Speculation: Ryzen 3000 series

[Markfw]

This means you also support what Intel does?

AMD is way more supportive on socket changes than Intel, you know this. I am saying that everybody expects "to the moon" from a crappy (cheap) motherboard. I am saying they did what they said, and its way more than Intel. Every Intel system I have had in the last 7 years, only lasted me a year, then a new socket. One example in particular. I got a 3930k (which I GAVE away to a forum member here), and in no time, now socket 2011 was dead, even though physically a new CPU would work, but now they are socket 2011-3, So I had to give the CPU away, and it really pissed me off.

 

[Shivansps]

AMD is way more supportive on socket changes than Intel, you know this. I am saying that everybody expects "to the moon" from a crappy (cheap) motherboard. I am saying they did what they said, and its way more than Intel. Every Intel system I have had in the last 7 years, only lasted me a year, then a new socket. One example in particular. I got a 3930k (which I GAVE away to a forum member here), and in no time, now socket 2011 was dead, even though physically a new CPU would work, but now they are socket 2011-3, So I had to give the CPU away, and it really pissed me off.

You are right about that, but i dont think anyone asking too much here, in fact if 12C and 16C was reserved for 500 series only that would be perfectly fine too, i could understand it. I just saying they should be bound by the promise they made in 2017 instead of looking for loopholes in what they said.

And i can understand about PCI-E 4 as well, supporting AM4 dosent mean add PCI-E 4, but they should have not said anything about not blocking it if a OEM wanted to add support.

 

[Shivansps]

Seems to me in there that said that this was their intention but they couldn't promise people that this was actually going to happen. Cept for the most part they are sticking to that. But whether or not it was disinterest by the MFGs or an understanding on the lackluster build quality or what. They are going into their 3rd gen and probable 4th generation of support on the older platform. I am not going to slam them for not being perfect. They at least tried. We got a new chipset and platform for increased power usage on CoffeeLake. Even though we know that's not a real issue on the Z chipsets boards that you had to get anyways. But AMD says ok we can mostly do it but certain versions aren't going to work as well, but still letting the other chipsets work, when the competition would just write off the whole platform, should be commended.

I could agree that they tried if, and only if, A320 was also OEM choice, but AMD just said NO, IM SURE that OEMs did not wanted to support the 300 series no matter what AMD wanted to do, you dont need to tell me that, BUT just dropping A320 like that considering the chipset and motherboards are still in production and not EOL... In fact they have nothing to replace A320 with.

They did much better than Intel, thats for sure.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

All this whining when a $55 B450 motherboard will support at least 8 cores for this generation, and probably the next one or 2. They never said "but we will give you new features that you can't use unless you upgrade." They said you won't have to buy a new motherboard, and I don't care about the 300 series either.

....but....Muh Feelz....

All I can say is if you’re that pissed off about no A320 go buy an intel system and see how that works out with cost/upgrading.

 

[Thunder 57]

They did much better than Intel, thats for sure.

QFT. Intel's shenanigans go back to at least Sandy Bridge. One chipset to rule them all? Nah. Oh wait, here's Z68, which should have been available at launch. But you still can't have VT-d if you also want to overclock, just because!

Z77 and Z75. No idea why Intel made Z75. The only difference was no smart response technology and no 3 way SLI. Literally.
Not that I minded, as it saved me a few bucks. Maybe that's why we didn't see a two tiered Z series again that I recall.

The worst offenders have to be Skylake to present. Just look at the buffoonery going on with CPU support. SK-L support KB-L, KB-L only supported KB-L, and CF-L only supports CF-L.

There was a time with AMD that on an nforce 570 SLI chipset I got the 3800+ X2, a die shrunk 5000+ X2, then a Phenom II X4 940. So one that board I got two die shrinks and went from 2 to 4 cores. I had to sacrifice some by using the old chipset, but it worked.

So when AMD went ahead and said socket AM4 until at least 2020, I was all over that. I have a feeling I will be on AM4 for another 3 years. Time will tell.

 

[Topweasel]

I could agree that they tried if, and only if, A320 was also OEM choice, but AMD just said NO, IM SURE that OEMs did not wanted to support the 300 series no matter what AMD wanted to do, you dont need to tell me that, BUT just dropping A320 like that considering the chipset and motherboards are still in production and not EOL... In fact they have nothing to replace A320 with.

They did much better than Intel, thats for sure.

You act like the OEMs had no say in this. Why do you think they dropped PCIe 4.0. You would be just as angry if AMD announced A320 support, then the Mobo mfgs said hey we aren't supporting it because we under engineered the boards and the OEMs said they weren't interested. What probably happened here is the OEMs behind closed doors said they weren't interested and the Mobo guys said that those boards were so cheap they didn't want to put the effort in and so under specced that they doubted it was going to work and it's better now then preordering a CPU and finding that a BIOS update isn't coming to your board. It's the same thing with PCIe 4.0. It was going to be such a tossup that trying to make it work wasn't going to be worth it.

The only reason we even had a chance at PCIe 4.0 is because there was probably some entusiasm on the high end. Companies like ASRock used to live off of Frankenstien products. But then MSI says we aren't even going to try. Others have high-end boards with a PCIe 1-4x slot before the 16x slot that are probably SOL and others just couldn't get it to work.

AMD wouldn't have done this without OEM and MFG recommendation. This just happened to have been decided before the CPUs announcement keeping the whole decision behind closed doors.

 

[amd6502]

Sorry i had no idea the universe ended in the eeuu.

Can you please stop making excuses for a company and applying you own suggestive view as for a320 vs b450 is worth it or not? This is simple:

-A320 can support 105W 8c? Yes
-A320 is sold as a current product? Yes
-it was promised that am4 will last to 2020 regardless of the chipset? Yes
-there is any reason for a320 not to support 6 and 8c ryzen 3000? No

Period. You can agree with me or not, i dont care, but you cant argue with the facts.

They attacked a320 because it is the logest lived 300 series chipset, they sold a lot of A320 regardless of what you think if it worth it or not to buy in eeuu.

I don't think anyone attacked the A320, but it is kind of a shame about the A320 matisse compatibility. The one possible explanation I could think of is that maybe the 7nm chips need a cleaner voltage source than some A320 boards' VRMs can provide.

The other reason i can think of is that they are running out of BIOS flash RAM (but here they could maybe offer alternate non-Bristol Ridge bios updates, and at least support a mainstream budget ryzen 5 such as the 3600).

Perhaps come Q4 by the time the matisse R5 quadcore land, they might provide a rough and dirty low bin 7nm chip that is so overvolted it can tolerate somewhat dirty voltage (assuming this is the reason for it).

 

[beginner99]

This means you also support what Intel does?

Something in between might be best but long socket compatibility is hardly very useful mostly. People that upgrade their CPU this quickly within 3 years are enthusiast which are most likley to also want all new features and hence a new mobo. Most people nowadays upgrade after >5 years and often due to the platform (motherboard) and not the CPU performance. holding back your cpu and platform due to backwards compatibility sounds like a worse choice to me.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I don't think anyone attacked the A320, but it is kind of a shame about the A320 matisse compatibility. The one possible explanation I could think of is that maybe the 7nm chips need a cleaner voltage source than some A320 boards' VRMs can provide.

The other reason i can think of is that they are running out of BIOS flash RAM (but here they could maybe offer alternate non-Bristol Ridge bios updates, and at least support a mainstream budget ryzen 5 such as the 3600).

A320 shipped in a lot of OEM systems where CPU upgrades are not gonna happen. It really isn't in AMD's best interest to bend over backwards to support 8c Matisse on such boards, when a significant number of buyers just don't care anyway. Even if AMD had only guaranteed X370 compatibility (and not B350) they'd still be technically keeping their promise of backwards compatibility. There are a LOT of reasons not to support many Matisse chips on B350, and yet, many B350 boards will support Matisse.

Perhaps come Q4 by the time the matisse R5 quadcore land, they might provide a rough and dirty low bin 7nm chip that is so overvolted it can tolerate somewhat dirty voltage (assuming this is the reason for it).

Maybe. The real question is, how much money will AMD and board OEMs spend on cooking up UEFI/microcode updates to assure that such compatibility happens?

 

[B-Riz]

Sorry i had no idea the universe ended in the eeuu.

Can you please stop making excuses for a company and applying you own suggestive view as for a320 vs b450 is worth it or not? This is simple:

-A320 can support 105W 8c? Yes
-A320 is sold as a current product? Yes
-it was promised that am4 will last to 2020 regardless of the chipset? Yes
-there is any reason for a320 not to support 6 and 8c ryzen 3000? No

Period. You can agree with me or not, i dont care, but you cant argue with the facts.

They attacked a320 because it is the logest lived 300 series chipset, they sold a lot of A320 regardless of what you think if it worth it or not to buy in eeuu.

You come to a *majority* enthusiast / DIY forum and complain about the cheapest option AMD provided for OEM's to use; arguably, it was never intended for the DIY market.

Did you ask for buying recommendations or just choose on price?

Buyer beware / you get what you pay for.

If you are in the EU, use your consumer protection laws and fight for the motherboard manufacturer to provide an updated BIOS.

The issue IS NOT AMD Corporate USA, IT IS THE MOTHERBOARD MANUFACTURERS!

 

[Ajay]

Are we aware that they aren't? I mean till the full spec outline is available I would assume they are. Either way all PCIe connections on X570 should support PCIe 4.0. The problem is that the previous boards weren't designed to support the extra tech needed for longer traces.

Good point. I have read about PCIe 4.0 support for the primary GFX connector and two M.2 connectors. The absence of information doesn't mean it is unsupported.

 

[zinfamous]

This means you also support what Intel does?

anyone can probably count on one hand the number of users that actually bought an a320 board to pair with a high-performing 6 or 8 core OG Zen CPU in 2017, with the plan to upgrade to the same class of CPU 2 years, 3, 4 years from then. ...even if you lost 80% of your fingers in a tragic mining accident.

do those boards still work with the type of Zen2 CPU that an actual user actually would have chosen for the lowest of the low end?

Also, what kind of DIY user expects each new generation to appear without brand new features that *may not* be fully compatible with older hardware? who thinks this?

It seems that AMD has maintained the promise that they made.

 

[lobz]

i dont care if its the OEM or AMD at fault here. One of the strong points of AM4 when launched was the "support until 2020", no one said ANYTHING about being OEM choice (B300 and X300) or that A320 will lack support enterely (that was something I WAS THINKING and some people attacked me for saying it back in 2017/8), if that was the case why they didnt launch a replacement A420? The keep selling A320 as first line product just to cut support suddenly now? I rather think it was a "accident".

Personally i would not buy A320 either, and personally i dont care, i care a lot more for my B350 motherboard that still has no bios, but professionally, A320 is our best sold AMD chipset and it was for 2 years now, there is no excuse for what is happening on A320.

OK we get it, AMD is a misleading, money grabbing evil company. Can we move on please?

 

[lobz]

This means you also support what Intel does?

Dude you must kill at parties... how can you compare this with what intel does??

 

[Shivansps]

QFT. Intel's shenanigans go back to at least Sandy Bridge. One chipset to rule them all? Nah. Oh wait, here's Z68, which should have been available at launch. But you still can't have VT-d if you also want to overclock, just because!

Z77 and Z75. No idea why Intel made Z75. The only difference was no smart response technology and no 3 way SLI. Literally.
Not that I minded, as it saved me a few bucks. Maybe that's why we didn't see a two tiered Z series again that I recall.

The worst offenders have to be Skylake to present. Just look at the buffoonery going on with CPU support. SK-L support KB-L, KB-L only supported KB-L, and CF-L only supports CF-L.

There was a time with AMD that on an nforce 570 SLI chipset I got the 3800+ X2, a die shrunk 5000+ X2, then a Phenom II X4 940. So one that board I got two die shrinks and went from 2 to 4 cores. I had to sacrifice some by using the old chipset, but it worked.

So when AMD went ahead and said socket AM4 until at least 2020, I was all over that. I have a feeling I will be on AM4 for another 3 years. Time will tell.

The worst part for AMD was pre-Ryzen, this whole thing with FM1, FM2, FM2+, AM3, AM3+, AM1 was a mess. But they did very very good with AM2/AM3, and AM4 will last until DDR5, a even trought it was not a perfect execution.

 

[Shivansps]

You act like the OEMs had no say in this. Why do you think they dropped PCIe 4.0. You would be just as angry if AMD announced A320 support, then the Mobo mfgs said hey we aren't supporting it because we under engineered the boards and the OEMs said they weren't interested. What probably happened here is the OEMs behind closed doors said they weren't interested and the Mobo guys said that those boards were so cheap they didn't want to put the effort in and so under specced that they doubted it was going to work and it's better now then preordering a CPU and finding that a BIOS update isn't coming to your board. It's the same thing with PCIe 4.0. It was going to be such a tossup that trying to make it work wasn't going to be worth it.

The only reason we even had a chance at PCIe 4.0 is because there was probably some entusiasm on the high end. Companies like ASRock used to live off of Frankenstien products. But then MSI says we aren't even going to try. Others have high-end boards with a PCIe 1-4x slot before the 16x slot that are probably SOL and others just couldn't get it to work.

AMD wouldn't have done this without OEM and MFG recommendation. This just happened to have been decided before the CPUs announcement keeping the whole decision behind closed doors.

In that case i would blame the OEMs for not supporting it. OEMs did not want to support it, the question is why AMD decided to protect those OEM by dropping A320 support instead of leaving it to "OEM choice" and have people blaming the OEMs for not supporting it.
Dont get me wrong I KNOW OEM ARE AT FAULT HERE, they dont want to support more than 2 gens on a motherboard, but why AMD went forward and block A320 so no one can give support even if they wish? This is something AMD did not the OEMs.

I don't think anyone attacked the A320, but it is kind of a shame about the A320 matisse compatibility. The one possible explanation I could think of is that maybe the 7nm chips need a cleaner voltage source than some A320 boards' VRMs can provide.

The other reason i can think of is that they are running out of BIOS flash RAM (but here they could maybe offer alternate non-Bristol Ridge bios updates, and at least support a mainstream budget ryzen 5 such as the 3600).

Perhaps come Q4 by the time the matisse R5 quadcore land, they might provide a rough and dirty low bin 7nm chip that is so overvolted it can tolerate somewhat dirty voltage (assuming this is the reason for it).

ROM is a issue, most of 300 boards are dropping BR support in order to support Ryzen 3000, thats a nice trade off if you ask me. But thats the same problem other boards are facing.

VRMs while it might be a issue, remember that A320 boards tend to be B350 or even X370, with just a diferent chipset. In fact i have in my hands right now a MSI A320M Gaming PRO and a MSI B350M Gaming PRO, i cant find a diference.

The issue IS NOT AMD Corporate USA, IT IS THE MOTHERBOARD MANUFACTURERS!

I know, but why AMD blocked A320 support? This is something AMD did not the manufacturers. I dont belive OEM forced AMD to do so.

anyone can probably count on one hand the number of users that actually bought an a320 board to pair with a high-performing 6 or 8 core OG Zen CPU in 2017, with the plan to upgrade to the same class of CPU 2 years, 3, 4 years from then. ...even if you lost 80% of your fingers in a tragic mining accident.

do those boards still work with the type of Zen2 CPU that an actual user actually would have chosen for the lowest of the low end?

Also, what kind of DIY user expects each new generation to appear without brand new features that *may not* be fully compatible with older hardware? who thinks this?

It seems that AMD has maintained the promise that they made.

We sold 32 last week alone... here is not like in the US where a B450 is cheaper than A320, going A320 actually allows for a 120G M2 / SSD or extra 4GB of ram to be added.
The average joe does not care about OC or anything that B450 gives. And A320 is perfectly fine.

And belive me, i have EVERY OPTION avalible, the most popular picks are the A320/2200G, A320/2400G and A320/2600. On Intel side is H310/9400F.

Not everyone is like you and me or most users in this forum that would never use a A320 for anything. A320 is more important than you think and it is the longest lived AM4 motherboard to date.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

ENOUGH with the A320 stuff it is as boring as the Old Jim talk regarding adore TV

 

[mopardude87]

We sold 32 last week alone... here is not like in the US where a B450 is cheaper than A320, going A320 actually allows for a 120G M2 / SSD or extra 4GB of ram to be added.
The average joe does not care about OC or anything that B450 gives. And A320 is perfectly fine.

If i didn't upgrade my H81/I5 4460 to this i7 8700 that A320 even for me looks like a nice upgrade. My previous H81 build started off with a G1820 and the H81 was the cheapest option. For non overclocking or basic browsing i could see justification in a A320 if its a bottom dollar build. I still have yet to find a use for usb 3.0 and well for my usage a A320 honestly would be overkill given my only usb devices are keyboard and mouse. I do benefit from the sata 6 though so A320 would prob be a nice sweet spot for me.

For anyone not sure how bad off the H81 let me say this. It offers nothing outside of usb 2.0 and sata 3 support. A320 suddenly looks like a interesting option if you were previously on a Intel chipset at least! It at least offers modern connectivity to mass storage devices so your not stuck in the stone ages like H81.

I still consider myself a gamer but a basic needs one. If i could have saved $10 not having usb 3.0 i would say lets pocket it. The only connection as of late i have cared about for my usage is sata 6 and apparently nvme ssds have little benefit for a browsing/htpc/gaming box. So if i get another ssd its prob still gonna be another sata 6.

 

[amd6502]

The average joe does not care about OC or anything that B450 gives. And A320 is perfectly fine.

Well, I'm pretty cheap when it comes to selecting a motherbird (and don't care about any non-XFR OC's) but I wouldn't pick an A320 over a B450 just because having the option of StoreMI is a lot of value added. So for any windose build a B450 is a no-brainer.

What AMD needs is an A330 (and that fits perfectly with airbus naming). Simply a modern post-1000 series update for the low end no-frills µatx and itx consumer (Drop most BR and 1000 series support). And maybe limit the models to 65W and under too (doing so would make sense for bios flash memory reasons as well as reducing board costs); limited BR and athlon 200 support, full 300 support, and full 65W 2000-3000 series support and full to limited future 4000 series support.

I imagine with all these launches, that AMD is way too preoccupied about A320 or any of the small stuff at the moment. Is it a done deal, this A320-matisse issue?? I would think come Q4 launches that there would be some possibility of limited matisse support to be added. By that time they have the luxury of time and getting to smaller items on their list.

 

[Thunder 57]

I imagine with all these launches, that AMD is way too preoccupied about A320 or any of the small stuff at the moment. Is it a done deal, this A320-matisse issue?? I would think come Q4 launches that there would be some possibility of limited matisse support to be added. By that time they have the luxury of time and getting to smaller items on their list.

I honestly don't think they see it as a big enough deal to spend time on.

 

[s44]

What AMD needs is an A330 (and that fits perfectly with airbus naming). Simply a modern post-1000 series update for the low end no-frills µatx and itx consumer (Drop most BR and 1000 series support). And maybe limit the models to 65W and under too (doing so would make sense for bios flash memory reasons as well as reducing board costs); limited BR and athlon 200 support, full 300 support, and full 65W 2000-3000 series support and full to limited future 4000 series support.

Given how low B350 and B450 prices bottom out, I don't see how this could be worth the cost of working up a new model across OEMs unless the prebuilt market demands it.

 

[Shivansps]

I honestly don't think they see it as a big enough deal to spend time on.

Well they need to replace it with something now, so they should know that they have to either drop B450 price or launch a new chipset. I hope they drop B450 prices.

 

[Markfw]

Well they need to replace it with something now, so they should know that they have to either drop B450 price or launch a new chipset. I hope they drop B450 prices.

So newegg has a B450 motherboard starting at $56. How low do you want them to go ? And this is not up to AMD, its the motherboard manufacturers. There is no way we had prices this low 2 years ago. The bottem was a $90 X370 motherboard at launch.

STOP WINING ABOUT THE B320 ! Everyone here appears to be sick of it.

 

[Hans Gruber]

I know the X570 has not been released yet. Should I consider a X470 or B450 for Zen 2? Is PCI4 the only added feature or are there more reasons to get the newest motherboards when they are released? I have a B350 right now. Should I use that when Zen 2 comes out? It's the top of the line middle of the Road chipset. MSI Gaming Pro Carbon motherboard. It's got a 240mm watercooler. I could just pop in a Zen 2 CPU and see how the market plays out for 6 months. Thoughts?

 

[Thunder 57]

Well they need to replace it with something now, so they should know that they have to either drop B450 price or launch a new chipset. I hope they drop B450 prices.

They don't need to do anything. B450 is already dirt cheap. It may not be that way where you live and that is unfortunate, but also not AMD's problem.

I know the X570 has not been released yet. Should I consider a X470 or B450 for Zen 2? Is PCI4 the only added feature or are there more reasons to get the newest motherboards when they are released? I have a B350 right now. Should I use that when Zen 2 comes out? It's the top of the line middle of the Road chipset. MSI Gaming Pro Carbon motherboard. It's got a 240mm watercooler. I could just pop in a Zen 2 CPU and see how the market plays out for 6 months. Thoughts?

More PCIe lanes from the chipset if you need a lot of those. That's all I can see. It's looking like X570 will be rather pricey at least at launch. I don't see much advantage at this point. I am maxed out PCIe wise, but I don't need anything more so I'm good for now. Those lanes will surely be useful to some right now though.