Which budget AMD mainboard for the following upgrade?

[ManemeJeff]

Hey so I have a Ryzen 5 1600, LPX 3200Mhz DDR4 RAM, MSI B350 Plus mate mainboard and an rtx 2060 right now.

 

Context:

The b350 is a really terrible mainboard.

The CMOS battery is beneath the GPU so I have to unplug the GPU to get to the battery but that's not the biggest issue.

 

The biggest issue with this board is that 2/4 SATA ports are vertical right beneath the end of the GPU casing, meaning that my GPU is blocking access to 2/4 SATA ports.

 

This is nobody's fault except MSI, there's no reason to design 2/4 Sata plugs horizontally (as you should) but then the other 2 vertically right next to the PCIe GPU slot.

 

Upgrade:

I want to upgrade my CPU for sure at some point. My idea was to upgrade to a Ryzen 9 5900x when the prices hit 299 or lower.

This will also finally allow me to run my LPX 3200MHz 4 modules at regular speeds without XMP (my Ryzen 5 1600 can't run RAM at 3200, so I have to use XMP overclocking to achive that.)

 

Additionally I would upgrade the GPU at some point, preferably to an RTX xx80 series. Eliminating a CPU beforehand bottleneck would be wise.

 

Question:

which mainboard would be good to look out for to meet these criteria?

This is not an urgent/must-have-now upgrade so I can wait.

 

I am not willing to spend more than 100€+- for it since I will wait for sales anyway and personally I never liked spending a lot on mainboards. I know it's not a lot but honestly I can see some good deals coming black friday or even next year christmas, I have time.

 

PS: I am also concerned about my maainboards voltage to the LPX modules.

PSPS: As mentioned below (thanks), XMP will be enabled one way or another. 

Edited September 29, 2022 by ManemeJeff
5800X->5900X

[NelizMastr]

Lots of old LPX kits were not optimized for AMD. You might need to replace them either way to run 3200 speeds, unless you're willing to overvolt to ~1.4V, which should be fine for DDR4, and the now considered cheap LPX stuff. You might get lucky.

 

Most B550 boards will suit your needs nicely, I wouldn't opt for anything B450 or older as Ryzen 5000 support simply is a bit spotty on some boards and many boards not having gotten beyond-BETA BIOS updates.

[PDifolco]

This one should be okay, not great but with $100 you won't ever have a great board, look at X670 boards lol

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/yyGnTW/gigabyte-b450-aorus-elite-v2-atx-am4-motherboard-b450-aorus-elite-v2

 

If you could spare $15 more you could get a B550 one

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/4mjNnQ/asrock-b550-phantom-gaming-4-atx-am4-motherboard-b550-phantom-gaming-4

[Helpful Tech Witch]

10 minutes ago, ManemeJeff said:

This will also finally allow me to run my LPX 3200MHz 4 modules at regular speeds without XMP (my Ryzen 5 1600 can't run RAM at 3200, so I have to use XMP overclocking to achive that.)

 

XMP is the intended way to run memory at its advertised frequencies, you'll probably end up using xmp on a new system too

[jaslion]

Just get a i5 12600k then? Its below 300$ now and matches the 5800x.

[ManemeJeff]

1 minute ago, PDifolco said:

This one should be okay, not great but with $100 you won't ever have a great board, look at X670 boards lol

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/yyGnTW/gigabyte-b450-aorus-elite-v2-atx-am4-motherboard-b450-aorus-elite-v2

 

If you could spare $15 more you could get a B550 one

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/4mjNnQ/asrock-b550-phantom-gaming-4-atx-am4-motherboard-b550-phantom-gaming-4

The second board looks promising since @NelizMastrrecommended b550.

 

The board doesn't have to cost 100€ right now, it can also cost 150€, since I will wait for a sale I can wait and snatch it for 110+- or beneath 100€.

 

But thanks for the second recommendation, looks interesting

 

[ManemeJeff]

2 minutes ago, Helpful Tech Witch said:

XMP is the intended way to run memory at its advertised frequencies, you'll probably end up using xmp on a new system too

Absolutely, I should've added that at the end of the post now that you mention it, one moment.

[ManemeJeff]

2 hours ago, jaslion said:

Just get a i5 12600k then? Its below 300$ now and matches the 5800x.

• The wattage of the 12600k is higher
• Total cores=10->total threads=16. The 5800x has 12 cores à 2 threads per core = 24 threads. I specifically target the 9 5800x for it's additional C/T, otherwise cheaper variants would outright have won the comparison.
• According to Intel ark, the 12600k has 20MB (I assume L3) Cache whereas the 5800x has 64MB.
• The 12600k is 0.1GHz faster @ turbo but that's not a meaningful difference compared to the difference in # of threads for example
• I've never had an Intel CPU or knowledge on FCLGA1700 socket, only AMD in my entire life. I remember our pc back in the days of nvidia 405 onboard graphics and quarterly Windows XP malware had an AMD CPU. ATI GPU was also a thing. I like Ryzen.

What I really love about the 12600k is that a neat iGPU is included but at the end of the day the 5800x fits my needs better.

[jaslion]

2 hours ago, ManemeJeff said:

The 5800x has 12 cores à 2 threads per core = 24 threads. I specifically target the 9 5800x for it's

Thats the 5900x. The 5800x is 8 core 16 threads

 

2 hours ago, ManemeJeff said:

The wattage of the 12600k is higher

Its not its actually quite efficient since its not pushed as hard

 

2 hours ago, ManemeJeff said:

According to Intel ark, the 12600k has 20MB (I assume L3) Cache whereas the 5800x has 64MB.

5800x has 32mb. In gaminf benchmarks both perform similar but the 12600k is a bit faster.

 

2 hours ago, ManemeJeff said:

• The 12600k is 0.1GHz faster @ turbo but that's not a meaningful difference compared to the difference in # of threads for example
• I've never had an Intel CPU or knowledge

You can NOT compare ghz. It is not a comparable number even in the same series cpu's

 

I think you are simply confusing the 5800x with the 5900x here and thus expextinf way more out of the 5800x.

 

 

[ManemeJeff]

2 hours ago, jaslion said:

Thats the 5900x. The 5800x is 8 core 16 threads

 

Its not its actually quite efficient since its not pushed as hard

 

5800x has 32mb. In gaminf benchmarks both perform similar but the 12600k is a bit faster.

 

You can NOT compare ghz. It is not a comparable number even in the same series cpu's

 

I think you are simply confusing the 5800x with the 5900x here and thus expextinf way more out of the 5800x.

 

2 hours ago, jaslion said:

 

 

I meant the 5900X as you said, I don't know why I typed 5800X.

Anyway, all the points still stand 64MB L3 cache, 12C/24T, lower wattage.

Why can't I compare GHz?

"That's not a comparable number even in the same cpu's series", can you back up that claim? Because unless a different/new technology is used that benefits the CPU in some way, I don't see how that statement could possibly be valid.

 

*Edited OP text from 5800x to 5900x. The link pointed to techspecups 5900X page the entire time so at least I didn't messed that up.

 

 

[jaslion]

1 hour ago, ManemeJeff said:

That's not a comparable number even in the same cpu's series", can you back up that claim? Because unless a different/new technology is used that benefits the CPU in some way, I don't see how that statement could possibly be valid.

Ghz has rarely been comparable. Even on same architecture cpu's.

 

Basically all has to do with ipc formulas.

 

But some real world examples:

A ryzen 5600 at 4ghz in a single core test will be slower than a 4ghz 5800x in a single core test partly because of the cache difference.

 

A pentium 4 3ghz is a lot slower than a athlon 64 2.6ghz. Because the athlon 64 has a much better ipc due to its architecture design.

 

A 5ghz fx 9590 in a single core test was about as fast as a i3 2120 a 3.1ghz cpu.

 

A 3.4ghz ghz i7 2600k is A LOT slower than a 3.5ghz i7 5820k in single core tests.

 

As you can see ghz is literally useless.

 

I say single core here to keep it simple because except for the p4 and athlon 64 all of these have different corecounts.

 

Anyway a 12700k is cheaper normally and flat out better gaming cpu. Also still similar powerdraw unless you unlock it full for the 5% extra performance.

[freeagent]

As a 5900X owner, I would say go with a different cpu. It is awesome when you open up the power taps and let it stretch its legs.. but if you just game then stick with a chip that has a single CCD. 5900X when you have a bit of a clock on will make your fans ramp with a quickness.  I am quite content running games on my secondary system that has a 5600X. I am replacing my 5900X with. 5800X3D, Amazon should have it here in a couple of days. Just food for thought.

[ManemeJeff]

3 hours ago, jaslion said:

Ghz has rarely been comparable. Even on same architecture cpu's.

 

Basically all has to do with ipc formulas.

 

But some real world examples:

A ryzen 5600 at 4ghz in a single core test will be slower than a 4ghz 5800x in a single core test partly because of the cache difference.

 

A pentium 4 3ghz is a lot slower than a athlon 64 2.6ghz. Because the athlon 64 has a much better ipc due to its architecture design.

 

A 5ghz fx 9590 in a single core test was about as fast as a i3 2120 a 3.1ghz cpu..

Very informative thank you.

5ghz fx processor sounds insane, I remember my fx 8350? was really not doing too well even on Windows 7.

 

2 hours ago, freeagent said:

As a 5900X owner, I would say go with a different cpu. It is awesome when you open up the power taps and let it stretch its legs.. but if you just game then stick with a chip that has a single CCD. 5900X when you have a bit of a clock on will make your fans ramp with a quickness.  I am quite content running games on my secondary system that has a 5600X. I am replacing my 5900X with. 5800X3D, Amazon should have it here in a couple of days. Just food for thought.

I am actually more interested in Programming, Virtual Machine utilisation for Reverse Engineering, small traces of rendering and a few games that already run around 60-100+ fps on my current 2060 (with DLSS they run even better). So I wouldn't worry on the games side at all.

 

If I understand your comment correctly, you're complaining about noise levels due to the fans ramping up?

Are you using the stock cooler, custom air cooler like Noctua DH14 or Dark Rock Pro 4, or AIO?

If you say it's noisy then that might be a problem, though I was planning to try AIO or a big air cooler anyway. 

 

I just need additional cores/threads, preferably more than 16T.

[freeagent]

Nono, I don’t have problems with cooling, D15 is not as good as my cooler anyways. For your workload 5900X would be good. Average Joe game player not so much.

[jaslion]

7 hours ago, ManemeJeff said:

I just need additional cores/threads, preferably more than 16T.

5900x it is OR check for a used 5950x

[ManemeJeff]

3 hours ago, jaslion said:

5900x it is OR check for a used 5950x

I've never bought used pc parts. Super scared about receiving a sub-functional product and then never being able to refund.

The 5900X will do just fine.

[freeagent]

5900X is a beast. Mine is a decent one and boosts to 5150.

[thewelshbrummie]

the TLDR - I think you need to rethink your budget as I think you're being unrealistic about potential sale pricing, especially when combined with the current €-$ exchange rate.

 

--

 

Quote

The biggest issue with this board is that 2/4 SATA ports are vertical right beneath the end of the GPU casing, meaning that my GPU is blocking access to 2/4 SATA ports.

 

This is nobody's fault except MSI, there's no reason to design 2/4 Sata plugs horizontally (as you should) but then the other 2 vertically right next to the PCIe GPU slot.

That's not MSI's fault. It's a very cheap board, historical pricing shows it never being more than $122 on Amazon US and around $90 was the cheapest price for it.  That's problem is arguably on you for not factoring in the physical size of your GPU or spending a bit more on the board. If you want all SATA ports to be rotated, then expect to pay more for the motherboard as it's a common upsell from cheap boards vs expensive boards - and something that's been common for at least the last 10 years. That & I doubt the majority of builds - especially budget builds - use all available SATA ports, so some are angled at 90 degrees and others not to provide the best option. Therefore I'm not surprised that MSI went this route for your motherboard.

 

I made a similar mistake with my old GTX 970, which fit in my case but was long enough to prevent me from installing HDDs in 2 of the drive bays in my old case. That mistake was on me for not planning ahead.

Quote

I am not willing to spend more than 100€+- for it since I will wait for sales anyway and personally I never liked spending a lot on mainboards. I know it's not a lot but honestly I can see some good deals coming black friday or even next year christmas, I have time.

Which I think is part of the reason you have the issue with SATA ports as I mentioned previously. Spending a little more can get you a far better board. €100 boards do exist for AM4 but look extremely basic with limited I/O and little if any VRM heatsink cooling. So if you're really concerned about RAM voltages and stability I'd strongly suggest spending a bit more. €130 boards are available and far better value for money imo. I don't think you can really go wrong with any OEM but I'd certainly spend that little bit extra to get exactly what you want. Waiting for the price to drop is not a realistic way of looking at it either as when stock starts to run low, prices will go up rather than continue down into fire-sale territory.

 

Quote

I want to upgrade my CPU for sure at some point. My idea was to upgrade to a Ryzen 9 5900x when the prices hit 299 or lower.

Wishful thinking imo. It's already been cut to around $400 in the US from $550 MSRP and I'd be surprised if it drops further. Factor in that you're using Euros, and the Euro to US Dollar exchange rate has never been this bad for the Euro, I really can't see the 5900X dropping much below the €430 mark that is the current asking price on Amazon Germany.

 

Intel pricing for CPUs is determined by the tray price multiplied by the exchange rate + sales tax + any cut the retailer wants to take. In the US the exchange rate is always 1:1 but obviously that varies in other countries, so a change in the exchange rate can directly affect the price of the CPU. I haven't looked that much into the logistics of AMD pricing but it wouldn't surprise me if they operate in the same way as Intel, and historical pricing does seem to confirm that.

You're also talking about one of the best 3 CPUs available for AM4 - the 5800X3D, the 5950X and the 5900X. All 3 are viable choices that are the end of the upgrade path for AM4 - those rarely drop in price, even years after being discontinued. I just don't see the 5900X ever dropping to below the price of the 7600X - it has double the cores! There's no way that it will drop to what you want it to.

Quote

Additionally I would upgrade the GPU at some point, preferably to an RTX xx80 series. Eliminating a CPU beforehand bottleneck would be wise.

That's sensible, but I don't think you need to go above a 5600X or a 12600K to eliminate any concerns if a 3080 is the intended GPU. That said, the 2060 should be fine for another year or two at 1080p. 1440p? Then a 3080 right now is a sensible upgrade.

 

It may be worth going further up if you need the CPU for productivity - just don't expect it to drop in price the way you think it will, even for next year.

[ManemeJeff]

15 hours ago, thewelshbrummie said:

the TLDR - I think you need to rethink your budget as I think you're being unrealistic about potential sale pricing, especially when combined with the current €-$ exchange rate.

 

--

 

That's not MSI's fault. It's a very cheap board, historical pricing shows it never being more than $122 on Amazon US and around $90 was the cheapest price for it.  That's problem is arguably on you for not factoring in the physical size of your GPU or spending a bit more on the board. If you want all SATA ports to be rotated, then expect to pay more for the motherboard as it's a common upsell from cheap boards vs expensive boards - and something that's been common for at least the last 10 years. That & I doubt the majority of builds - especially budget builds - use all available SATA ports, so some are angled at 90 degrees and others not to provide the best option. Therefore I'm not surprised that MSI went this route for your motherboard.

 

I made a similar mistake with my old GTX 970, which fit in my case but was long enough to prevent me from installing HDDs in 2 of the drive bays in my old case. That mistake was on me for not planning ahead.

Which I think is part of the reason you have the issue with SATA ports as I mentioned previously. Spending a little more can get you a far better board. €100 boards do exist for AM4 but look extremely basic with limited I/O and little if any VRM heatsink cooling. So if you're really concerned about RAM voltages and stability I'd strongly suggest spending a bit more. €130 boards are available and far better value for money imo. I don't think you can really go wrong with any OEM but I'd certainly spend that little bit extra to get exactly what you want. Waiting for the price to drop is not a realistic way of looking at it either as when stock starts to run low, prices will go up rather than continue down into fire-sale territory.

 

Wishful thinking imo. It's already been cut to around $400 in the US from $550 MSRP and I'd be surprised if it drops further. Factor in that you're using Euros, and the Euro to US Dollar exchange rate has never been this bad for the Euro, I really can't see the 5900X dropping much below the €430 mark that is the current asking price on Amazon Germany.

 

Intel pricing for CPUs is determined by the tray price multiplied by the exchange rate + sales tax + any cut the retailer wants to take. In the US the exchange rate is always 1:1 but obviously that varies in other countries, so a change in the exchange rate can directly affect the price of the CPU. I haven't looked that much into the logistics of AMD pricing but it wouldn't surprise me if they operate in the same way as Intel, and historical pricing does seem to confirm that.

You're also talking about one of the best 3 CPUs available for AM4 - the 5800X3D, the 5950X and the 5900X. All 3 are viable choices that are the end of the upgrade path for AM4 - those rarely drop in price, even years after being discontinued. I just don't see the 5900X ever dropping to below the price of the 7600X - it has double the cores! There's no way that it will drop to what you want it to.

That's sensible, but I don't think you need to go above a 5600X or a 12600K to eliminate any concerns if a 3080 is the intended GPU. That said, the 2060 should be fine for another year or two at 1080p. 1440p? Then a 3080 right now is a sensible upgrade.

 

It may be worth going further up if you need the CPU for productivity - just don't expect it to drop in price the way you think it will, even for next year.

I agree with all your points, you make a very good case here which makes me think twice and harder now.

 

I added somewhere that 100 was more of a relative budgets +- some 10 euros was fine and since I am not in a hurry I am certain that a solid mainboard will fall into that budget range at some point.

 

Regarding the 5900X, people usually don't use Amazon at all for price baselines at all.

 

For example, there's a very popular pc parts shop (online) that I have bought plenty hardware from before, that sells the 5900X right now (and days before) for 399€. That's a 7.2%/31€ price difference.

 

I personally never liked Amazon's pricing at all, with pc parts, they seem to be always more expensive.

The problem is that I have a certain feeling that if I pay more than x for y, that I simply don't feel right about it. I could throw more money at every part but it doesn't feel like the right decision.

 

 

Dropped all plans for GPU upgrade as my needs at already well met and I personally can't justify spending almost 600-1000€ for a GPU when I have a 2060, a definitely not shabby card.

 

Thank you again for posting.