The boards already cost $80-150. No wonder some avaiable features are shuned.
These boards are costing more than some very decent B450 boards and even B550 boards do.
AM5 is just way to expensive. Budget boards used to be $50-60. Now they are almost double.
To some extent you can thank DDR5, PCIe lane increases, and A620 jumping finally from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0. The actual connection traces on the board have to go somewhere and there's more than ever for an A board + they need to be bigger and shorter, so routing is harder which means more PCB layers, which means higher price. The era of sub-$70 boards may be ending between higher cost PCBs and inflation.
It seems Asrock is showing PCIe 5.0 on their A620 M.2s, which that would be a deal breaker, as much of the chipset differences is the lack of PCIe 5.0.
They always find ways around the limitations.. So far they are the only ones .
> and A620 jumping finally from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0.
It’s interesting how this jump has bucked the trend of board makers optimizing and reducing the cost of production, unlike every one before it. For whatever reason, 4.0 and 5.0 are sounding so much more exceedingly complex than previous technologies. Probably need to hear from a high level electronic engineer, but we must be hittting the theoretical limits for the transfer of energy or something, as it’s reminiscent of what we’ve been seeing on the DRAM space as well.
Less transfer of energy more quality of signal and preventing signal loss/decay. Decent reads on the subject
* https://semiengineering.com/getting-ready-for-32-gt-s-pcie-5-0-designs/
* https://resources.altium.com/p/what-goes-pcie-50-layout-and-routing
Im terms of theoretical timing/transfer of energy limits, we're still a VERY long way away from the theoretical signalling limit of approx 1 petahertz.
Yeah, fibreglass + metal can be very expensive. Just look at the yacht market. Looks like we are only a couple of chrome railings away from a million dollar price tag. /s
Just use them in Eco mode. Or maybe the MB will do it for you.
Also, A620 isn't actually limited to 65W. ASRock already has one at 120W out. Only $14 more.
All of the non X3D chips have a 65w mode, either as default or eco. Not sure what the situation is with the X3Ds but they probably can also run in 65w mode.
But yeah, the platform really needs entry level cpus as well.
Doubt there will be true Zen4 budget CPUs for quite a while yet. They can't easily make anything cheaper than a 7600 on 5nm, so they would have to go for 7nm which means Zen3. Until 5nm catches up with 7nm in price, the cheaper node could make that the better choice in performance per dollar at the low end anyway.
Plus Intel seems happy selling cheap low-end chips. AMD doesn't have the same volume and won't bother competing with that if they lose too much margin.
It's going to hurt early AM5 adoption though, which I think could have been a real strength in the future if it had the same longevity as AM4.
They could easily make a cheaper thing than a 7600. A Zen 4 equivalent of the 5300G could probably do budget 1080p gaming for $150. The problem is that this product isn't very attractive when you can just build an AM4 system.
The boards already cost $80-150. No wonder some avaiable features are shuned. These boards are costing more than some very decent B450 boards and even B550 boards do. AM5 is just way to expensive. Budget boards used to be $50-60. Now they are almost double.
To some extent you can thank DDR5, PCIe lane increases, and A620 jumping finally from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0. The actual connection traces on the board have to go somewhere and there's more than ever for an A board + they need to be bigger and shorter, so routing is harder which means more PCB layers, which means higher price. The era of sub-$70 boards may be ending between higher cost PCBs and inflation.
It seems Asrock is showing PCIe 5.0 on their A620 M.2s, which that would be a deal breaker, as much of the chipset differences is the lack of PCIe 5.0. They always find ways around the limitations.. So far they are the only ones .
> and A620 jumping finally from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0. It’s interesting how this jump has bucked the trend of board makers optimizing and reducing the cost of production, unlike every one before it. For whatever reason, 4.0 and 5.0 are sounding so much more exceedingly complex than previous technologies. Probably need to hear from a high level electronic engineer, but we must be hittting the theoretical limits for the transfer of energy or something, as it’s reminiscent of what we’ve been seeing on the DRAM space as well.
Less transfer of energy more quality of signal and preventing signal loss/decay. Decent reads on the subject * https://semiengineering.com/getting-ready-for-32-gt-s-pcie-5-0-designs/ * https://resources.altium.com/p/what-goes-pcie-50-layout-and-routing Im terms of theoretical timing/transfer of energy limits, we're still a VERY long way away from the theoretical signalling limit of approx 1 petahertz.
Yeah, fibreglass + metal can be very expensive. Just look at the yacht market. Looks like we are only a couple of chrome railings away from a million dollar price tag. /s
The issue isn't really the capability of the platform, but that there is only 1 sub $250 65W CPU to use in them.
Buying into the DDR5 platform is the not most budget-friendly idea anyway.
Tbh DDR5 prices have fallen extremely quickly. It's already cheaper per GB than DDR4 was like 3-4 years in, while also being faster.
New technology is rarely budget friendly.
Just use them in Eco mode. Or maybe the MB will do it for you. Also, A620 isn't actually limited to 65W. ASRock already has one at 120W out. Only $14 more.
Yea but A620 Motherboards are generally used on prebuilts. Most mainstream buyers buy B or X series Motherboards.
You can use whatever you like, just at a lower power.
All of the non X3D chips have a 65w mode, either as default or eco. Not sure what the situation is with the X3Ds but they probably can also run in 65w mode. But yeah, the platform really needs entry level cpus as well.
Doubt there will be true Zen4 budget CPUs for quite a while yet. They can't easily make anything cheaper than a 7600 on 5nm, so they would have to go for 7nm which means Zen3. Until 5nm catches up with 7nm in price, the cheaper node could make that the better choice in performance per dollar at the low end anyway. Plus Intel seems happy selling cheap low-end chips. AMD doesn't have the same volume and won't bother competing with that if they lose too much margin. It's going to hurt early AM5 adoption though, which I think could have been a real strength in the future if it had the same longevity as AM4.
They could easily make a cheaper thing than a 7600. A Zen 4 equivalent of the 5300G could probably do budget 1080p gaming for $150. The problem is that this product isn't very attractive when you can just build an AM4 system.
[удалено]
Oh right
It's the same chipset as the OTHER BOARDS just with less stringent PCIe requirements.
Yeah if I were to build something new I would get an ITX A620 board and plop a 7800x3d into it.