AMD prevents motherboard manufacturers from releasing beta BIOS for Ryzen 5000 on X370

[WereCat]

If you guys actually tried updating BIOS on the old B350/X370 boards then you would realize how big of a headache that is. While it's good to have options, what's happening there is just a pure mess.

 

You often have to have multiple CPU's just to get from the shipped default BIOS to a new latest BIOS and update BIOS to different versions in between because the latest BIOS may not support the CPU you originally got with the motherboard but it may support the newer CPU that was released 2 years later.

So you have to update to the BIOS that supports the newer CPU then swap the CPUs and then update to the latest BIOS.

 

Obviously, just giving an example but I've had an opportunity with 2 such motherboards already. One bad step and you're SOL.

[Mark Kaine]

3 minutes ago, WereCat said:

actually tried updating BIOS on the old B350

I did...

3 minutes ago, WereCat said:

is just a pure mess.

It is...  but only because manufacturers (like MSI) are incapable of giving clear instructions and label the different BIOS's appropriately. Don't get me wrong at least they try with the labeling , its still a huge mess, because its simply not sufficient, i cant even update my current BIOS because i cant be too sure this would leave me without a working cpu - they're using "codenames" and stuff instead of calling the chips by their names for example (ie Ryzen 5 3600, etc) and yeah, updating BIOS does *not* work how they say whatsoever, you *do* need to copy files they explicitly tell you *not* to copy and if you have a degree in voodoo magic, that would  also be helpful...

[pzspah]

AMD stopped PCIe 4.0 bios from being released on the 400 series boards too. I was really surprised when they released smart access memory  support on x470 with 3000 series cpus. (3900x and 6900xt in my case)

[StDragon]

4 hours ago, WereCat said:

You often have to have multiple CPU's just to get from the shipped default BIOS to a new latest BIOS and update BIOS to different versions in between because the latest BIOS may not support the CPU you originally got with the motherboard but it may support the newer CPU that was released 2 years later.

So you have to update to the BIOS that supports the newer CPU then swap the CPUs and then update to the latest BIOS.

If BIOS Flashback was a standard feature, this wouldn't be so much of a problem.

[LAwLz]

4 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

last I checked people ripped into intel for making z170/z270 different from z370 and z490 for no reason

Yes exactly. 

AMD does something bad = "noo they are just trying to protect us. They are the good guys!" 

Intel does something = "Boo Intel is bad. How dare Intel do this to us?!" 

[Beerzerker]

Years ago AMD used the same leverage to stop core unlocking with AM3 chips.

The 790 and 890FX chipped boards had this capability but not too long after the 990FX chipped boards were released, board makers suddenly stopped support of it via a board redesign and it wasn't like the CPU's themselves suddenly lost the ability to unlock if it could.
The ability to unlock was due to a small chip that was intergrated into the board's circuitry that made it possible, with this ACC could then get around the disabling of an otherwise locked core and make it function if it would at all.

AMD was losing sales of it's higher core count chips to the lower core count chips because (Obviously) folks were buying and unlocking them for a "Free" upgrade.
What AMD did was to "Strongly Suggest" (That's how it was described) the manufactuers eliminate the ability on the grounds of warranty related issues. It's true many were buying, trying to unlock them and if it didn't unlock, they did an RMA claim to get another to try again.

Between the RMA's of otherwise properly working chips and the loss of sales with higher CPU models is why in this instance.

I'm not suprised at all AMD is doing this but I have to agree, if they said before support was promised then they need to keep their word period.

[Tannah]

One thing I would question here is: where did AMD say that All AM4 sockets would be backward compatible?

All I can find is the Statement from AMD which confirm AM4 motherboards will be supported until 2020. The press has said other things, but I have not seen a statement from AMD saying anything different? If there is a statement fro AMD could someone link it please?

This isn't all that different from what AMD did on the AM2, AM2+, AM3, AM3+.

[Beerzerker]

The thing with sockets of that time was transitional and could be confusing too.

AM2 itself is only compatable with DDR2, that being one of the things about it but also it didn't support anything AM3 at all. You can run an AM2 chip in an AM2+ socket too along with a few AM3 chips.
AM2+ is what supported a few AM3 chips like the Sempron and that was really only because the CPU's IMC could run DDR2. I believe only the Sempron and Regor core chips would run in those, possibly an early C2 Deneb along with the Heka core chips and that's about it.

Later C3 Deneb's and anything based on a Deneb core (Callisto for example) most likely won't - It's possible but I don't think so.

The IMC's of a Thuban chip, also being an AM3 chip won't run DDR2, it's strictly DDR3 only so no dice there.

What I'm seeing isn't unlike this with AM4, however if a promise was made they need to keep it or at least give damn good reason why not after what was said earlier.

[D13H4RD]

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Yes exactly. 

AMD does something bad = "noo they are just trying to protect us. They are the good guys!" 

Intel does something = "Boo Intel is bad. How dare Intel do this to us?!" 

Essentially, it's just like that Gordon Ramsay meme.

 

AMD screws up: "Oh dear, oh dear. Gorgeous..."

 

Intel screws up: "You fucking donkey..."

[Moonzy]

15 hours ago, mariushm said:

The 370 (and 470) chipset advertised SLI and crossfire, so some motherboards had 2 pci-e x16 slots connected to the cpu, which got switched to pci-e x8 if you installed a second video card.

The problem is there's a maximum limit to how long the pci-e 4.0 traces (between cpu socket and slot) are supposed to be, and on a lot of motherboards the length of traces going to the 2nd slot could be above that limit.

those 5 people that NEEDS SLI on PCIE 4.0 can go get a new board, dont drag everyone else with them

 

15 hours ago, mariushm said:

Also, pci-e 4.0 in theory requires better pcb materials and better routing of traces, but in practice it can work on some motherboards  with minimal error rates - if the design was good enough

exactly, so why block out all boards?

 

15 hours ago, mariushm said:

Another issue is memory compatibility ... when the B350 chipset and x370 chipset motherboards were released, The Ryzen 1xxx could do only 3000-3200 Mhz ... A LOT of motherboards could barely do 3000 Mhz. It has to do with the cpu (the memory controller inside was poorly tuned for various memory chips) but it also has to do with the actual circuit board traces going from cpu socket to the memory slots.

If you use a Ryzen 5xxx cpu somehow on such board, that doesn't mean you're gonna be able to suddenly use 3600 Mhz memory sticks

check motherboard's max memory supported frequency.

dont see the frequency you like? get a new board

[Kisai]

On 5/1/2021 at 6:24 AM, James Evens said:

Expect this trend to continue with AM5 as they now have a good image/reputation and no longer need the 4 years on one socket which was more like 3 years/generation on a single mainboard anyway.

I doubt this is the case. The problem with the AM4 migration path is that the MB manufacturers all cheaped out by releasing boards with too small of a firmware, so in order to squeeze a newer CPU generation in that wasn't intended for that chipset, it basically requires doubling of the firmware space. So the more likely reason nobody is permitted to have the firmware updated to support a newer CPU is that it creates a support problem where the released boards don't support 5000 and you need a 3000 part to flash it to 5000, because it drops support for the earlier cpu's.

 

It's the MB vendors that are either lying, or incompetent by cheaping out on the parts. Now, that said, AMD is not blameless either. If they were not intending to for all AM4 boards to support a CPU, they should have pulled an Intel and relocated a single pin, so everyone would need a new motherboard. Intel's reasoning is very likely the same, some minor architecture changes warrants a new chipset, thus the cpu has to be mechanically incompatible. It's very likely they (Intel) could have had every 14nm cpu supported by the same chipset, but the number of cpu's released will never fit on one firmware.

 

And here's the thing, in the end, most people do not upgrade their cpu's on their motherboards. Only the really high end builds may even attempt to do this because they like to piecemeal upgrade. All the non-X chipsets are not actually intended to be upgraded, because they're intended to go into "budget/business/laptop/embedded" devices.

 

One thing we need to keep in mind and understand is that budget chipsets are very likely the same chipset core, but it's the difference between an i7 and an i3 in terms of features, and thus they are very likely have been binned, and the firmware updates may unlock features that were explicitly turned off, and the motherboard vendor didn't engineer the board for (such as PCIe4.)

[spartaman64]

On 5/2/2021 at 9:58 AM, LAwLz said:

Yes exactly. 

AMD does something bad = "noo they are just trying to protect us. They are the good guys!" 

Intel does something = "Boo Intel is bad. How dare Intel do this to us?!" 

you mean like what intel does every generation and receives 0 backlash for. i guess amd should just change the pin layout like intel and use that as justification 

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, spartaman64 said:

you mean like what intel does every generation and receives 0 backlash for. i guess amd should just change the pin layout like intel and use that as justification 

I can with ease find 30 posts on this forum complaining about Intel changing socket every second generation. You can't go 5 replies an Intel or AMD thread before someone mentions it.

Also, changing socket and telling motherboard manufacturers that they are not allowed to make their products work with newer generation CPUs are a bit different, even though the outcome is the same.

 

In any case, this is a dick move from AMD and I honestly don't understand how people can defend it.

And yes, I wouldn't be surprised if AMD will start changing the pin layout more often now. AM4 support has been quite the clusterfuck and in the best case scenario it has only been supported for 1 generation longer (3 generations) than Intel's standard support (2 generations).

AMD has clearly demonstrated with this, as well as the previous motherboard debacle, that they do not want customers to be able to keep their motherboards. That's something they marketed when they were the underdog. Now that they are the top dog I expect them to do just like Intel did when they were on top.

 

Remember, AMD is not your friend.

[Blademaster91]

This isn't surprising because of how much of a mess beta bios updates were for B350 boards, though the CPU support is still better with 3 CPU upgrades, compared to Intel you just get 1 cpu refresh upgrade.

And people that are yelling "aMd BaD" aren't realizing that all of the microcode to support Ryzen 1xxx series all the way up to Ryzen 5xxx series and the Ryzen APU's won't fit into the BIOS chip, and a beta bios can potentially break a motherboard or have all kinds of issues.

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

In any case, this is a dick move from AMD and I honestly don't understand how people can defend it.

For what reasons is it a dick move?

[LAwLz]

13 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

This isn't surprising because of how much of a mess beta bios updates were for B350 boards, though the CPU support is still better with 3 CPU upgrades, compared to Intel you just get 1 cpu refresh upgrade.

That's a weird way of phrasing it. Are you trying to make it sound like AMD gave users 3 upgrades and Intel only one? 

It's 2 CPU generations vs 3 CPU generations. Not 1 vs 3.

 

14 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

And people that are yelling "aMd BaD" aren't realizing that all of the microcode to support Ryzen 1xxx series all the way up to Ryzen 5xxx series and the Ryzen APU's won't fit into the BIOS chip, and a beta bios can potentially break a motherboard or have all kinds of issues.

But shouldn't that be up to the motherboard manufacturer to decide which CPUs they want to support and how to go about it? Shouldn't a motherboard manufacturer be free to let's say support 4 generations of CPUs by making their GUI simpler, or cutting support for uncommon chips? They haven't had issues with motherboard manufacturers doing similar things before. 

 

Also, what does beta bios have to do with anything? AMD aren't blocking it because it's a beta bios that might have issues. They have had no problems with beta BIOSes before. If that was the reason then they would never be okay with a beta BIOS.

[LAwLz]

10 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

For what reasons is it a dick move?

Because:

1) AMD are telling motherboard manufacturers what they can and can't support on their boards. I think motherboard manufacturers should be free to do whatever with their boards. 

 

2) It makes it so that some customers will need to buy a new motherboard despite there being 0 technical reasons for it. Very similar to what Intel has been doing and constantly getting shit on for the last decade or so. Except with Intel there are actually some (small or not) technical reasons for it. 

[Mr.Meerkat]

On 5/3/2021 at 12:57 AM, Kisai said:

So the more likely reason nobody is permitted to have the firmware updated to support a newer CPU is that it creates a support problem where the released boards don't support 5000 and you need a 3000 part to flash it to 5000, because it drops support for the earlier cpu's.

Oh it's worse than that. Had I not had a 3700X in my B350 mobo, I'd still be running a BIOS versions that doesn't support 3000-series CPUs. Had MSI then proceeded to release a new BIOS version with 5000-series support and drops 1000-series support, assuming I'm still using a 1700, it may physically be impossible to update the BIOS without a 2000 or 3000-series CPU unless USB flashback was an option (which isn't in my case, and isn't for most mobos). 

 

As for AMD giving support to this issue, they have already had this very exact issue, 1 generation earlier, with 3rd gen Ryzen which resulted in them giving out "loaner CPUs" and I suspect they rather not go through that headache again, especially if dropping 1000-series and Bristol ridge (pre-Zen APUs)  is not enough where it has to drop support for raven ridge as well (2000-series APUs, what they used for the loaner CPUs). 

 

There's ofc also the issue of 300-series mobos not supporting 1st gen Ryzen, which is...not great let's be honest...would be an utter headache for second hand parts. 

 

5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

But shouldn't that be up to the motherboard manufacturer to decide which CPUs they want to support and how to go about it? Shouldn't a motherboard manufacturer be free to let's say support 4 generations of CPUs by making their GUI simpler, or cutting support for uncommon chips? They haven't had issues with motherboard manufacturers doing similar things before. 

Do note that most 300-series mobos had to drop Raven ridge support and include a much reduced BIOS to fit 3rd gen Ryzen onto them. As discussed above, it may really be a physical limitation in the sense that you just can't fit all four generations of Ryzen onto some AM4 BIOS chips. As for letting manufacturers decide support, you then have the issue of mobo owners getting unhappy with how their specific mobo doesn't support 5000-series and it could end up being a bit of a clusterfuck. 

 

It is true that people do complain about Intel when they pull something like this but this isn't quite the same as there are actual very arguable physical restrictions that is limiting it. I'd argue AMD hands are close to their hands being tied here. If anyone is going to upgrade to 5000-series Ryzen then it's probably going to be people with 1000-series, which could potentially be impossible without a second CPU and in the case it does, it just ends up being a headache for retailers, manufacturers, AMD and consumers. 

[Guest]

On 5/2/2021 at 3:11 AM, WereCat said:

 

You often have to have multiple CPU's just to get from the shipped default BIOS to a new latest BIOS and update BIOS to different versions in between because the latest BIOS may not support the CPU you originally got with the motherboard but it may support the newer CPU that was released 2 years later.

 

Actually that's entirely true. You only need a certain chip, and you can get it free.

 

I believe, and anyone may feel to find the information to correct me.....

 

The 200ge and 1200 (not super sure for the 1200) are supported through all bios revisions which may actually include one or two more. Just not exactly sure without a tad bit of research, but I sent my 200ge to Mr.Scott from my benching team to update the bios on his X570 chipset, which would be the same cpu used from X370 and up and also the same chip that AMD would send during the RMA process to request a free bios update cpu for when the issue occured with factory shipped bios's that didn't support 3000 and 5000 series chips.

 

Short term processor loan boot kit.

At the bottom of the page from the link below.

https://www.amd.com/en/support/kb/faq/pa-100

[Middcore]

When AMD debuted AM4 in 2017, they promised to stick with the socket through 2020.

 

They may have abided by the letter of that promise, but they certainly haven't stuck to the spirit. A person who bought a 300-series board in 2017 had every reason to believe AMD was saying they'd be able to use AMD's latest processors through 2020, and that didn't turn out to be true. Heck, if we haven't already forgotten, AMD even tried to block Zen 3 on X470 and B450 boards until there was an outcry about it. 

[Giganthrax]

Maybe they're against it because it's hella unstable and they dont want to be bombed with customer complaints.

 

I recently upgraded from 1600x to 3700x on an ASUS X370 PRO. Fully updated BIOS. It worked for a few days and then I kept getting BSOD after BSOD after BSOD with all sorts of error messages.

 

Tried everything but nothing fixed the problem until I relocated the 3700x into a B450 mobo. Now it works perfectly. I put the 1600x back into the X370 pro, and that works perfectly as well.

 

I'm guessing these BIOS compatibility updates arent nearly as stable as mosy people would hope. I also wouldnt be surprised it mobo manufacturers just want to churn these unstable bios updates out so they could sell more o their remaining old mobo stock.

[Blademaster91]

48 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

That's a weird way of phrasing it. Are you trying to make it sound like AMD gave users 3 upgrades and Intel only one? 

It's 2 CPU generations vs 3 CPU generations. Not 1 vs 3.

 It's still better than what Intel allows, and no one complains when Intel makes you buy a new motherboard, for example theres plenty of decent Z270 boards that could've handled Intel 8th gen cpu's but no have to buy a new mobo.

48 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

But shouldn't that be up to the motherboard manufacturer to decide which CPUs they want to support and how to go about it? Shouldn't a motherboard manufacturer be free to let's say support 4 generations of CPUs by making their GUI simpler, or cutting support for uncommon chips? They haven't had issues with motherboard manufacturers doing similar things before. 

 

Also, what does beta bios have to do with anything? AMD aren't blocking it because it's a beta bios that might have issues. They have had no problems with beta BIOSes before. If that was the reason then they would never be okay with a beta BIOS.

So if one manufacturer decides to support it then everyone would be complaining to all the motherboard manufacturers to support it, people would complain they lose the flashy UI, and the only way for manufacturers to support Ryzen 5000 on X370 is cut support for previous generation chips, or do another CPU upgrade program.

Cutting CPU support adds the problem of no more updates for those with previous gen chips, making beta bios updates costs the motherboard manufacturer, of course the motherboard manufacturers would rather you buy a new board. And the CPU upgrade program was a nice thing for AMD to do but that was also a more complicated process than most people probably wanted to do.

There have been problems in the past with beta bios with Ryzen cpus, so they could be blocking it because so much would have to be removed from microcode, and for stability reasons, I doubt AMD wants complaints of unstable Ryzen 5000 cpus on X370.

[HenrySalayne]

39 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

2) It makes it so that some customers will need to buy a new motherboard despite there being 0 technical reasons for it. Very similar to what Intel has been doing and constantly getting shit on for the last decade or so. Except with Intel there are actually some (small or not) technical reasons for it. 

Nobody knows AMD's reasoning behind this decision. I already explained in my first post why it's highly unlikely "more money" was the reason. For a "dick move" they need some questionable intentions, but there is no evidence whatsoever.

[Ydfhlx]

Do people actually think that AMD does it to "avoid confusion", "protect from MoBo failures", "they were poor quality so Zen3 wouldn't work anyways" or "not high enough quality"???

 

It is a motherboard I OWN and whose MANUFACTURER wants to update it.

 

It's my motherboard as I said, I see no reason why shouldn't I be allowed to take the risk of updating. Just make me tick the box "This BIOS is unoffical version, might be unstable and even destroy the board. I am aware of the risk". And AMD could always say "we newer said it is officially supported, if it doesn't work it's not our fault" - just like ECC RAM support.

 

Yes you might not get RAM speeds that you would on new board. And you can probably forget about overclocking a 5950X on such a board. But again, AMD doesn't have to officially bring support.

 

Confusion already exists - mostly due to  motherboard manufacturers. Some call Ryzen 5000 series a 3rd gen, contrary to popular counting it as a 4th gen. Some even list APUs as "2nd generation Ryzen processors with Radeon Vega graphics" and repeat it every other sentence when discussing compatibility. I couldn't even make this up. This also makes people think that 3000 series CPUs and APUs are same generation (it's also partly AMD's fault tho).

 

This situation, where AMD blocks software to force buying a new product to old hardware, can be summed up with 1 sentence: "AMD pulled an Intel"

[Kisai]

38 minutes ago, Ydfhlx said:

Do people actually think that AMD does it to "avoid confusion", "protect from MoBo failures", "they were poor quality so Zen3 wouldn't work anyways" or "not high enough quality"???

 

It is a motherboard I OWN and whose MANUFACTURER wants to update it.

 

What would have solved this is a socketed A/B/C firmware chip. Eg the socketed (A) firmware chip can be replaced with a larger model for larger firmware update, and the onboard (B) firmware only supports the one-generation of cpu the chipset was designed for, and the (C) firmware is the stock firmware the board comes with and can't be flashed.

 

Obviously motherboard manufacturers would rather save a few pennies and only have one bios, but many non-budget boards, including OEM systems like Dell, have two bios's, but update both of them (updating the second bios after the first bios passes the checksum.) This creates a potential problem of flashing a firmware upwards, and removing support for the CPU it was booted from.

 

Like another solution here, would have been to put a microSD slot on the motherboard, and have the MB use the SD-card's firmware, at the expense of some boot time, with a physical jumper flipped that makes it replace the default bios.

 

https://www.techpowerup.com/257201/bios-rom-size-limitations-almost-derail-amds-zen2-backwards-compatibility-promise?cp=2

 

Quote

The scary part? Many other motherboard brands appear to be using 16-megabyte EEPROMs on their older socket AM4 motherboards. These companies are bound to run into similar ROM capacity issues unless they keep their UEFI setup programs lightweight. Motherboards based on the latest X570 chipset feature 32-megabyte EEPROMs. The AMD X570 chipset lacks support for not just "Bristol Ridge," but also first-generation Ryzen "Summit Ridge" and "Raven Ridge" processors.

 

Like how much does a 16MB or 32MB EEPROM cost? Probably a difference of $1.00 at most. Why not just stick a 128MB EEPROM on the board and fill the rest of the space with a Linux rescue/diagnostic OS that can be jettisoned if the space is ever needed.