienate, as they will abandon you the earliest.

 

[LightningZ71]

OEMs still have a ton of product in their distribution channels that they need to clear. Heck, many are still producing a ton of 4xx boards each month and AMD, with this one decision, has significantly devalued EVERY ONE of those boards.

If you are going out today to purchase an enthusiasts platform (and, let's face it, enthusiast boards are where the margin is), are you going to purchase a previous gen board that has absolutely no upgrade path? If you've got money to throw away, you're already buying Intel, but mind factory is showing that their share of that market is shrinking. This is nothing more than a money decision by AMD, and being a corporation, I expect nothing less from them. This reduces their validation burden and makes only one current chipset "long life", the x570. What happens to be the one chipset that supports AM4 that AMD makes the most money from? Why, the x570, which is the one that they have GF produce for them as part of the wafer agreement. How long life? With current bioses on the same size ROM chips as the 4xx series boards, they can boot everything from Summit Ridge on!

This being a money decision, there's only one way to fix it: don't give them your money. Stop buying any AM4 products until AMD relents. It's as simple as capitalism. Follow it up by letting AMD know why you aren't buying their products.

Until the numbers shift, AMD won't.

 

[Shivansps]

BTW, has anybody here thought "well, when Zen 3 comes out if I have an x570 mobo I can put it in, and if I have another mobo, I have 3 generations of chips to upgrade to !"

Seriously, this is the worst whine I have seen. Intel doesn't even get this much whining with all the crap they do.

Are you for real? AMD did something that right now left MSI in a really bad legal position, and they had first hand data, what about the regular people?
No one is saying that Intel is better, dont try to use Intel as a excuse. AMD needs to be clear with their marketing, plain and simple, if it is 3 gens whiout compatibility in both ways they should say it and be done with it, instead of trying to capitalize on a open interpretation.

I really dont care much about B450 not supporting future Zens since i fully expected this to happen after the 300 series issue back in the day and i not going to fight that war again agaist people defending a company, is not worth it.
I can fully understand the people that got a B450 motherboard because B550 was late, but the rest had to know this could happen.

What i do care is about the retrocompatibility of B550 motherboards being less than of X570, it is a 100% business decision, and a **** move.

 

[rbk123]

This being a money decision, there's only one way to fix it: don't give them your money. Stop buying any AM4 products until AMD relents. It's as simple as capitalism. Follow it up by letting AMD know why you aren't buying their products.

Until the numbers shift, AMD won't.

Pick your poison. Reward AMD's bad behavior by buying more Zen, or reward Intel's wretched behavior by switching to them.

 

[Hitman928]

New video by GN on the subject that I think covers it in a fair and informed way.

Highlights:

• They believe AMD trying to blame Intel for "anti-consumer" behavior in their marketing material has made this worse for AMD.
• They think AMD needs to transition their marketing from small, chip on their shoulder type company to 'big boy' marketing.
• AMD originally said support for AM4 through 2020 (with an asterisk) but later (subtly) changed it to until 2020.
• AMD deserves some criticism for how it handled everything, but the reaction has also been overblown.
• They spoke with multiple board makers and the technical issues with the ROM size is real. "Internet sleuths" trying to prove that the technical issue doesn't exist are wrong and don't understand the full picture.
• BIOS support resources for most board makers are already stretched to the limit.
• Technically board makers could get creative to support all AM4 CPUs but while those options are technically achievable, they are unrealistic to actually implement.

 

[coercitiv]

New video by GN on the subject that I think covers it in a fair and informed way.

I thought that too until some of the parts in that clip didn't quite make sense.

"Internet sleuths" trying to prove that the technical issue doesn't exist are wrong and don't understand the full picture.

That's quite a bit of hand-waiving from a hardware news & reviews outlet that makes it it's business to investigate technical issues without fully understanding the big picture. If they have more info from mobo makers yet cannot discuss it publicly, the least they can do is not talk down on people who take the time to do the detective work. They used to be those people.

BIOS support resources for most board makers are already stretched to the limit.

I can agree with that as a whole, but again the GN take is high-contrast to say the least:

• on one side they speak of Asus having money come out their rear-end from selling Intel boards before the Ryzen 1000 release
• on the other side they talk of OEMs not being able to afford more than 1 BIOS engineer

So Asus was "printing" money from motherboard sales just a few years ago, yet today can presumably barely afford a "small" BIOS team. Don't serve me the low margin argument while also speaking of how much money Asus was making a few years ago.

Last but not least, he makes an example of the time when Intel did not comment on AMD related questions from GN during their press events. If that was the right way to market their products (which may be, I have no formed opinion here), then why was GN asking Intel about AMD in the first place?

I like Gamers Nexus, but this piece doesn't feel as accurate as they're used to deliver.

 

[AtenRa]

• Technically board makers could get creative to support all AM4 CPUs but while those options are technically achievable, they unrealistic to actually implement.

Heh, give me a brake,

AMD and the Board Partners would know that from far back in 2017 and yet AMDs Marketing department continued to communicate to the public they will support AM4 through 2020.
Personally the AMD Marketing department along with the Engineering department messed up badly here.
Especially the Marketing department has failed to increase the attractiveness and desirability of AMD Brand Name to the consumer.


They are lucky Intel is in such a f..... up state in DIY Desktop.

Edit: AMD and Board Partners could easily create a new BIOS for the 3xx/4xx chipstes to allow only a ZEN 3 CPU support. Im sure every motherboard would easily use a single gen CPU and the vast majority of consumers would not care if the new BIOS would only have Ryzen 4xxx support when they would upgrade to ZEN 3. No need to support all four generations of CPUs in the same BIOS

 

[rainy]

AMD and the Board Partners would know that from far back in 2017 and yet AMDs Marketing department continued to communicate to the public they will support AM4 through 2020.

Personally, I don't like it how AMD is handle whole situation, however they have promised support till 2020 and not as you've said.

Btw, is quite understandable that users of older motherboards would love to have opportunity to use Zen 3 as well.

 

[Hitman928]

That's quite a bit of hand-waiving from a hardware news & reviews outlet that makes it it's business to investigate technical issues without fully understanding the big picture. If they have more info from mobo makers yet cannot discuss it publicly, the least they can do is not talk down on people who take the time to do the detective work. They used to be those people.

I thought they gave decent detail here. I mean, what more detail did you want? They talked about the ROM limitation as well as most boards already having to not support the full range of current AM4 CPUs due to these limitations. They talk about how larger ROMs could have been used but due to both the cost and AMD's competitive history at Zen1's launch, it wasn't going to happen from the beginning. You could argue that board makers should have moved to larger ROMs for the 400 series boards but then that would increase costs and most board makers still wouldn't have done it for most boards and AMD would have to require it for chipset compatability which would have created a firestorm amongst the board makers.

I can agree with that as a whole, but again the GN take is high-contrast to say the least:

• on one side they speak of Asus having money come out their rear-end from selling Intel boards before the Ryzen 1000 release
• on the other side they talk of OEMs not being able to afford more than 1 BIOS engineer

So Asus was "printing" money from motherboard sales just a few years ago, yet today can presumably barely afford a "small" BIOS team. Don't serve me the low margin argument while also speaking of how much money Asus was making a few years ago.

This is how these businesses work. You might not like it, but this is how they've been operating for years now. Why do you think companies are willing to sink cost into special skus, support, and marketing to get Intel, or Google's, or Apple's business? Why don't they sink those same resources into smaller players? Because the volumes they see aren't worth the extra costs.

Last but not least, he makes an example of the time when Intel did not comment on AMD related questions from GN during their press events. If that was the right way to market their products (which may be, I have no formed opinion here), then why was GN asking Intel about AMD in the first place?

He didn't say that not acknowledging your competitor at all is the right way to do it, but that somewhere inbetween the two approaches and closer to intel's is what he feels is the proper way but this is really just an editorial opinion from someone who is front and center in the enthusiast community.

I like Gamers Nexus, but this piece doesn't feel as accurate as they're used to deliver.

That's fine, it doesn't change the content of the piece though and the fact that there is way more involved in this than people are suggesting when someone points out a board here and there that could support additional SKUs or come up with their own work around solutions when they don't have to face the costs and headaches of those solutions nor deal with all the negotiations and politics that go into supporting a platform across multiple OEMs on a global scale.

Does AMD deserve some criticism? Yes. I believe that if they had just announced this when Zen2 launched, they would have faced some backlash, but it would have been much better overall for everyone. With that said, people are blowing this way out of proportion and acting like AMD has turned to the "dark side" and is this evil company all of a sudden.

 

[Hitman928]

Heh, give me a brake,

AMD and the Board Partners would know that from far back in 2017 and yet AMDs Marketing department continued to communicate to the public they will support AM4 through 2020.
Personally the AMD Marketing department along with the Engineering department messed up badly here.
Especially the Marketing department has failed to increase the attractiveness and desirability of AMD Brand Name to the consumer.


They are lucky Intel is in such a f..... up state in DIY Desktop.

Edit: AMD and Board Partners could easily create a new BIOS for the 3xx/4xx chipstes to allow only a ZEN 3 CPU support. Im sure every motherboard would easily use a single gen CPU and the vast majority of consumers would not care if the new BIOS would only have Ryzen 4xxx support when they would upgrade to ZEN 3. No need to support all four generations of CPUs in the same BIOS

All of this was addressed in the video so I won't rehash it here but I will point out that your suggested solution was also addressed specifically. This would significantly increase customer support as well as RMA costs for board makers and AMD as well as create bad experiences for many users who have or will switch to AMD.

 

[PingSpike]

Well, looking on the bright side I personally am still interested to see the B550 boards.

There's still a chance that this chipset fixes the ACS separation issues that 300/400 series had, as its actually newer hardware. Probably not but its possible. This chipset has 8x/8x support and maybe it will even be commonly available unlike x570. And while it lacks SATA ports, they probably won't have the speed regressions of x570 since asmedia makes them not AMD...and with 3.0 slots on the chipset (and jmicron releasing the first new pci-e sata chipset in years) it will be easier to make up for their loss. And I'm sure it will be lower power than x570, possibly better than x470 or at least as good. Unfortunately that is a big list of wait and sees.

 

[Atari2600]

Poor form IMO.

As long as they have learned and specified bigger ROM sizes for any future board specs then its not so bad. Repeating the same mistake in another year or two would be unforgiveable.

 

[Markfw]

Poor form IMO.

As long as they have learned and specified bigger ROM sizes for any future board specs then its not so bad. Repeating the same mistake in another year or two would be unforgiveable.

I have that issue with my EPYC boards. Many of them only have (and I could have the sizes mixed up or wrong) 16 meg for 7001 series support, and it has to be a 32 meg bios for 7001 and 7002 series support.

 

[Hitman928]

Poor form IMO.

As long as they have learned and specified bigger ROM sizes for any future board specs then its not so bad. Repeating the same mistake in another year or two would be unforgiveable.

I doubt we'll see bigger ROM sizes in general next gen but we'll see.

 

[zir_blazer]

Oh, about the whole B450/X470 with PCIe 4 on the Processor Slots, I just found out that such a thing does exist: The OEM only B550A Chipset.
It is pretty much previous Promontory X470/B450 silicon with a shiny new name. So yes, AMD actually did it like 6 months ago or so. They just provide no such solution in the DIY market.

There's still a chance that this chipset fixes the ACS separation issues that 300/400 series had, as its actually newer hardware.

If it was made by AMD I would believe that it has PCIe ACS, since X570 had it. If it is made by ASMedia, I doubt so, too much of a niche feature and they don't have a good track record with those.
Also, do we know who is actually making the B550? I would find it weird that there are two different Chipset designs on a single generation.



Finally, since everyone is talking way too much about BIOS sizes, shrinking the AGESA with selective Processor support and the like, you may be interesed in reading THIS. I wrote it several months ago for a reason, but no one here paid attention to it. Now I'm sure that more people will be interesed.

 

[Rigg]

From a PR and Marketing POV this is an absolute disaster. I expect nothing less from AMD at this point. Their launches are fraught with bone headed mistakes. It seems like they just can't help but step on a rake every time they release a new product. Every launch there is some dumb and avoidable flub that results in outraged customers. There previus 3 launches also had some form of controversy.

-Early Zen 2 300/400 series bios support and boost issues
-5700(xt) driver issues
-5600 xt last minute vbios update to make the cards price competitive

There is probably more that I'm forgetting.

I agree that there processor naming needs work. Keep the numbering scheme consistent with node at least. Even if mobile needs to be a number higher. Releasing Zen + CPU's under 1000 model numbers is bizarre and confusing. I'm not sure why the APU's are even Ryzen branded. These should be Athlons IMO.

 

[Shivansps]

Poor form IMO.

As long as they have learned and specified bigger ROM sizes for any future board specs then its not so bad. Repeating the same mistake in another year or two would be unforgiveable.

Some OEM did things right, the Asus Prime A320M-K supports from the A6-9500 all the way up to R9 3950X with the same bios, that single board has the best AM4 CPU compatibility ever done so far.

Oh, about the whole B450/X470 with PCIe 4 on the Processor Slots, I just found out that such a thing does exist: The OEM only B550A Chipset.
It is pretty much previous Promontory X470/B450 silicon with a shiny new name. So yes, AMD actually did it like 6 months ago or so. They just provide no such solution in the DIY market.

Well that it is then, logic wins again.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Oh, about the whole B450/X470 with PCIe 4 on the Processor Slots, I just found out that such a thing does exist: The OEM only B550A Chipset.

Looks just like a B550 motherboard. What's the actual difference? It doesn't look like a B450 rebrand at all.

 

[piokos]

With that said, people are blowing this way out of proportion and acting like AMD has turned to the "dark side" and is this evil company all of a sudden.

How is AMD *not* and "evil company"? You're suggesting they're in this business for fun?

It's a company like any other. They're in this for profit.
Internally they're much like Intel. They just need to treat this a bit more seriously.

 

[Hitman928]

Oh, about the whole B450/X470 with PCIe 4 on the Processor Slots, I just found out that such a thing does exist: The OEM only B550A Chipset.
It is pretty much previous Promontory X470/B450 silicon with a shiny new name. So yes, AMD actually did it like 6 months ago or so. They just provide no such solution in the DIY market.



If it was made by AMD I would believe that it has PCIe ACS, since X570 had it. If it is made by ASMedia, I doubt so, too much of a niche feature and they don't have a good track record with those.
Also, do we know who is actually making the B550? I would find it weird that there are two different Chipset designs on a single generation.



Finally, since everyone is talking way too much about BIOS sizes, shrinking the AGESA with selective Processor support and the like, you may be interesed in reading THIS. I wrote it several months ago for a reason, but no one here paid attention to it. Now I'm sure that more people will be interesed.

As far as I know, the B550A boards were redesigned boards to make them support newer features/CPUs. This was done for OEMs because the regular 550 chipset was delayed but board makers already had been preparing for their original release date so they had board designs that were ready for things such as PCIe4 and the new CPUs. For instance, I don't think there is an Asrock B450 board that you can point to and show that the 550a gaming is the same board, it is unique in their lineup. Even just looking at the VRMs, I don't think there's a B450 board that matches the B550AM. Even still, I'm pretty sure some 400 series boards might have been able to handle PCIe4 at least to the nvme and/or first GPU slot, but then you get back to the logistics of actually supporting it on a small number of boards and the headaches that ensue and eventually AMD just decided it was more trouble than it was worth.