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.

 

[coercitiv]

are there really that many people buying a budget chipset who were also looking to make a pretty minor jump from Zen 2 to Zen 3?

Zen 3 will bring a decent IPC improvement, but I suspect barely any clock, and no core count increases.

Zen 3 is very likely to make a serious jump in gaming performance relative to Zen 2. A preview of what may happen is the 3300X vs 3100 which shows how much faster Zen 2 can be at gaming when all cores within a CCD share the same L3 cache. The gains from lower inter-core latencies are so big that not even memory overclocking and optimized timings can mitigate the performance delta.

 

[Topweasel]

Zen 3 is very likely to make a serious jump in gaming performance relative to Zen 2. A preview of what may happen is the 3300X vs 3100 which shows how much faster Zen 2 can be at gaming when all cores within a CCD share the same L3 cache. The gains from lower inter-core latencies are so big that not even memory overclocking and optimized timings can mitigate the performance delta.

I think it will be pretty similar to the Zen 2 increase. New arch and sure a reconfigged L3 will help and if we compare to Intel this is the Sandybridge to Skylake level of IPC gain in just one generation. It's large. But its not like what Zen 2 brought, higher clocks, a unique turboing solution that really does pull max clocks for the scenario out of your cpu, an already also large IPC increase, and a doubling up of cores. For all that Zen 3 will build on that with the new arch and cache management, its just not going to be the bright and shiny of Zen 2. Which was kind of my point. Zen 2 to Zen 3 is going to be like Zen vs Skylake. It's going to be faster but the greater value even with the 5-10% lower game performance lies with the Zen 2 product and is a massive performance upgrade option for even 2nd gen Ryzen solutions.

 

[Gideon]

Zen 3 is very likely to make a serious jump in gaming performance relative to Zen 2. A preview of what may happen is the 3300X vs 3100 which shows how much faster Zen 2 can be at gaming when all cores within a CCD share the same L3 cache. The gains from lower inter-core latencies are so big that not even memory overclocking and optimized timings can mitigate the performance delta.

I agree about zen3. But the diff between 3300 and 3100 is almost surely due to half the L3 per CCX. After all 3600 and 3700x perform at the same level

 

[Zucker2k]

der8auer's take on this debate.

 

[DrMrLordX]

That part of the manual make it sound like PCI-E 4.0 is also enabled on Summit Ridge,

That is completely impossible.

@Zucker2k

That video is worth watching just for the cat.

 

[coercitiv]

That video is worth watching just for the cat.

Also for the part where he tells Ryzen 3000 owners they could just skip Zen 3 entirely since performance benefit is very small. This is golden, PC enthusiast on his enthusiast YT channel telling people they could just skip a new CPU product and wait until motherboards become.... more advanced and upgrade worthy.

From this point onward I no longer care about AMDs part of this story, I just wanna' see every tech channel come up with their own ridiculous idea of why this is happening and how to fix it.

[Edit] I'm still laughing here: the solution to mobo makers needing to sell more motherboards is consumers buying less CPUs.

 

[Rigg]

I don't even know what "productivity benefit" is. Can you measure it for gamers as well?

It means the CPU upgrade needs to result in getting work done faster/more efficiently to justify the investment. This shouldn't be hard to calculate with some degree of accuracy in any business that is dependent on specific applications to make money. If the CPU upgrade isn't resulting in increased productivity than it's a bad business decision. The cost of a motherboard and the downtime to upgrade a work machine would be factored into this decision.

Actually you can measure this for gamers in a similar way. It's pretty simple. How much extra FPS performance do I get for spending x amount of money? That's kind of my point. Up to a certain point a new GPU and/or a Zen 2 upgrade is going to net considerably more performance per dollar than upgrading to Zen 3 will. You need to spend so much money on a GPU to bottleneck a Zen 2 that sweating over $100 motherboard upgrade becomes hilarious.

It's really not necessary to mention precise scenarios. Is a general issue.
You buy a CPU + mobo today (moment A). You'd like to upgrade in 2-3 years (moment B).
With Intel you expect that this will force replacing the motherboard - you buy 2 mobos and 2 CPUs.
With AMD you were being convinced that your motherboard will work.
So the only important question is: given the same budget for the PC, could that make you spend more initially (A)?

Our assessment of this issue depends on which Zen2 and Zen3 CPUs will be in production 2-3 years from now.

I'm not here to defend AMD (or their board partners) misleading marketing and bad public relations. I'm merely pointing out that as a practical matter this is being overblown. Unless you bought a B450 with an R9 you have upgrades available. AMD has incentive to keep making Zen 2 CPU's. The cost to produce them has decreased while yields have increased. It wouldn't surprise me to see them release more SKU's. They could put out Zen 2 65w 12 and 16 cores. They can put out Zen 2 6 and 8 cores with much better binned chiplets.

 

[Thunder 57]

Ignoring AMDs perpetually -redacted- communications, are there really that many people buying a budget chipset who were also looking to make a pretty minor jump from Zen 2 to Zen 3?

Profanity in the tech forums is prohibited.

Daveybrat
AT Moderator

What about people like me who wanted to go from Zen+ to Zen3?

 

[Markfw]

What about people like me who wanted to go from Zen+ to Zen3?

Until it comes out, I don;t know all the features and requirements, but my gut tells me that if you want one, the performance will be so hampered by other older motherboards, you would be way better off investing in a more recent chipset/motherboard to get what you paid for in the chip, ewven if some older motherboards do release a bios that boots it.

 

[Rigg]

What about people like me who wanted to go from Zen+ to Zen3?

Your upgrade options have just been made abundantly clear.

Option 1: Upgrade to a Zen 2 and keep your current motherboard
Option 2: Sell your current motherboard and upgrade to b550/x570/x670
Option 3: Wait 2 more years for AM5
Option 4: Compromise between # 1 and #3. Buy a 3300x/3600 in the interim and upgrade to AM5 in the future
Option 5: Sell your current motherboard/CPU and switch to 10th gen Intel on principal
Option 6: Continue to publicly voice your displeasure in hopes AMD caves and offers Zen 3 support for your motherboard

If I were in this situation I'd be listing my motherboard for sale immediately to maximize resale value. You couldn't have been gifted a better opportunity to minimize the fallout from a forced motherboard upgrade. Used AM4 is going for stupid money right now. Assuming you can do without your system being functional while you track down an x570 to use with your current CPU in the interim.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Until it comes out, I don;t know all the features and requirements, but my gut tells me that if you want one, the performance will be so hampered by other older motherboards, you would be way better off investing in a more recent chipset/motherboard to get what you paid for in the chip, ewven if some older motherboards do release a bios that boots it.

I’m certainly not an expert but this sounds correct. There is a reason why they aren’t making it more backward compatible. I’m sure money & engineering time is part of the equation however I suspect there is a big performance aspect too.
I suspect AMD doesn’t make a ton of money off motherboard sales.

 

[Markfw]

I’m certainly not an expert but this sounds correct. There is a reason why they aren’t making it more backward compatible. I’m sure money & engineering time is part of the equation however I suspect there is a big performance aspect too.
I suspect AMD doesn’t make a ton of money off motherboard sales.

And its not just that, but the issue of the bios size, and the work it would take to create literally hundreds of BIOS's to do a bad job of supporting these new chips. And if they DON'T have enough space in their BIOS chip then its not even an option. Everybody seems so bent on being pissed that their $60 motherboard won;t support a NEW probably $300 or better CPU. Even if it was $200, and I was missing 1/3rd the performance, because my motherboard was an old design, I would buy a new motherboard.

Too many whiners ......

 

[DrMrLordX]

Until it comes out, I don;t know all the features and requirements, but my gut tells me that if you want one, the performance will be so hampered by other older motherboards, you would be way better off investing in a more recent chipset/motherboard to get what you paid for in the chip, ewven if some older motherboards do release a bios that boots it.

That might be true now, but it wasn't necessarily true for people running Matisse on x370 boards (for example). I would say that people on a C6H are within 5% of people on a C8H.

I suspect AMD doesn’t make a ton of money off motherboard sales.

Hard to say? x570 is AMD's baby from top to bottom. Everything else from A320 on up to X470 and B550 are ASMedia chipsets. I don't know if AMD gets a cut of every chipset ASMedia sells.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

That might be true now, but it wasn't necessarily true for people running Matisse on x370 boards (for example). I would say that people on a C6H are within 5% of people on a C8H.



Hard to say? x570 is AMD's baby from top to bottom. Everything else from A320 on up to X470 and B550 are ASMedia chipsets. I don't know if AMD gets a cut of every chipset ASMedia sells.

I’m sure they do and I’m sure they get some kind of licensing fee out of new boards, I just doubt it is a sizable amount of cash.
Really the question is does a fraction of a fraction of their existing customer base being disappointed their old board won’t work with a new chip vs some incremental revenue and assurance all boards meet or exceed expectations.

 

[Shivansps]

I’m certainly not an expert but this sounds correct. There is a reason why they aren’t making it more backward compatible. I’m sure money & engineering time is part of the equation however I suspect there is a big performance aspect too.
I suspect AMD doesn’t make a ton of money off motherboard sales.

There is no reason to have less compatibility than X570 and that one has a chipset supporting PCI-E 4.0, B550 has zero PCI-E 4.0 support. Im yet to find any explanation of why retrocompatibility is a issue that actually makes sence. Other than it is a business decision to sell new cpus.

And its not just that, but the issue of the bios size, and the work it would take to create literally hundreds of BIOS's to do a bad job of supporting these new chips. And if they DON'T have enough space in their BIOS chip then its not even an option. Everybody seems so bent on being pissed that their $60 motherboard won;t support a NEW probably $300 or better CPU. Even if it was $200, and I was missing 1/3rd the performance, because my motherboard was an old design, I would buy a new motherboard.

Too many whiners ......

Asus Prime A320M-K supports from A6-9500 to R9 3950X on the same bios version, please dont bring up bios sizes as an issue, the cheapest of AM4 motherboards supports Bristol, Raven, Summit, Pinnacle, Raven2, Picasso and Mattise, it is just silly on new motherboards to talk about bios sizes. And is not much of a issue either, most brands with incorrect bios sizes on 300 series had to cut Bristol Ridge support since X version, is not much of a problem to cut Summit Ridge and Raven on B550 if needed.... IN FACT they did exactly that with X570 only to add it without announcing it on 1.0.0.4.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Asus Prime A320M-K supports from A6-9500 to R9 3950X on the same bios version, please dont bring up bios sizes as an issue, the cheapest of AM4 motherboards supports Bristol, Raven, Summit, Pinnacle, Raven2, Picasso and Mattise, it is just silly on new motherboards to talk about bios sizes. And is not much of a issue either, most brands with incorrect bios sizes on 300 series had to cut Bristol Ridge support since X version, is not much of a problem to cut Summit Ridge if needed.... IN FACT they did exactly that with X570 only to add it without announcing it on 1.0.0.4.

And that board has poor reviews

Amazon.com

www.amazon.com

If you buy a modern Ryzen processor for this motherboard, you'll be sad to find that it isn't supported out of the box. You'll find no indication of this on this Amazon page or on the ASUS support page. The only way to fix this issue is with a BIOS update that can only be done if you have a 1st gen Ryzen cpu to use first. If you don't, you literally can't use the motherboard. They have convoluted solution where you have to contact AMD and ask for a "AMD Boot Kit" which is just a thumbdrive the the bios update and an old used cpu. This takes weeks to get done and is absurd.

Don't buy this board unless you have an old gen 1 Ryzen processor.

And it appears to not offer the best performance

**warning** this is just quick googling

UserBenchmark: Asus PRIME A320M-K Compatible Builds

www.userbenchmark.com

this is my point it may simply be a decision of is it worth it to offer a board that could be compatible with bad reviews vs selling a new board that is known to have good performance.

 

[Thunder 57]

Your upgrade options have just been made abundantly clear.

Option 1: Upgrade to a Zen 2 and keep your current motherboard
Option 2: Sell your current motherboard and upgrade to b550/x570/x670
Option 3: Wait 2 more years for AM5
Option 4: Compromise between # 1 and #3. Buy a 3300x/3600 in the interim and upgrade to AM5 in the future
Option 5: Sell your current motherboard/CPU and switch to 10th gen Intel on principal
Option 6: Continue to publicly voice your displeasure in hopes AMD caves and offers Zen 3 support for your motherboard

If I were in this situation I'd be listing my motherboard for sale immediately to maximize resale value. You couldn't have been gifted a better opportunity to minimize the fallout from a forced motherboard upgrade. Used AM4 is going for stupid money right now. Assuming you can do without your system being functional while you track down an x570 to use with your current CPU in the interim.

I know what my options are, but that doesn't mean I have to like them. People rightfully give Intel crap for their lack of upgrade options. I was hoping for unofficial support just like some 300 series boards support Zen 2. I'd be even more upset if I bought Zen 2 with a B450 as then I couldn't even get one more generation out of it, even if one generation is probably never worth it.

It wouldn't be so bad if B550 wasn't stupidly late. It should have been out at least 6 months ago. I suppose that's on ASMedia though. Also, this if my first comment on the matter and I'm hardly whining about it like others are. I basically said I was hoping to go from Zen+ to Zen 3. Now I know I won't be able to. Oh well. SO I'll go with option 3 or 4. I'm sure I could get a 3700X/3800X cheap enough later on then jump to AM5, or just wait till AM5.

...Even if it was $200, and I was missing 1/3rd the performance, because my motherboard was an old design, I would buy a new motherboard.

Too many whiners ......

Where are you getting that from? Don't you run Zen 2 in x370 boards? No way you're losing 1/3 the performance. You may not have access to as many or newer features, but that's always been part of the compromise.

 

[Markfw]

Where are you getting that from? Don't you run Zen 2 in x370 boards? No way you're losing 1/3 the performance. You may not have access to as many or newer features, but that's always been part of the compromise.

Zen3 . If I bought a Zen3, I would most likely lose a lot of performance if an x370 board had a bios to run it. Or a b450.

My point is, if this chip is so different that older motherboards lose performance with a bios update that supports this new cpu, its bad for AMD. I guess they have decided not to do it, and I don't blame them.

Then there is the issue of the BIOS having enough memory. If thats true (which I bet it is), then its a nobrainer, it can;t happen.

Then there is the issue of modding 500 BIOS files to support it, bad or not. Thats a practicality thing.

 

[Rigg]

I know what my options are, but that doesn't mean I have to like them. People rightfully give Intel crap for their lack of upgrade options. I was hoping for unofficial support just like some 300 series boards support Zen 2. I'd be even more upset if I bought Zen 2 with a B450 as then I couldn't even get one more generation out of it, even if one generation is probably never worth it.

It wouldn't be so bad if B550 wasn't stupidly late. It should have been out at least 6 months ago. I suppose that's on ASMedia though. Also, this if my first comment on the matter and I'm hardly whining about it like others are. I basically said I was hoping to go from Zen+ to Zen 3. Now I know I won't be able to. Oh well. SO I'll go with option 3 or 4. I'm sure I could get a 3700X/3800X cheap enough later on then jump to AM5, or just wait till AM5.

I don't blame you for not liking the situation. I also didn't mean to imply that you were whining. You sound like you are looking at the situation rationally and in practical terms. We don't have to like it but the situation is what it is.

Out of curiosity, If Zen 3 was set for release in Q1 2021 rather than Q4 2020 would you still be annoyed? If this is released a few months later is there anything to complain about?

I understand and accept the decision. I still think this situation was handled poorly on several fronts by AMD. B550 delays were certainly gasoline on this fire. If AMD had PR and marketing people worth a damn they should have made X570 and B550 AM4+. They should have made it clear these would be the only chipsets to support the next gen Zen 3 CPU's when they announced Zen 2. If Zen 3 is the last AM4 launch they better make that clear as well. Otherwise they should be prepared for plenty of butthurt from the 500 series owners 2 years from now.

 

[Thunder 57]

Zen3 . If I bought a Zen3, I would most likely lose a lot of performance if an x370 board had a bios to run it. Or a b450.

My point is, if this chip is so different that older motherboards lose performance with a bios update that supports this new cpu, its bad for AMD. I guess they have decided not to do it, and I don't blame them.

Then there is the issue of the BIOS having enough memory. If thats true (which I bet it is), then its a nobrainer, it can;t happen.

Then there is the issue of modding 500 BIOS files to support it, bad or not. Thats a practicality thing.

I meant you are running Zen 2 on x370, when Zen 2 was meant for 500 series chipsets. Do you really think you are losing up to 1/3 performance by running x370 instead of x570? I imagine it would be the same for a 400 series chipset intended for Zen+ and presumably a 600 series chipset launched with Zen 3.

If AMD had come out and said at Zen 2 launch a 500 series chipset would be required for future upgrades, that would've gone a long way in reducing the surprise. Or if B550 had launched much earlier. B550 is practically DoA. Anyone who wanted Zen 2 made up their mind already which means all it serves is to save a few bucks with a Zen 3 build. This is assuming Zen3 is the last AM4 launch.

I don't blame you for not liking the situation. I also didn't mean to imply that you were whining. You sound like you are looking at the situation rationally and in practical terms. We don't have to like it but the situation is what it is.

Out of curiosity, If Zen 3 was set for release in Q1 2021 rather than Q4 2020 would you still be annoyed? If this is released a few months later is there anything to complain about?

I understand and accept the decision. I still think this situation was handled poorly on several fronts by AMD. B550 delays were certainly gasoline on this fire. If AMD had PR and marketing people worth a damn they should have made X570 and B550 AM4+. They should have made it clear these would be the only chipsets to support the next gen Zen 3 CPU's when they announced Zen 2. If Zen 3 is the last AM4 launch they better make that clear as well. Otherwise they should be prepared for plenty of butthurt from the 500 series owners 2 years from now.

Considering I'm not in any rush to upgrade, it doesn't matter to me. I would have liked the option to upgrade to Zen 3 at some point though. Let AM5 mature a bit and assuming it uses DDR5 some time for prices to settle on the new memory. Yea, AMD marketing is pretty piss poor compared to the CPU's they make.

My last main build was a dead end Intel, but at least I knew that going in. B550 buyers in particular ought to know if they are investing in a dead end platform as well, or if there will be a Zen3+ or something.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Intel changes chipsets like normal people change underwear. The response to Intel: oh you
AMD doesn't do legacy support: the world has ended

 

[Markfw]

I meant you are running Zen 2 on x370, when Zen 2 was meant for 500 series chipsets. Do you really think you are losing up to 1/3 performance by running x370 instead of x570? I imagine it would be the same for a 400 series chipset intended for Zen+ and presumably a 600 series chipset launched with Zen 3.

I am losing performance, I have no PCIE4 ! And in some ways, I AM losing 30% or more. But I don't need that for what I am doing. So I am OK. If it did not work at all, I would not have sold my 1800x.

 

[Snakexor]

I am losing performance, I have no PCIE4 ! And in some ways, I AM losing 30% or more. But I don't need that for what I am doing. So I am OK. If it did not work at all, I would not have sold my 1800x.

Mark,

Can you be more specific about "Where" you are losing 30% or more?

Interested x370 owner looking to upgrade to a 3900/50. Thanks.

 

[Markfw]

Mark,

Can you be more specific about "Where" you are losing 30% or more?

Interested x370 owner looking to upgrade to a 3900/50. Thanks.

I don't have PCIE4, which the CPU supports, but not the motherboard. If I was doing things requiring large constant IO, I would be losing performance. I don't have that need.

I am sure there are other small things, but its doing fine for me the way its working.

 

[coercitiv]

Intel changes chipsets like normal people change underwear. The response to Intel: oh you
AMD doesn't do legacy support: the world has ended

AMD had no value chipset at Zen 2 launch, so they advised people to buy B450 if they did not need PCIe 4.0. For all intents and purposes, the B450 was the B550 they could not deliver. People bought B450 /w Zen 2, only to find out a few days ago that there was one more huge difference between B450 and X570: support for the next gen arch. Sorry, technical and/or cost problems that could have been foreseen since a year ago at the very least.

So in just one week we have gone from AMD offering superior compatibility support to Intel in every aspect, to a single painful situation where they ironically offer worse support than Intel. From the Zen 2 buyers point of view, B450 supports only one meaningful CPU generation. And nobody told them.

Think of it this way: what was the purpose of the B450 MAX motherboards from MSI if all their B450 motherboards already supported Ryzen 3000 and future support was going to end with Zen 2 anyway? Why go through the hassle of making and marketing new motherboard SKUs if old ones were fine and the feature difference was almost non-existent except for the BIOS chip size?

Answer? Because they knew consumers were looking for value boards to pair with Zen 2, and X570 boards with more expensive components simply did not cut it. And they knew some of them were worried about future support, so they made the BIOS (chip) bigger and marketed that as competitive advantage. Both MSI and press outlets literally told their customers B450 MAX boards would support future AMD generations.

What did AMD do while all this was happening? Anything but come forth and have a honest discussion with their board partners at least. The least you can do is warn the damn OEMs: shut up, we can't do that.

They could also have warned consumers but here's the rub, that might have affected Zen 2 sales... becasue you know... no B550 chipset for value boards. Fun stuff right? Consumers basically paid for ASMedia's failure.