Jump to content

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

Icarus_Radio
49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't have any problem with assumptions being made.

I have a problem with people saying "this is how it is" when they are making assumptions without any actual knowledge on the subject.

Fair point.

 

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think the AGESA size is kind of irrelevant because yes, I do think that AMD shouldn't tell motherboard vendors what they can and can't do with their motherboards.

Remember like a year ago when Intel started limiting memory speeds on their lower end motherboards? We had threads like these and people were absolutely flaming Intel for it, including our friend @GDRRiley.

Notice how nobody is saying "well it's Intel's chipset so they can do whatever they want with it"?

Then we have had threads like these where people are saying they bought an AMD processor because Intel had done things like block Gigabyte from releasing a BIOS with multiple CPU generations of support. Or this thread where people were praising ASRock for allowing overclocking Intel processors on non-Z motherboards.

 

If we go back even further then we can see a similar thing happened in 2015 when ASRock and MSI enabled base clock overclocking on Intel motherboards (allowing non-K processors to be overclocked).

Thread 1

Thread 2

Thread 3

Thread 4

Thread 5

 

 

This was before it was cool to hate Intel though so people aren't going #FuckIntel over it. People were more indifferent about Intel and as such just went "this is great news". Nobody said "oh I hope Intel blocks this because they have the right to do that and it might be bad for consumers".

I don't believe the size issue is irrelevant, but I also don't believe it's the primary issue either. There are some boards where the size of the AGESA will be an issue, particularly boards with 32mb or less ROM's. Does this mean it will impact every board? No, not by any means. The issue I believe would likely impact every board is the SMU firmware version and the inability to downgrade once upgraded. It's a dangerous game to play letting people update the SMU to handle the boost/voltage behavior of these CPU's and their core functions only to realize something isn't quite right, then learn that you can't go backwards after having already updated it. You can go backwards on a typical AGESA update, but when the SMU is updated, going backwards is an absolute nightmare.

 

Also, if you look in those threads you linked, you'll see that I participated in a couple. I had a Pentium G4400 and 6600T that were overclocked to kingdom come and I thoroughly enjoyed the fun I had doing so. That said, there were drawbacks when performing said overclocking that nobody spoke about and I myself tried to bring that to this very forums attention: 

If you are asking my opinion on Intel blocking this like they did, as someone that enjoyed using it, I'd tell you I am perfectly fine with them doing so. Those of us that want to do it ourselves know how to circumvent the blocks, just like those that wish to use Zen 3 on AMD's X370 platforms know how to do it if we want to roll that dice. A company can define how they want their product to be used, but ultimately the consumer dictates how it will be used. I've said this many times in the Nvidia threads, and my position has not changed. Nvidia limiting crypto performance is entirely within their means to do so and I have no problem with them making that decision, much like I do not mind those that circumvent that limit with their own creativity.

 

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Ehm... It's a beta BIOS. Of course we can't be sure how stable it is. It's still in development.

"It might be unstable in its current form" does not validate blocking it though. Blocking it only makes it so that development can't go on and improve. It's completely backwards logic going on in this thread.

If something might be unstable then what should happen is that it should be tested and further developed upon. Not abaondned because it wasn't 100% perflect and flawless right out of the gates.

I think we are making the assumption that it hasn't been tested already. I cannot think of a world where AMD would not want to make their Zen 3 CPU's more available to their customers, even if strictly from a market share perspective. The profit margin on chipsets is incredibly low ( I can speak from experience on this, I am in the system integration business and have bought my fair share of boards from both sides of the party line here). CPU's however, there is a huge margin for profit there, especially with AMD's MCM design. They'd stand to gain far more from selling more CPU's even if they were used on older boards. This part is simply speculation, but I'd imagine AMD would have done some of the testing themselves and likely came to the determination that their processors would not be received in the best light on their older platforms. Either that, or the original specifications they defined for the platform likely isn't good enough for these CPU's. Does this mean every board should be barred? Who knows, but I do firmly believe the decision rests in AMD's hands. It is the responsibility of the company to protect their own image and the image of their products and if they feel this would be damaging to them, they are within their rights to put their foot down on it. Much like we are within our rights to flip them the bird and mod it ourselves.

 

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Also, who says AMD would get the blame? That's a massive assumption that I have seen 0 evidence to support.

Let's be honest here, this BIOS update is only appealing to enthusiasts. Not the average Joe. If you are swapping your CPU then you are already an enthusiast. If you are not only swapping out your CPU but also reading BIOS patch notes and figuring out which BIOS supports which CPU then you are most likely in the camp that realize it is not AMD's fault if one CPU doesn't work with a specific motherboard with a specific BIOS version.

I say it, because they've received a lot of flack recently from ignorant customers (myself included) over how board partners handled recent AGESA firmware updates. AMD was recently blamed publicly by both customers and tech publications alike for a USB issue that was a result of poor port mapping on the part of board vendors conflicting with the registers defined by the new 5000 series CPU's that AMD had to release a universal fix for because too many of the partners failed to properly follow instructions: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16554/amd-set-to-roll-out-agesa-firmware-usb-fix-for-ryzen-coming-april. Looking through the port mapping with AMIBCP, you'd see all sorts of screwed up mapping (port 19 mapped to 12, USB controller devices mapped to LED firmware controllers, etc) and these boards took forever to enumerate USB devices when first plugged in. We all blamed AMD for that one, but it was entirely the fault of 2 large board vendors across their entire product stack. Since we saw all of the reports impacting different classes of boards from multiple vendors, we just assumed it had to be AMD, the common denominator.

 

Now this doesn't mean AMD is free from scrutiny, there is still plenty of valid criticism for their recent handling of the AGESA firmware updates (specifically the recent patches to 1.2) that absolutely deserve the ire of their consumers, but to say it wouldn't (or can't) happen would simply be false.

 

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If the argument is that "people will see AM4 and then get mad at AMD when their AM4 processor doesn't work" then that's a really shit argument because that is exactly the situation we are already in. If someone buys a 5600X because it is an AM4 processor and tries to put it in an X370 motherboard because it has an AM4 socket then it won't work, and now AMD are blocking motherboard manufacturers from making it work. I honestly think it is mind blowing how much mental gymnastics are going on in this thread to try and defend AMD.

I think the explanation I came up with for why AMD are doing this is the only logical one. 

Luckily this is not the argument I am making, so we can dodge this bullet entirely. That said, I did make this argument when Intel launched their godawful X299 platform with those Kaby Lake (or Baby Lake, as I liked to call them) quad core CPU's that disabled half their PCIe lanes, memory channels and controllers on the board. People see X299 CPU, buy it with an X299 board, then realize half the X299 features are gone, lol.

 

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't like what you are doing right now.

"I don't defend their behavior, I defend their right to do what they are doing" is usually said by people who desperately want to defend a company without endorsing what the company is doing because they themselves deep down think it is wrong.

The beauty of discussion is that we do not need to like each other or what each other are doing in order to have said discussion. I invited you to view my history as you've done with others in this thread because I am confident in my prior stance on this subject across all vendors & companies. I am very black & white with how I treat this when it comes up, regardless of whether it's about Intel, AMD, Nvidia or any company for that matter. Companies do not deserve defending, companies are not fragile creatures that require us to stand up for them. I am merely making sure we avoid slippery slopes by depriving companies of their rights to protect their products simply because we, as consumers, demand we be allowed to pour the proverbial hot coffee on our laps and pretend that some idiot won't then go blame the company despite the rest of us having some common sense. 

 

49 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Do you think it is a good or bad thing for consumers and motherboard manufacturers that AMD are telling motherboard manufacturers that they are not allowed to add support for Ryzen 5000 series processors on X370 motherboards?

The way you worded this is interesting as I see what you're doing, but I'll answer it honestly nonetheless. Do I think it's a good or bad thing for consumers & motherboard manufacturers that AMD is telling motherboard manufacturers that they are not allowed to support Ryzen 5000 series processors on X370 motherboards?

  1. It's good for motherboard manufacturers. Simply put, if their old boards do not support new processors, customers are forced to update and buy new boards to use new CPU's. Board partners do not need to maintain support for older boards, they reach EOL sooner. This is a net win for board manufacturers.
  2. It's potentially good for customers (assuming AMD has a reason not to support it), but likely bad in the grand scheme of things for the reason mentioned directly above.
    • If AMD has a valid reason to prevent support of Zen 3 on the 300 series CPU's, then they are providing a service to customers by saving them from potential headaches involved with using these CPU's on those boards. If this is the case, I'd like them to publicly disclose why these CPU's aren't supported, so us modders can at least decide if we want to roll the dice long-term on it or not.
    • If AMD does not have a valid reason and are simply doing it out of spite, it's bad for the consumer as they'll have to upgrade their board to use a new CPU.

 

Now with my answers disclosed above, if you want to know if I think AMD is morally wrong to intentionally restrict and artificially limit product support for the sake of pushing new chipsets, I'd say no. Much like I criticized Intel in the past for this very same move, I ultimately determined it is their decision to shoot themselves in the foot if they wish to do so. We are not owed more than what we are promised, keep that in mind. 

 

It's been no secret on this forum that I am not a big fan of backwards compatibility when it comes to computer hardware. While I may be wrong, I have this deep seeded belief that backwards compatibility ultimately stifles innovation and clinging on to old standards will ultimately hold us back. This is my personal bias on the subject, so do with that what you will.

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

2) It is okay for them to do this because "3x0 boards were mostly bad". I don't think this is true either. Even if it is true, it still doesn't justify blocking it on boards that weren't bad. There are plenty of good X370 boards out there. There are plenty of X370 boards I'd consider superior to the lower end boards with later chipsets. I mean, you can't tell me with a straight face that the ROG Crosshair VI Hero is a worse motherboard than the Asus Prime A520M-K, yet AMD aren't blocking anyone from putting a Ryzen 9 5950X on that board. Only the first board is being blocked. That also disproves the whole bullshit "they are doing it to protect people from putting high power CPUs on weak boards" argument I've seen people try to pull as well.

Yep, my rog hero VII was almost not gonna get zen 3 support, even though it has more than enough VRM and rom space for support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh....wonder if someone will make the code themselves to spite big tech

Workstation Laptop: Dell Precision 7540, Xeon E-2276M, 32gb DDR4, Quadro T2000 GPU, 4k display

Wifes Rig: ASRock B550m Riptide, Ryzen 5 5600X, Sapphire Nitro+ RX 6700 XT, 16gb (2x8) 3600mhz V-Color Skywalker RAM, ARESGAME AGS 850w PSU, 1tb WD Black SN750, 500gb Crucial m.2, DIYPC MA01-G case

My Rig: ASRock B450m Pro4, Ryzen 5 3600, ARESGAME River 5 CPU cooler, EVGA RTX 2060 KO, 16gb (2x8) 3600mhz TeamGroup T-Force RAM, ARESGAME AGV750w PSU, 1tb WD Black SN750 NVMe Win 10 boot drive, 3tb Hitachi 7200 RPM HDD, Fractal Design Focus G Mini custom painted.  

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 5 3600,ASRock B450M Pro4 (3dmark.com)

Daughter 1 Rig: ASrock B450 Pro4, Ryzen 7 1700 @ 4.2ghz all core 1.4vCore, AMD R9 Fury X w/ Swiftech KOMODO waterblock, Custom Loop 2x240mm + 1x120mm radiators in push/pull 16gb (2x8) Patriot Viper CL14 2666mhz RAM, Corsair HX850 PSU, 250gb Samsun 960 EVO NVMe Win 10 boot drive, 500gb Samsung 840 EVO SSD, 512GB TeamGroup MP30 M.2 SATA III SSD, SuperTalent 512gb SATA III SSD, CoolerMaster HAF XM Case. 

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/37004594?

Daughter 2 Rig: ASUS B350-PRIME ATX, Ryzen 7 1700, Sapphire Nitro+ R9 Fury Tri-X, 16gb (2x8) 3200mhz V-Color Skywalker, ANTEC Earthwatts 750w PSU, MasterLiquid Lite 120 AIO cooler in Push/Pull config as rear exhaust, 250gb Samsung 850 Evo SSD, Patriot Burst 240gb SSD, Cougar MX330-X Case

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2021 at 7:14 AM, Icarus_Radio said:

Summary

AMD forbids the makers from even releasing a beta BIOS for X370 platform.

 

Quotes

 

My thoughts

It feels bad that AMD tells customer what they cannot do. This is more like an Intel or Apple thing (or NVIDIA for their mining limiter recently).

 

Sources

https://wccftech.com/amd-warns-motherboard-makers-offering-ryzen-5000-desktop-cpu-bios-support-on-am4-x370/

It's kind of dumb, This is why I loved AMD, every generation of ryzen has been compatible with am4, but on older motherboards, I guess they're making it difficult. Intel is weird constantly switching their socket 1151, 1200 etc. It's annoying how company's do this. Planned obsolescence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

Remember like a year ago when Intel started limiting memory speeds on their lower end motherboards? We had threads like these and people were absolutely flaming Intel for it, including our friend @GDRRiley.

Notice how nobody is saying "well it's Intel's chipset so they can do whatever they want with it"?

 

This was before it was cool to hate Intel though so people aren't going #FuckIntel over it. People were more indifferent about Intel and as such just went "this is great news". Nobody said "oh I hope Intel blocks this because they have the right to do that and it might be bad for consumers".

intel in that case was segmenting the market for no reason, AMD is trying to save the consumer from more of a headache and limited the amount of pissed people who can't get a CPU+board to work.  other than iGPU performance (which matters quite a bit on a low end chipset) RAM OC doesn't give intel a 20% boost so no one understood why they did it.
While they can do whatever doesn't mean they should, and they bought back memory OC to all CPUs in 11th gen on most boards.

 

I don't find it cool to hate on a company but I've got my reasons for disliking some
 

Good luck, Have fun, Build PC, and have a last gen console for use once a year. I should answer most of the time between 9 to 3 PST

NightHawk 3.0: R7 5700x @, B550A vision D, H105, 2x32gb Oloy 3600, Sapphire RX 6700XT  Nitro+, Corsair RM750X, 500 gb 850 evo, 2tb rocket and 5tb Toshiba x300, 2x 6TB WD Black W10 all in a 750D airflow.
GF PC: (nighthawk 2.0): R7 2700x, B450m vision D, 4x8gb Geli 2933, Strix GTX970, CX650M RGB, Obsidian 350D

Skunkworks: R5 3500U, 16gb, 500gb Adata XPG 6000 lite, Vega 8. HP probook G455R G6 Ubuntu 20. LTS

Condor (MC server): 6600K, z170m plus, 16gb corsair vengeance LPX, samsung 750 evo, EVGA BR 450.

Spirt  (NAS) ASUS Z9PR-D12, 2x E5 2620V2, 8x4gb, 24 3tb HDD. F80 800gb cache, trueNAS, 2x12disk raid Z3 stripped

PSU Tier List      Motherboard Tier List     SSD Tier List     How to get PC parts cheap    HP probook 445R G6 review

 

"Stupidity is like trying to find a limit of a constant. You are never truly smart in something, just less stupid."

Camera Gear: X-S10, 16-80 F4, 60D, 24-105 F4, 50mm F1.4, Helios44-m, 2 Cos-11D lavs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

So first AMD *allows* 16mb chips, but then *disallows* to actually use them?  Just a bit sus, heh.

You mean allowed 32MB? 16MB is pretty well the going standard at the time. It's the 16MB chips that can't fit every Zen through to Zen3 CPU and APU.

 

3 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

I think its a bit disingenuous to say the 16mb chips are "too small", AMD should have known this ,and also who's to say its *impossible* to make a BIOS with a smaller footprint, apparently motherboard manufacturers think it is possible?

I don't think so. The actual processor designers and architects are making choices so far ahead and base quite a lot on existing standards. It's not a surprise at all that Zen1 had a 16MB limitation as it would have been designed to address the going standard BIOS chip size at the time and it's not like at the architectural and chip design stage they are going to know that specifically 5 odd years of platform support is going to be required and the product stack is going to be so many different models and archecture all in the same socket and platform.

 

It's really not that all of a surprising oversight at all. And that's without also factoring in the chipset and AGESA are likely different teams as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Demonking said:

Yep, my rog hero VII was almost not gonna get zen 3 support, even though it has more than enough VRM and rom space for support.

I honestly don't think it's a VRM issue. An overbuilt VRM on Ryzen is utterly pointless with AMD's EDC and PPT limits in-place in terms of CPU overclocking short of pushing LN2. You have boards with massive 300A current limits, but a 142W PPT socket limit that you can't overcome. Even if you define a higher value using motherboard values instead of CPU values, something internal to the CPU still ends up limiting you to roughly the same power draw. I'd almost wager you could get away with using an A320 board and still not kill the VRM on a board, I just wouldn't be dumb enough to try it myself, lol.

 

I think the bigger issue is going to be SMU firmware implementation and trying to support it across the entire spectrum of CPU's. Looking at several different X570 boards, all of them support Zen +, Zen 2, Zen 3, but none that I could find support the original Zen CPU's. This includes the X570 Strix boards with the 256mb ROM's, so I highly doubt this is due to a limitation in ROM size. That may have mattered on some of the earlier budget Zen boards, but I just don't see that being the case for most of the more expensive boards with decent size EEPROM's.

 

Now with AMD not supporting Zen 1 on X570 boards, it makes sense for them not to support Zen 3 on X370 boards if this is in fact an SMU issue. You would likely be in a situation where you'd have to choose support for one other the other, not both. The fact that they are doing this both ways lends further credence to this theory than if they were to simply limit it one way.

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MageTank said:

but none that I could find support the original Zen CPU's

I would say that is related to Zen1 16MB address limit, unless I'm remember that wrong. I'm sure that is correct though so I don't think any of the motherboard makers want to have to deal with partitioning a 32MB chip in to 16MB address spaces just so Zen1 CPU can be put in to the board and not freak out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, leadeater said:

I would say that is related to Zen1 16MB address limit, unless I'm remember that wrong. I'm sure that is correct though so I don't think any of the motherboard makers want to have to deal with partitioning a 32MB chip in to 16MB address spaces just so Zen1 CPU can be put in to the board and not freak out.

I recall hearing about that as well, I just don't remember where. Still, it's definitely possible for them to do it, and we all know that AGESA support for Zen 1 exists in 1.0.0.4 (which technically launched on X570 boards, meaning they had the AGESA foundation to support the CPU's), it's just curious as to why nobody decided to actually implement the support.

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, leadeater said:

You mean allowed 32MB? 16MB is pretty well the going standard at the time. It's the 16MB chips that can't fit every Zen through to Zen3 CPU and APU.

 

37 minutes ago, leadeater said:

I don't think so. The actual processor designers and architects are making choices so far ahead and base quite a lot on existing standards

The info is a bit difficult to find now, but as i stated my main issue is that it was stated AM4 would support all upcoming Ryzen generations , or at least it was suggested, so while I understand things change and not everything can be predicted, i wouldn't really have an issue with all of this if they would call those newer chips that apparently need bigger BIOS and are therefore incompatible with older boards not AM4, but instead AM4+ or similar.

The more i think about it the more baffling it gets tbh, AM4 boards ,incompatible with AM4 CPUs, who thought  thats a good idea?

 

 

 

The direction tells you... the direction

-Scott Manley, 2021

 

Softwares used:

Corsair Link (Anime Edition) 

MSI Afterburner 

OpenRGB

Lively Wallpaper 

OBS Studio

Shutter Encoder

Avidemux

FSResizer

Audacity 

VLC

WMP

GIMP

HWiNFO64

Paint

3D Paint

GitHub Desktop 

Superposition 

Prime95

Aida64

GPUZ

CPUZ

Generic Logviewer

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, MageTank said:

I recall hearing about that as well, I just don't remember where. Still, it's definitely possible for them to do it, and we all know that AGESA support for Zen 1 exists in 1.0.0.4 (which technically launched on X570 boards, meaning they had the AGESA foundation to support the CPU's), it's just curious as to why nobody decided to actually implement the support.

Pretty sure it was in one of the GN videos. They can use 32MB chips it's just that from memory they were partitioned in to two 16MB address spaces. This method still has the down size of limiting the newer generation stuff to 16MB as well, since they were putting all the Zen/Zen+ stuff in to one section and the Zen2 and newer in the other.

 

Of course details subject to my memory of the situation so healthy dose of salt applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Neoquazar824 said:

Planned obsolescence. 

No, it's not. The opposite is true. Every CPU without a mainboard is worthless on the used market. Failure rates of mainboards are way higher than failure rates of CPUs. Just upgrading the CPU while keeping the mainboard will shift the balance even more towards a unhealthy supply of CPUs on the used market. These fully functional CPUs have to be thrown away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

 

The info is a bit difficult to find now, but as i stated my main issue is that it was stated AM4 would support all upcoming Ryzen generations , or at least it was suggested, so while I understand things change and not everything can be predicted, i wouldn't really have an issue with all of this if they would call those newer chips that apparently need bigger BIOS and are therefore incompatible with older boards not AM4, but instead AM4+ or similar.

The more i think about it the more baffling it gets tbh, AM4 boards ,incompatible with AM4 CPUs, who thought  thats a good idea?

 

 

 

I recall the original promise being support until 2020. https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/amd-socket-am4-motherboards-support-until-2020, https://community.amd.com/t5/blogs/the-exciting-future-of-amd-socket-am4/ba-p/414125, https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_reaffirms_commitment_to_am4_socket_until_2020/1. The use of the word "until" is very important, and they likely chose that word for a reason. Much like ISP's like to use the magical words "up to" to avoid the mighty reach of the FTC. They delivered on that promise, seeing as Zen 3 was released in Q4 of 2020 and wasn't readily available for purchase until 2021 (gotta love paper launches).

 

Nowhere did I ever see AMD suggest that X370 boards would support Zen 3 and you'll be hard pressed to find any mention of that from AMD online. Other customers made assumptions that it would, but AMD are not liable for assumptions made by other customers.

 

As for AM4 boards not supporting AM4 CPU's and the confusing nature that brings about, this is unfortunately not something new, not even to AMD. Socket AM2 supported Socket AM2+ CPU's, but not all AM2 boards allowed this because they didn't all support the downgrade to HTT 2.0 with an AM2+ CPU installed. We also saw this with AM3, where AM3 CPU's worked on older boards due to the CPU's dual IMC (DDR2 and DDR3 support) but old AM2 CPU's didn't work on AM3 boards due to the lack of a DDR3 IMC. Those were far confusing times. If you need a more recent example, Intel's LGA1151 would be the biggest example, where you have 1151 CPU's that physically fit (and work in older boards with a #2 pencil and some firmware shenanigans), but they blocked it from working for reasons unknown to this day.

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

@MageTank alright, point taken and thanks for the links , its something ive been trying to find, or even earlier stuff, although i distinctly remember that being a sales pitch back then (think i bought my first Ryzen in 2017) maybe it was not said by AMD directly.

 

 

Anyway, what does stop AMD to label things clearly, why not just call the new chipsets AM4+?  It would remove a lot of the confusion, and would  just be an all around pro consumer move ,im sure many would  appreciate.

 

And yes, i know intel does worse / similar, doesnt  mean AMD couldn't do better.

The direction tells you... the direction

-Scott Manley, 2021

 

Softwares used:

Corsair Link (Anime Edition) 

MSI Afterburner 

OpenRGB

Lively Wallpaper 

OBS Studio

Shutter Encoder

Avidemux

FSResizer

Audacity 

VLC

WMP

GIMP

HWiNFO64

Paint

3D Paint

GitHub Desktop 

Superposition 

Prime95

Aida64

GPUZ

CPUZ

Generic Logviewer

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mark Kaine said:

@MageTank alright, point taken and thanks for the links , its something ive been trying to find, or even earlier stuff, although i distinctly remember that being a sales pitch back then (think i bought my first Ryzen in 2017) maybe it was not said by AMD directly.

 

 

Anyway, what does stop AMD to label things clearly, why not just call the new chipsets AM4+?  It would remove a lot of the confusion, and would  just be an all around pro consumer move ,im sure many would  appreciate.

 

And yes, i know intel does worse / similar, doesnt  mean AMD couldn't do better.

I don't think nothing would stop them from doing it, though it would break away from their previous trend as their + nomenclature typically involved an increase in pin count on the socket itself for the newer CPU's. 

 

I think people should spend less time paying attention to the socket itself and more attention to chipset support as the socket can be deceptive. If we look at the sockets, TR4 vs TRX40 would look identical but the difference in chipset is what dictates the difference in compatibility, despite the CPU's physically fitting in the boards.

 

I don't know, I can't really think of the best way to name these without someone coming out of it confused, but there definitely needs to be an improvement.

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MageTank said:

The use of the word "until" is very important, and they likely chose that word for a reason.

I find it interesting as in my world, as in work, support means support, as in firmware updates and other fault resolutions. It can also mean sale of but applies only to that actual product/generation, products go through phases of "support"; End of Sale, End of Life and End of Support.

 

End of Sale = will no longer sell it to you

End of Life = no longer manufacturing

End of Support = no support at all offered aka go away

 

In my work frame of mind and how I interact with hardware and support all that was promised by AMD was sale of, warranty replacement and firmware updates of products on AM4 platforms. That is extremely broad while also being very specific (per actual product generation), what that means is I wouldn't even question it in that setting if there were only 1 CPU generation for AM4 at all and sale of the CPUs and accompanying motherboards ceased after 3 years so long as they honored all other parts of support.

 

Differences in expectations is always amusing, not that I would treat AMD's statement in a consumer electronics show like the above but either way support is a wildly board thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

I don't remember what your stance was on it, I wasn't singling you out in my post (at least I didn't mean to), I was just pointing out that many people were conveniently forgetting/ignoring AMD's track record with feature support and platform options in an attempt to slag off Intel.   Technology these days is so complex and needs to be moved at such a pace that there is no way any company can avoid things going wrong, whether it is exploits like spectre and meltdown, or if it is bios size incompatibilities.  All I am asking for is forewarning form the companies rather than all the marketing BS trying to sell you their wares then dropping the "sorry you can't do that" policy on us. 

 

 

 

Ok yeah sorry I misunderstood your post then, I agree companies shouldn't be promising things or making a bunch of marketing claims they can't actually bring to the consumer because of any limitations, like bios chip size. But yeah AM4 has been a bit of a mess, especially if you aren't buying the high end chipset, even with the high end chipsets, AMD didn't allow PCI-e 4.0 on X470. I recall a reason being that extra board layers are needed for PCI-e 4.0 and most boards couldn't run 4.0, but i'm not sure about that myself and I think they could've allowed users to test a beta bios as PCI-e 4.0 isn't a necessary feature unless you're needing fast storage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2021 at 2:27 PM, mariushm said:

I'm fine with it.

AMD never promised support for x370,

 

 

In 2017 they promised support for AM4 through 2020, that's when AMD 5000 was released. That's why I adopted early, because Intel had landlocked me into 1 generation updates. I can get up to a 3000 chip and that's great, but don't pretend like they "never promised" that's horseshit.

Athan is pronounced like Nathan without the N. <3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Athan Immortal said:

they promised support for AM4 through 2020

technically the socket is still supported

 

just not x370 chipset

-sigh- feeling like I'm being too negative lately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Athan Immortal said:

In 2017 they promised support for AM4 through 2020, that's when AMD 5000 was released. That's why I adopted early, because Intel had landlocked me into 1 generation updates. I can get up to a 3000 chip and that's great, but don't pretend like they "never promised" that's horseshit.

They never used the word "through". They used the word "until". Multiple sources in my previous post showed this:

 

18 hours ago, MageTank said:

I recall the original promise being support until 2020. https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/amd-socket-am4-motherboards-support-until-2020, https://community.amd.com/t5/blogs/the-exciting-future-of-amd-socket-am4/ba-p/414125, https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cpu_mainboard/amd_reaffirms_commitment_to_am4_socket_until_2020/1. The use of the word "until" is very important, and they likely chose that word for a reason. Much like ISP's like to use the magical words "up to" to avoid the mighty reach of the FTC. They delivered on that promise, seeing as Zen 3 was released in Q4 of 2020 and wasn't readily available for purchase until 2021 (gotta love paper launches).

 

Find me one quote from AMD where they themselves promised support through 2020. It's important that we do not misrepresent what they said to fit our narrative, regardless of how badly we want it to be true.

13 hours ago, leadeater said:

I find it interesting as in my world, as in work, support means support, as in firmware updates and other fault resolutions. It can also mean sale of but applies only to that actual product/generation, products go through phases of "support"; End of Sale, End of Life and End of Support.

 

End of Sale = will no longer sell it to you

End of Life = no longer manufacturing

End of Support = no support at all offered aka go away

 

In my work frame of mind and how I interact with hardware and support all that was promised by AMD was sale of, warranty replacement and firmware updates of products on AM4 platforms. That is extremely broad while also being very specific (per actual product generation), what that means is I wouldn't even question it in that setting if there were only 1 CPU generation for AM4 at all and sale of the CPUs and accompanying motherboards ceased after 3 years so long as they honored all other parts of support.

 

Differences in expectations is always amusing, not that I would treat AMD's statement in a consumer electronics show like the above but either way support is a wildly board thing.

I suppose it's possible one could interpret AMD's promise of "motherboard support until 2020" as a means of disputing X570's incompatibility with first gen Ryzen, depending on how they'd define "support", though it still doesn't help them with the claims they are making involving Zen 3 being promised when it was released in Q4 of 2020. I would agree with your definitions personally as they seem more literal and that is how I prefer to interpret things when at all possible. It's also how we handle our products at our company and it has worked well for us in terms of CSAT and overall business.

My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2021 at 6:13 PM, GDRRiley said:

I don't find it cool to hate on a company but I've got my reasons for disliking some

I think anyone who has read your posts for any extended period of time will have picked up that you strongly dislike one particular CPU manufacturer and strongly likes the competitor.

 

 

11 hours ago, Moonzy said:

technically the socket is still supported

 

just not x370 chipset

Yeah, that's what they ended up meaning.

People interpreted "support AM4 until 2020" as meaning "if I buy an AM4 motherboard, new processors released in 2020 will work on it" and AMD never corrected any of those misinterpretations (why would they? It made them sell more products and gave their rabid fans some ammunition against Intel).

Since AMD never specified that the chipsets would continue to get support for newer processors they "technically" didn't lie. They just gave people the wrong idea.

 

 

8 hours ago, MageTank said:

They never used the word "through". They used the word "until". Multiple sources in my previous post showed this:

Don't try and defend them, they knew what they were doing.

According to AMD themselves, they have supported AM4 throughout 2020. Yes, they might have said "until" but in AMD's own eyes they have supported it throughout 2020.

Releasing a product on the socket counts as "supporting it" in AMD's eyes. It's like what Moonzy said. See this blog post if you don't believe me:

Quote

Q: Will the “Zen 3” architecture be compatible with AMD Socket AM4?
A: Yes! AMD officially plans to support next-gen AMD Ryzen™ desktop processors, with the “Zen 3” architecture, on AMD X570 and B550 motherboards. 

 

The people who try and defend AMD by going "well technically they never promised support throughout 2020 so by definition they didn't lie, they were just vague and that mislead people" are not only misunderstanding the issue but also misunderstanding what AMD said and define as "support AM4".

 

In AMD's eyes, they have supported AM4 throughout 2020. "Supporting AM4" does not mean supporting AM4 motherboards or chipsets though. It only means they continued to release CPUs that used the physical AM4 socket.

AMD makes a clear distinction between chipset support and socket support. Most people think they are the same though, hence a lot of confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

People interpreted "support AM4 until 2020" as meaning "if I buy an AM4 motherboard, new processors released in 2020 will work on it" and AMD never corrected any of those misinterpretations (why would they? It made them sell more products and gave their rabid fans some ammunition against Intel).

Since AMD never specified that the chipsets would continue to get support for newer processors they "technically" didn't lie. They were just being deceiving. 

i wouldn't go so far as to say that's their original intention

 

just that supporting AM4 for that many years turned out to be more than what they asked for

-sigh- feeling like I'm being too negative lately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Moonzy said:

i wouldn't go so far as to say that's their original intention

 

just that supporting AM4 for that many years turned out to be more than what they asked for

Deceiving might be the wrong word.

I think they made vague claims because they weren't sure what they were going to do or how to do it, and they never bothered to correct the misinterpretations people had (because that would be shooting themselves in the foot).

 

AMD: "We are going to support AM4 until 2020, or maybe not we'll see" (they didn't even promise it would be supported until 2020 since they said they would change it if they had to).

AMD fans: "oh wow! Does that mean I can buy a motherboard now and then when I buy your new CPU in 2020 I can just put it in the same motherboard?"

AMD: "..."

AMD fans: "That's great! I am totally going to recommend AMD CPUs now! You're so much better than Intel regarding this!"

AMD: "Thanks"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

In AMD's eyes, they have supported AM4 throughout 2020. "Supporting AM4" does not mean supporting AM4 motherboards or chipsets though. It only means they continued to release CPUs that used the physical AM4 socket.

AMD makes a clear distinction between chipset support and socket support. Most people think they are the same though, hence a lot of confusion.

AMD knew full well what they were doing. People didn't like Intel's policy of socket changes so AMD made an appeal to consumers back in 2017 to be better than that. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a lot harder and more complicated for them and the consumers and in the end, once AMD was done with legal obligations to that statement, they stopped. Yeah, AMD's move here is anti-consumer and honestly, it doesn't matter if it was legal, it should leave a bad taste in consumers mouths. Unfortunately, that's not going to stop people from buying AMD just like complaining about Intel socket switches didn't stop people from buying Intel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MageTank said:

Find me one quote from AMD where they themselves promised support through 2020. It's important that we do not misrepresent what they said to fit our narrative, regardless of how badly we want it to be true.

21 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Don't try and defend them, they knew what they were doing.

According to AMD themselves, they have supported AM4 throughout 2020. Yes, they might have said "until" but in AMD's own eyes they have supported it throughout 2020.

Releasing a product on the socket counts as "supporting it" in AMD's eyes. It's like what Moonzy said. See this blog post if you don't believe me:

 

The people who try and defend AMD by going "well technically they never promised support throughout 2020 so by definition they didn't lie, they were just vague and that mislead people" are not only misunderstanding the issue but also misunderstanding what AMD said and define as "support AM4".

 

In AMD's eyes, they have supported AM4 throughout 2020. "Supporting AM4" does not mean supporting AM4 motherboards or chipsets though. It only means they continued to release CPUs that used the physical AM4 socket.

AMD makes a clear distinction between chipset support and socket support. Most people think they are the same though, hence a lot of confusion.

 

Also, they did say "through 2020".

They have since deleted all references to "through 2020".

 

You can still find posts where they say "through 2020" on the way back machine such as this one:

Quote

With the launch of the AM4 platform in 2016, we at AMD made a commitment to maintain and support socket AM4 through 2020.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×