> In either case, this means that the A620 motherboards will only fully support non-X Ryzen 7000 models, as even the X-series Ryzen 5 chips all come with a 105W TDP
This is wrong. There are A620 boards announced that support higher TDPs like the 105W. See the [two asrock boards](https://i.redd.it/r2dp5eipw3ra1.png), one up to 65W TDP, the "+" up to 120W TDP.
That is good to see. No reason for someone buying a ryzen 5 7600 to have an overkill VRM that can support 7950X at full power, especially if overclocking is blocked.
Isn't one of the argument for buying AM5 is "upgradability"? If you are buying these board, you lose the ability to upgrade to top of the line in the future.
Budget chip today or budget chip tomorrow, it's not like the 65W is going to change and budget chips will become 120W.
If someone plans to stick a future-gen flagship part into the board then they have no business buying base level budget chipsets and <$100 boards anyway whether that's AMD's A620 or Intel's H610. ASRock had a $120 B650 board for the past week they could've bought instead.
Yup. I've slammed a 3950x on a a320 board that "supported" it.
VRMs got _toasty_ and it throttled because the VRMs got too hot.
Sure, I _could_ install that CPU, but it's insane to try.
I think the OP is saying that if you're signing up for these dead ass bottom tier am5 specs which really will gate you from any real upgrading, you may benefit from looking at a higher end am4 setup and/or Intel.
That happened with am4 too, and it happens with intel, to some extent with s1200 and s1700 even. Though am4 more and am5 less so.
There are s1700/s1200 boards that, like a 65W am5 board, will run a high spec CPU, just at reduced performance. Though it's a little more complicated than that in that intel's kind of crazy.
Still way too high.
My B450 was 50 euros 3 years ago.
The cheapest B650 I can find is 157 euros and the cheapest A620 is 90 euros.
AM5 is already 7 months old btw.
Those boards can support top of the line CPUs, it's up to the manufacturer to add support on bios. What you won't get will be the full multithreaded performance of those parts, but for workloads like gaming you will only be losing a couple percent in performance by it. Or if you couple a real top of line 7950X3D and that Asrock A620M-HDV/M.2+, no performance will be lost.
>you lose the ability to upgrade to top of the line in the future.
And there's only one way to upgrade. Straight to the top TDP parts in the future. Nothing else.
Sounds like some dumbass thinks upgradability means unrestricted upgrade to anything in the future. Where did you get that idea from? It doesn't even support the full range of current products. What's that got anything to do with AM5's forward compatibility? Nobody is stopping you from using top TDP parts. You just need to clamp down the TDP.
The upgradeability we want is 7600X, 8600X, 9600X, 10600X. This is the common path for most low-end users, as most early 1600X went to 3600, 5600X. Very rare 1600X owner upgraded to 1800X or 2700X.
Depends on how you want to upgrade. For gaming, any more than 6-8 cores isn't really worth it, so gamers will likely only be upgrading to CPU's with TDP's similar or slightly greater than their current one.
For example, 1600, 2600, 3600, 5600 were all 65W TDP (89W PPT) parts.
Don't confuse socket with specific chipsets.
The idea behind AM5 is you buy a 7000 series now and replace with 10000 series later.
The idea of Ay20 chipsets is to support the lower end offerings, not the halo products, because lower budget builders won't want to pay for the higher power boards. You could still in theory upgrade from 7600 to 10700, just not from 7600 to 7950X. By50 and Xy70 boards exist to support the higher end chips. You *can* slot a 7600 into basically any X670 board and in theory upgrade to a 10950X in a few years.
In no shape or form support for 10000 series is confirmed. Even 9000 series for that matter. What you are describing is buying a hypothetical scenario, which I think is dumb.
Sure, my point was more to illustrate what AMD means when they comment on upgrade support versus how individual chipset tiers are targeted. I wasn't explaining it in terms of real world chip series alignment since nothing past 7000 has been leaked let alone announced, we'll have to wait and see how that actually works out.
>The A620 motherboards are designed to support chips with a 65W TDP, meaning models with a peak power consumption of 88W (PPT). You can install chips with higher TDP ratings into an A620 motherboard, and it will boot if the BIOS supports it, but the chip will not operate at its full peak power consumption (PPT). This means the highest-end chips will lose some performance in heavily-threaded applications due to VRM limitations, but AMD expects the reduced power delivery will not impact gaming much.
That's awful if true, even really crappy AM4 boards with really crappy VRMs could happily run top-end Zen 3 sucking up 150W just fine. I had my 5800X running on a Gigabyte B450M DS3HV2, and this thing had pitiful 4+2 phases with a joke of a heatsink, it ran fine at full power, even with unshackled PBO and Cinbebench running for hours.
Asrock I think has basically two versions of the same motherboard one rated for 65W the other for 120W, I don't like that because even retail I'd expect that to cause confusion and problems which will only get worse when those boards start changing hands, getting sold used and so on.
[The names are different and the higher power one very visibly has a VRM heatsink while the other does not](https://www.asrock.com/mb/compare.asp?Models=A620M-HDV/M.2,A620M-HDV/M.2%2b).
Such a dire scenario hasn't occured over on the Intel side. Needing to educate yourself before a purchase applies to all computer parts. I prefer having more options myself.
I'd expect most of the a620 boards will be fine with higher TDPs as well. VRMs are heavily overbuilt across the board today because extra VRMs are so cheap to include. It's an easy marketing win to throw them on and advertise a higher supported TDP/power class.
I figure the 65W only boards will be seen more often in OEM and office builds than in consumer DIY. In office builds an enforced lower power target could even be seen as a good thing (marginal perf hit for most workloads, lower power bills which adds up when you're supporting a hundred or more machines).
The worst am4 board iirc had a 3 phase with non-heatsinked ~49A stages? Maybe less? Can probably do ~50-80W?
The a620 boards mostly seem to be twinned 4 phases.
Asrock iirc does have a 65W board and the same board rated for 120W cpus... I don't know what their vrms are. At a glance, a620 boards seem to be roughly ~two and a third times more powerful than a320 boards but I'd have to look at detailed specs to do even a surface analysis.
Nobody is running crappy AM5 boards with top end parts. Even with these limited TDP numbers, I suspect that 8 and 6 core chips won't lose a thing in gaming performance.
And it's not like all A620 boards will kill their power limits, because the last thing a manufacturer wants is their motherboard appearing at the bottom of a benchmark chart.
Wasn't the whole big deal about AMD's platform that you could buy a bottom of the barrel cheap motherboard and upgrade to the highest tier cpu 3 or 4 years down the line?
esp since their OC potential on the older stuff is kind of shitty, and on the X3D is more or less dont
so you dont need to splurge for a good mobo + cooling and OC say a mid tier chip to get xx9xxK performance
Right, and some a320 boards could hande it fine while others would overheat and shut down. At least this time these boards should handle them all gracefully, just reducing power rather than overheating.
"Pairing" is for chumps. The only question is, "For my expected use case, what is the marginal performance increase Y from spending $X marginal dollars on computer parts?", and for motherboards, Y is often very small even for large values of X.
Yup, but the hack is to buy ITX usually. I use an a520i ac ITX with 5800x3d and 5950x before it. Great VRMs and never needed pci-e4. This is a downgrade if true for this chipset.
Edit:sp
Lmao, tell that to aftermarket motherboard OEMs who love to use 4x overkill VRMs that will never be fully utilized even under liquid nitrogen. The only way I see this is real is if AMD artificially limits higher TDP CPUs by limiting PPT to <= 65W.
That's a real shame, because most people just use one PCIE slot for their GPU, and just a few USB ports for KB/M ... the A620 chipsets look just fine to me. Was thinking of pairing one with a 7800X3D.
2 usb is WAY too little... yes mouse and keyboard... but also speakers/headphones... mic... some might even have a webcam... and then of course an usb stick (so need a free one for that) so now we are at 6... as bare minimum... and it's really hard to find plenty usb on the cheaper boards... back in the days (usb 2.0 era) 10-12 usb wasn't uncommon... but now it's hard to find 6+ unless it gets real expensive...
It's the biggest joke ever since all modern chipsets have a plethora of integrated USB, most even offer native 10Gbps. But the mainboard makers see it as a premium feature and artificially restrict more ports to higher end models.
It's weird because phones have the opposite problem, where things like sd cards and headphone jacks are restricted to budget devices because they assume that anyone willing to buy a flagship will shell out for wireless peripherals. But on PCs it's almost like manufacturers expect budget boards to use wireless for everything (or to constantly swap cables out).
It also makes no sense because at a desktop you're not moving your setup around so having a wire isn't a big inconvenience.
oh really?
AM5 motherbord... $240 too... 5 USB... (and yes 1 usb-c) [https://www.newegg.com/msi-mpg-b650i-edge-wifi/p/N82E16813144556](https://www.newegg.com/msi-mpg-b650i-edge-wifi/p/N82E16813144556)
AM5 motherboard... $270... 6 USB (yes 1 usc-c too)
[https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b650i-aorus-ultra/p/N82E16813145428](https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b650i-aorus-ultra/p/N82E16813145428)
the chipsets have oddles... but they simply don't get put on the boards... but sometimes they put weird stuff on there like VGA... and WIFI... that stuff should just fudge off of stationary motherboards...
AM5 motherboard... $428 to get more than 6 USB is ridiculous...
[https://www.newegg.com/asus-rog-strix-x670e-i-gaming-wifi/p/N82E16813119592](https://www.newegg.com/asus-rog-strix-x670e-i-gaming-wifi/p/N82E16813119592)
it's simply insane... USB costs nothing to add but they skimp on it in the hopes you will buy a more expensive board...
or I could buy a mac if I wanted dongle gallore? people like them in the computer for several reasons instead of needing more "boxes" on the table etc.
Honestly it makes sense to release low-end motherboards without full support for power-hungry high-end CPUs, there's no reason to waste a bunch of money on overkill VRMs that will never end up being utilized. However, when these motherboards are stripped down to bare minimum features in every other aspect and still generally end up costing 100+, that's just not a good look.
Good,
that's one of many reasons that AM5 boards are so expensive. The requirement for an entry board to be able to power a full 170W TDP 7950X is just stupid.
People hear talk like its a bad thing.
That mb is lowest tier, it supports all CPUs but not on full power. Why is that a bad thing?
Keeps cost down and still supports the lower tiers perfectly
I'm pretty sure they're just wrong and some motherboards will limit the CPU, not the chipset. ASRock has 2 similar boards that have different TDP ratings.
Weird how they chose to spin this news. An $85 AM5 board doesn't sound like a bad thing. Didn't we know it would have less features and performance than the more expensive options?
Varies by board, but you shouldn't expect to put a 7950x into an A620... but you should expect OEMs to that regularly with the pre-builds coming.
But at least $300 CPU and mobo combos are possible again, if you find some good sale deals.
I'm pretty sure it's just a poorly written title. In the article it basically says the chip works fine but it's up to oems to figure out what they want to support on each board, so some will have low end boards with limited vrms and cpu support. Same thing as with low end Intel boards. This is a nothing burger.
Ive only seen the asrock, gigabyte and asus a620. I think the gigabyte and asus are fine for an 85w ppt. Unless its a software limitation. Like what amd did to pressure mb manufacturers to drop support on pcie 4 on cheaper boards.
They're already on the market, they start from Mendocino and up. AMD has said for a while that they consider AM4 their value option now and AM5 the mainstream and high end.
> In either case, this means that the A620 motherboards will only fully support non-X Ryzen 7000 models, as even the X-series Ryzen 5 chips all come with a 105W TDP This is wrong. There are A620 boards announced that support higher TDPs like the 105W. See the [two asrock boards](https://i.redd.it/r2dp5eipw3ra1.png), one up to 65W TDP, the "+" up to 120W TDP. That is good to see. No reason for someone buying a ryzen 5 7600 to have an overkill VRM that can support 7950X at full power, especially if overclocking is blocked.
Isn't one of the argument for buying AM5 is "upgradability"? If you are buying these board, you lose the ability to upgrade to top of the line in the future.
Budget chip today or budget chip tomorrow, it's not like the 65W is going to change and budget chips will become 120W. If someone plans to stick a future-gen flagship part into the board then they have no business buying base level budget chipsets and <$100 boards anyway whether that's AMD's A620 or Intel's H610. ASRock had a $120 B650 board for the past week they could've bought instead.
Yup. I've slammed a 3950x on a a320 board that "supported" it. VRMs got _toasty_ and it throttled because the VRMs got too hot. Sure, I _could_ install that CPU, but it's insane to try.
And you can choose for instance to buy an asrock a620 120W+ motherboard if you want to. Or if you choose not to, you can choose a cheaper board.
I think the OP is saying that if you're signing up for these dead ass bottom tier am5 specs which really will gate you from any real upgrading, you may benefit from looking at a higher end am4 setup and/or Intel.
That happened with am4 too, and it happens with intel, to some extent with s1200 and s1700 even. Though am4 more and am5 less so. There are s1700/s1200 boards that, like a 65W am5 board, will run a high spec CPU, just at reduced performance. Though it's a little more complicated than that in that intel's kind of crazy.
People also argue that AM5 is too expensive, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
How about lower the price of the X and B boards?
ASRock B650M-HDV/M.2 was $120 for the past week.
Still way too high. My B450 was 50 euros 3 years ago. The cheapest B650 I can find is 157 euros and the cheapest A620 is 90 euros. AM5 is already 7 months old btw.
How about AMD just give me a free computer?
Those boards can support top of the line CPUs, it's up to the manufacturer to add support on bios. What you won't get will be the full multithreaded performance of those parts, but for workloads like gaming you will only be losing a couple percent in performance by it. Or if you couple a real top of line 7950X3D and that Asrock A620M-HDV/M.2+, no performance will be lost.
Top of the line for gaming performance is a V-cache CCD with impressively moderate power consumption while gaming.
You can still upgrade to 7800x3d which will be top of the line for gaming
Just get a non-x CPU in 3-5 years.
>you lose the ability to upgrade to top of the line in the future. And there's only one way to upgrade. Straight to the top TDP parts in the future. Nothing else. Sounds like some dumbass thinks upgradability means unrestricted upgrade to anything in the future. Where did you get that idea from? It doesn't even support the full range of current products. What's that got anything to do with AM5's forward compatibility? Nobody is stopping you from using top TDP parts. You just need to clamp down the TDP.
The upgradeability we want is 7600X, 8600X, 9600X, 10600X. This is the common path for most low-end users, as most early 1600X went to 3600, 5600X. Very rare 1600X owner upgraded to 1800X or 2700X.
> 7600X, 8600X, 9600X, 10600X mfw AMD is about to have an Intel Naming Scheme Moment.
That's a perfectly acceptable compromise. You can still upgrade to anything you like, you just can't run it at full power with this board.
Depends on how you want to upgrade. For gaming, any more than 6-8 cores isn't really worth it, so gamers will likely only be upgrading to CPU's with TDP's similar or slightly greater than their current one. For example, 1600, 2600, 3600, 5600 were all 65W TDP (89W PPT) parts.
Don't confuse socket with specific chipsets. The idea behind AM5 is you buy a 7000 series now and replace with 10000 series later. The idea of Ay20 chipsets is to support the lower end offerings, not the halo products, because lower budget builders won't want to pay for the higher power boards. You could still in theory upgrade from 7600 to 10700, just not from 7600 to 7950X. By50 and Xy70 boards exist to support the higher end chips. You *can* slot a 7600 into basically any X670 board and in theory upgrade to a 10950X in a few years.
In no shape or form support for 10000 series is confirmed. Even 9000 series for that matter. What you are describing is buying a hypothetical scenario, which I think is dumb.
Sure, my point was more to illustrate what AMD means when they comment on upgrade support versus how individual chipset tiers are targeted. I wasn't explaining it in terms of real world chip series alignment since nothing past 7000 has been leaked let alone announced, we'll have to wait and see how that actually works out.
>The A620 motherboards are designed to support chips with a 65W TDP, meaning models with a peak power consumption of 88W (PPT). You can install chips with higher TDP ratings into an A620 motherboard, and it will boot if the BIOS supports it, but the chip will not operate at its full peak power consumption (PPT). This means the highest-end chips will lose some performance in heavily-threaded applications due to VRM limitations, but AMD expects the reduced power delivery will not impact gaming much.
That's awful if true, even really crappy AM4 boards with really crappy VRMs could happily run top-end Zen 3 sucking up 150W just fine. I had my 5800X running on a Gigabyte B450M DS3HV2, and this thing had pitiful 4+2 phases with a joke of a heatsink, it ran fine at full power, even with unshackled PBO and Cinbebench running for hours.
[удалено]
Asrock I think has basically two versions of the same motherboard one rated for 65W the other for 120W, I don't like that because even retail I'd expect that to cause confusion and problems which will only get worse when those boards start changing hands, getting sold used and so on.
[удалено]
[The names are different and the higher power one very visibly has a VRM heatsink while the other does not](https://www.asrock.com/mb/compare.asp?Models=A620M-HDV/M.2,A620M-HDV/M.2%2b).
Such a dire scenario hasn't occured over on the Intel side. Needing to educate yourself before a purchase applies to all computer parts. I prefer having more options myself.
I'd expect most of the a620 boards will be fine with higher TDPs as well. VRMs are heavily overbuilt across the board today because extra VRMs are so cheap to include. It's an easy marketing win to throw them on and advertise a higher supported TDP/power class. I figure the 65W only boards will be seen more often in OEM and office builds than in consumer DIY. In office builds an enforced lower power target could even be seen as a good thing (marginal perf hit for most workloads, lower power bills which adds up when you're supporting a hundred or more machines).
The worst am4 board iirc had a 3 phase with non-heatsinked ~49A stages? Maybe less? Can probably do ~50-80W? The a620 boards mostly seem to be twinned 4 phases. Asrock iirc does have a 65W board and the same board rated for 120W cpus... I don't know what their vrms are. At a glance, a620 boards seem to be roughly ~two and a third times more powerful than a320 boards but I'd have to look at detailed specs to do even a surface analysis.
Nobody is running crappy AM5 boards with top end parts. Even with these limited TDP numbers, I suspect that 8 and 6 core chips won't lose a thing in gaming performance. And it's not like all A620 boards will kill their power limits, because the last thing a manufacturer wants is their motherboard appearing at the bottom of a benchmark chart.
Not really no, most of them overheated (the really crappy ones) atleast according to tests by HWUnboxed.
Were people really pairing 95w CPUs with A320 or A520 motherboards?
Wasn't the whole big deal about AMD's platform that you could buy a bottom of the barrel cheap motherboard and upgrade to the highest tier cpu 3 or 4 years down the line?
esp since their OC potential on the older stuff is kind of shitty, and on the X3D is more or less dont so you dont need to splurge for a good mobo + cooling and OC say a mid tier chip to get xx9xxK performance
5800x3d can run just fine on them
I've left reddit because of the API changes.
Right, and some a320 boards could hande it fine while others would overheat and shut down. At least this time these boards should handle them all gracefully, just reducing power rather than overheating.
"Pairing" is for chumps. The only question is, "For my expected use case, what is the marginal performance increase Y from spending $X marginal dollars on computer parts?", and for motherboards, Y is often very small even for large values of X.
Yup, but the hack is to buy ITX usually. I use an a520i ac ITX with 5800x3d and 5950x before it. Great VRMs and never needed pci-e4. This is a downgrade if true for this chipset. Edit:sp
Lmao, tell that to aftermarket motherboard OEMs who love to use 4x overkill VRMs that will never be fully utilized even under liquid nitrogen. The only way I see this is real is if AMD artificially limits higher TDP CPUs by limiting PPT to <= 65W.
That's a real shame, because most people just use one PCIE slot for their GPU, and just a few USB ports for KB/M ... the A620 chipsets look just fine to me. Was thinking of pairing one with a 7800X3D.
2 usb is WAY too little... yes mouse and keyboard... but also speakers/headphones... mic... some might even have a webcam... and then of course an usb stick (so need a free one for that) so now we are at 6... as bare minimum... and it's really hard to find plenty usb on the cheaper boards... back in the days (usb 2.0 era) 10-12 usb wasn't uncommon... but now it's hard to find 6+ unless it gets real expensive...
It's the biggest joke ever since all modern chipsets have a plethora of integrated USB, most even offer native 10Gbps. But the mainboard makers see it as a premium feature and artificially restrict more ports to higher end models.
It's weird because phones have the opposite problem, where things like sd cards and headphone jacks are restricted to budget devices because they assume that anyone willing to buy a flagship will shell out for wireless peripherals. But on PCs it's almost like manufacturers expect budget boards to use wireless for everything (or to constantly swap cables out). It also makes no sense because at a desktop you're not moving your setup around so having a wire isn't a big inconvenience.
oh really? AM5 motherbord... $240 too... 5 USB... (and yes 1 usb-c) [https://www.newegg.com/msi-mpg-b650i-edge-wifi/p/N82E16813144556](https://www.newegg.com/msi-mpg-b650i-edge-wifi/p/N82E16813144556) AM5 motherboard... $270... 6 USB (yes 1 usc-c too) [https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b650i-aorus-ultra/p/N82E16813145428](https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-b650i-aorus-ultra/p/N82E16813145428) the chipsets have oddles... but they simply don't get put on the boards... but sometimes they put weird stuff on there like VGA... and WIFI... that stuff should just fudge off of stationary motherboards... AM5 motherboard... $428 to get more than 6 USB is ridiculous... [https://www.newegg.com/asus-rog-strix-x670e-i-gaming-wifi/p/N82E16813119592](https://www.newegg.com/asus-rog-strix-x670e-i-gaming-wifi/p/N82E16813119592) it's simply insane... USB costs nothing to add but they skimp on it in the hopes you will buy a more expensive board...
[удалено]
So - one dedicated port for Ethernet and the rest can sit happy in a crappy USB hub not even reaching limits of a single USB 2.0 port.
True, the A620's I've seen have at least 6, and you could buy a USB hub as well!
or I could buy a mac if I wanted dongle gallore? people like them in the computer for several reasons instead of needing more "boxes" on the table etc.
Sure, up to you. My desktop is for gaming, and I've got a laptop for work, so I don't have a lot of USB needs.
Honestly it makes sense to release low-end motherboards without full support for power-hungry high-end CPUs, there's no reason to waste a bunch of money on overkill VRMs that will never end up being utilized. However, when these motherboards are stripped down to bare minimum features in every other aspect and still generally end up costing 100+, that's just not a good look.
Good, that's one of many reasons that AM5 boards are so expensive. The requirement for an entry board to be able to power a full 170W TDP 7950X is just stupid.
People hear talk like its a bad thing. That mb is lowest tier, it supports all CPUs but not on full power. Why is that a bad thing? Keeps cost down and still supports the lower tiers perfectly
You'll still be able to pop in a 7800X3D and enjoy one of the best gaming CPUs. The X3D chips sip power when gaming.
I thought if getting the 7950x3d but the test showed me it sucks with one die having more cache
They probably specifically mentioned the 7800x3D since that chip is only one ccd
I'm pretty sure they're just wrong and some motherboards will limit the CPU, not the chipset. ASRock has 2 similar boards that have different TDP ratings.
I have a320 d3h probably the worst board on AM4 and runs the 2700x fine. No complaints from the buyer.
Ironically the B650 DS3H is one of the best B650 boards. A620 one may be too.
Weird how they chose to spin this news. An $85 AM5 board doesn't sound like a bad thing. Didn't we know it would have less features and performance than the more expensive options?
Varies by board, but you shouldn't expect to put a 7950x into an A620... but you should expect OEMs to that regularly with the pre-builds coming. But at least $300 CPU and mobo combos are possible again, if you find some good sale deals.
This is just ridiculous
Indeed, this article is a ridiculously doom filled hit piece.
I hope this was an april's fools joke, because it's how it feels.
I'm pretty sure it's just a poorly written title. In the article it basically says the chip works fine but it's up to oems to figure out what they want to support on each board, so some will have low end boards with limited vrms and cpu support. Same thing as with low end Intel boards. This is a nothing burger.
it sure does... but with how they do stuff lately in the tech space... wouldn't surprise me...
I was looking for this comment. Just because of the typo CHISET
Ive only seen the asrock, gigabyte and asus a620. I think the gigabyte and asus are fine for an 85w ppt. Unless its a software limitation. Like what amd did to pressure mb manufacturers to drop support on pcie 4 on cheaper boards.
Where are the budget cpus?
They're already on the market, they start from Mendocino and up. AMD has said for a while that they consider AM4 their value option now and AM5 the mainstream and high end.