New AMD A620 Motherboards, DO NOT Support CPU's Over 65 Watt TDP or 88W PPT. Non X Only

[da na]

7 hours ago, leadeater said:

I don't see A series being popular like it wasn't every other generation. OEM/ODM tend to pick them for the bottom stuff but you also can't pick non-supported CPUs when buying either. Just need to be aware it's an A series and what you can't do with it if you get one later, like say used or pass on after a business doesn't need it.

i have an AMD A series laptop that, when you move the mouse, the CPU usage increases by 20%

[Uttamattamakin]

1 hour ago, da na said:

i have an AMD A series laptop that, when you move the mouse, the CPU usage increases by 20%

Not sure if serious or trolling. 

[da na]

1 minute ago, Uttamattamakin said:

Not sure if serious or trolling. 

Very serious, unfortunately

[Lurking]

Makes sense. Not everyone needs (or needs to pay for) a $500 MB that can OC the s$$t out of an 16-core CPU. The A-boards still can support the 12-core 7900. I think that should be enough power for an admin person opening a spreadsheet or write an email.

 

We also can buy small cars, and Semi-trucks. No need to take the small car choice away and force everyone to buy a Semi Truck. The person buying the small car probably knows they can't tow a 40 ton trailers with it (and are fine with that). 

 

If you are DIY person, you should know to buy a B650 or similar MB to OC, upgrade later or get more hungry CPUs. The A-boards won't displace the B and X boards. More choice = better.

[Arika]

I wonder if Intel did the same thing if this forum's response would be the same....i'm going to say no.

[Uttamattamakin]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

I wonder if Intel did the same thing if this forum's response would be the same....i'm going to say no.

I haven't built with Intel in over a decade.  Nothing against them, I've used Intel on Mobile for the same length of time. 

From what I can tell Intel seems to keep it simple.  If a chip can physically go into a given socket it will at least give all it's base level performance.  

That's what I think is being missed here.  It's not that you can put in a 7000X CPU and not overclock it.  This seems to indicate such a CPU on one of these boards will not even get it's full base performance. 

I could be wrong.  I'd be happy to be wrong.  Either way just thought it was some interesting gadget news. 

[Lurking]

18 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

I haven't built with Intel in over a decade.  Nothing against them, I've used Intel on Mobile for the same length of time. 

From what I can tell Intel seems to keep it simple.  If a chip can physically go into a given socket it will at least give all it's base level performance.  

That's what I think is being missed here.  It's not that you can put in a 7000X CPU and not overclock it.  This seems to indicate such a CPU on one of these boards will not even get it's full base performance. 

I could be wrong.  I'd be happy to be wrong.  Either way just thought it was some interesting gadget news. 

No one here is missing what it means and does. You basically only can run the CPU at 65W (or 88W), even if it is a 170W CPU. This will run the 170W CPU at lower clockspeed (or disable gores???).

 

You seem to ignore what a capable CPU the 12 core 7900 is that still is 65W. If someone needs more performance, they also want a better board.

 

It is basically a market segmentation to allow cheaper boards with cheaper VRM and no PCIe 5 etc. This addresses the complaint about AM5 that MB are expensive. If they give the A620 the same features and requirements as B650, then it would cost the same. Then it would be truly useless. 

 

Not sure if there will be a quadcore AM5. But a $90 MB, 16GB 5200 RAM for $60 and a $140 quadcore make a quite good PC for non gamers. This likely isn't for you, or me. But for tons of people.

[Doobeedoo]

That's fine and expected as it does make sense.

[mr moose]

People have really short memories, every generation of every CPU has ended up with some sort of support issue, it's been happening since forever (late 80's at least).

 

And it's not like this forum hasn't seen hundreds of threads arguing over how every generation series ends up in some split of features that makes product line up a bit sketchy one way or another.

 

 

[Lurking]

20 minutes ago, mr moose said:

People have really short memories, every generation of every CPU has ended up with some sort of support issue, it's been happening since forever (late 80's at least).

 

And it's not like this forum hasn't seen hundreds of threads arguing over how every generation series ends up in some split of features that makes product line up a bit sketchy one way or another.

 

 

It's not really a support issue. The A chipsets support what they are designed for. The market demands $1000 and $70 boards. Obviously (and hopefully!) this means different features and performance. 

 

With the 7900 you can run a $429 CPU on the $70 MB. Not that you should... But if you buy a more powerful CPU, you also can buy a more expensive MB 

 

It is almost like people demand a $300 MB, but want it to cost $70. Then they get mad that the $70 board has fewer features. 

 

No, a $10K car doesn't have the same features and performance like a $100K car. Even if both kind of do the same thing 

[GoodBytes]

I don't know... considering that budget board tend to suck with high power demanding CPUs, I don't think it matters. 

[Uttamattamakin]

6 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

I don't know... considering that budget board tend to suck with high power demanding CPUs, I don't think it matters. 

True.  This is exactly why a budget MB will be put into prebuilt-OEM PC's that a lot of people buy.  Then they'll be stuck unable to upgrade their CPU latter.   Lots of people who would never build their own PC from scratch will do that and be in a bad place latter. 

 

Then that may mean a whole computer becomes Ewaste sooner than it had to.   Things like this I just see the problems as more systemwide.  IMHO while affordable computers need to exist disposable ones don't need to. 

[GuiltySpark_]

This thing handles 7950x just fine and I'm sure Steve will test the A620 version(s) when he can get his hands on them. 

 

Incredibly solid board, shame the $125 price isn't accurate so far. Selling for $140 in the US ATM. 

 

 

[dizmo]

7 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

True.  This is exactly why a budget MB will be put into prebuilt-OEM PC's that a lot of people buy.  Then they'll be stuck unable to upgrade their CPU latter.   Lots of people who would never build their own PC from scratch will do that and be in a bad place latter. 

 

Then that may mean a whole computer becomes Ewaste sooner than it had to.   Things like this I just see the problems as more systemwide.  IMHO while affordable computers need to exist disposable ones don't need to. 

People that don't build their own computers aren't going to be upgrading their CPU later, either. 

 

Some of the arguments here are bordering on Twitch style arguing for the sake of arguing. They're ridiculous. 

 

This is by no means an issue we should be crying over. If you're spending $500+ on a CPU, you can spend the extra $40 on an appropriate motherboard. You want high end parts, you pay the price. On top of that, there are 12 core 65w parts. I run one. They're perfectly fine and do everything someone running a basement grade motherboard would want. 

[Uttamattamakin]

42 minutes ago, dizmo said:

People that don't build their own computers aren't going to be upgrading their CPU later, either. 

 

That is false.  

In fact upgrading the CPU ram or storage on a PC has a much longer history than building one from off the shelf parts (At least if we ignore pre IBM PC's that were built from like IC's soldered together by the end user).   Lots of people LOTS of people will upgrade the components of a pre-built if they can. 

Intel's whole value proposition in the 90's was that.  AMD's whole business model in the 90's was that you could upgrade an old 486 to a "586" or the k5 or K6 since they were pin and socket compatabile with intel. 

The main reason some won't is due to worries about the warranty.  By the time a 1 year standard or 2 year extended warranty is up spending $200 on the "old" highest end CPU that can fit into your computer makes a lot more sens that scrapping it and starting over. If anything this is more true now. All PC's are so OP for what we do with them that almost no one really needs the latest thing.   It is, however, nice to be able to upgrade to that latest thing in place.  Sure you can't put an intel chip in an AMD socket like in the good old days but upgrading is a real option. 

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, Uttamattamakin said:

That is false.  

It is a very uncommon thing in normal consumer behavior
even in enthusiast spaces, people just go and build whole new PCs cause "bottleneck". 

It should be encouraged more* but in the real world single gen upgrades are generally not full of value.

[GuiltySpark_]

2 hours ago, GuiltySpark_ said:

This thing handles 7950x just fine and I'm sure Steve will test the A620 version(s) when he can get his hands on them. 

 

Incredibly solid board, shame the $125 price isn't accurate so far. Selling for $140 in the US ATM. 

 

 

$119 on Newegg as of today. 

[dizmo]

2 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

That is false.  

In fact upgrading the CPU ram or storage on a PC has a much longer history than building one from off the shelf parts (At least if we ignore pre IBM PC's that were built from like IC's soldered together by the end user).   Lots of people LOTS of people will upgrade the components of a pre-built if they can. 

Intel's whole value proposition in the 90's was that.  AMD's whole business model in the 90's was that you could upgrade an old 486 to a "586" or the k5 or K6 since they were pin and socket compatabile with intel. 

The main reason some won't is due to worries about the warranty.  By the time a 1 year standard or 2 year extended warranty is up spending $200 on the "old" highest end CPU that can fit into your computer makes a lot more sens that scrapping it and starting over. If anything this is more true now. All PC's are so OP for what we do with them that almost no one really needs the latest thing.   It is, however, nice to be able to upgrade to that latest thing in place.  Sure you can't put an intel chip in an AMD socket like in the good old days but upgrading is a real option. 

If you think that's false, then you're completely out of touch with how an average consumer is in the current age.

 

Even my friends that are gaming enthusiasts and know a decent amount about PCs don't bother upgrading their CPU, they simply buy a new machine when theirs doesn't perform the way they'd like. This is going to be even more the case with people that don't build their own computer; they're not going to open up their machine and install a CPU if they're unwilling to do that with the initial purchase. Sure, there are outliers. There always will be. But this is not the norm. If you think it is, you likely only spend time around tech forums, and that's what you've used to build that belief.

 

Quote

All PC's are so OP for what we do with them that almost no one really needs the latest thing.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Exactly. There's no reason for people to be swapping in parts later down the line.

Scenario A: You have the PC, it works, you don't upgrade because you don't need to.

Scenario B: You buy the PC much later in the future, and look to upgrade for more speed. Then realize that it makes more sense to simply buy something new, as the cost for the same performance is about the same or lower.

 

[leadeater]

On 4/4/2023 at 3:01 PM, Arika S said:

I wonder if Intel did the same thing if this forum's response would be the same....i'm going to say no.

Nah they just take away dual channel support, any overclocking, PCIe 4 lanes from the chipset and the fastest USB support. That's just this generation too, Intel has done worse in the past heh.

 

 

People complain about it, but also know it's worthless to so don't do it a lot. B series and the highest H only got it after AMD stopped sucking so hard everyone forgot they existed lol

 

I would rather be restricted to 120W than not have dual channel, but maybe that's just me.

[leadeater]

16 hours ago, Uttamattamakin said:

That is false.  

In fact upgrading the CPU ram or storage on a PC has a much longer history than building one from off the shelf parts (At least if we ignore pre IBM PC's that were built from like IC's soldered together by the end user).   Lots of people LOTS of people will upgrade the components of a pre-built if they can. 

People hardly upgrade CPU that build entirely DIY. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen but the proportion is very, very small of those who do actually do it. Things other than the CPU sure that is vastly more common, but the CPU is not commonly upgraded.

[mr moose]

22 hours ago, Lurking said:

It's not really a support issue. The A chipsets support what they are designed for. The market demands $1000 and $70 boards. Obviously (and hopefully!) this means different features and performance. 

I never said there was no market or that it's all arbitrary, just pointing out that this type fracture in support (a $70 mobo not supporting a high power CPU) is something we see all the time across the board.

 

22 hours ago, Lurking said:

With the 7900 you can run a $429 CPU on the $70 MB. Not that you should... But if you buy a more powerful CPU, you also can buy a more expensive MB 

 

It is almost like people demand a $300 MB, but want it to cost $70. Then they get mad that the $70 board has fewer features. 

 

No, a $10K car doesn't have the same features and performance like a $100K car. Even if both kind of do the same thing 

Is that addressed to me or to the thread in general?  Because I wasn't arguing anything in particular, just pointing out (again) that this type of thing happens all the time. The only reason I did that was because every time it happens we get a several page thread of people bitching and carrying on like some big nasty company is making them touch their tongue on dog poo.

 

 

[mr moose]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

People hardly upgrade CPU that build entirely DIY. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen but the proportion is very, very small of those who do actually do it. Things other than the CPU sure that is vastly more common, but the CPU is not commonly upgraded.

The vast majority of people upgrade their systems after 5 years, by which point you can rarely get a CPU that would fit your current mobo let alone one that is worth upgrading to.  Plus the fact that after 5 years we generally have a new generation of RAM and generally need more of it so it doesn't make sense to do just the CPU.

[Lurking]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

I never said there was no market or that it's all arbitrary, just pointing out that this type fracture in support (a $70 mobo not supporting a high power CPU) is something we see all the time across the board.

 

Is that addressed to me or to the thread in general?  Because I wasn't arguing anything in particular, just pointing out (again) that this type of thing happens all the time. The only reason I did that was because every time it happens we get a several page thread of people bitching and carrying on like some big nasty company is making them touch their tongue on dog poo.

 

 

Most is for the general thread. For you specifically I just addressed you calling it a support issue. Maybe it is semantics. But if the A620 supports what the specs say (only 65W), then it is not a support issue. Support is what it is supposed to be.

 

It would be a support issue if the MB does not support a listed CPU. 

 

I don't know anyone who would ever upgrade a CPU. This is just a rare thing. 99% of people buy a prebuilt PC. And when some software doesn't work after 5 year, they buy a new PC. This isn't good, but is what it is.

 

Unless you are a total gamer or pro always needing the newest, it also isn't worth it to upgrade the CPU alone. I buy a CPU good for some years and typically 2-3 times the cost of the MB. And after say 5 years I just buy a new MB (often new CPU are not supported anyway and there are new other features or standards). Even if I upgraded the old CPU, what would I do with the old CPU? It needs an MB anyway. There is a surplus of old CPUs, and a shortage of old MB. MB just fail more often than CPUs. So I either sell or use the old MB/CPU combo in a secondary system. It is less e-waste to use the old CPU and MB for lower uses than having the old CPU in a drawer. My last system was an i7-7700k on a $100 MB. My current one is a 7900 on a $150 MB. By the time I need a a new CPU, we are on AM6 or AM7 anyway (or Intel gets better). 

 

Maybe if you buy MB that cost as much or more as the CPU, upgrading CPU makes sense. But this isn't what we would expect for A620 buyers.

 

 

[Uttamattamakin]

7 hours ago, leadeater said:

People hardly upgrade CPU that build entirely DIY. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen but the proportion is very, very small of those who do actually do it. Things other than the CPU sure that is vastly more common, but the CPU is not commonly upgraded.

True, but I am not talking about the small minority of people who build DIY.  I am thinking about the much larger more systemically important group who just buy a PC at Best Buy or off Amazon for the lowest price that they can... thinking they can upgrade it to being a beast latter by adding or swapping components.   I think I said that a few times in this thread. 

 

1 hour ago, Lurking said:

I don't know anyone who would ever upgrade a CPU. This is just a rare thing. 99% of people buy a prebuilt PC. And when some software doesn't work after 5 year, they buy a new PC. This isn't good, but is what it is.

 

This is not surprising since quite a lot of ordinary users only have a laptop  these days.  Go to a best buy or even Microcenter.  You'll see rows and rows of laptops on display but relatively few desktops.  Here's the thing I like to remember.  The LTT audience is a 0.01% of all people who buy and use computers and we on the forum are at most 10% of that audience (Maybe more post hackening).  

IF boxed processors for building a PC were only something 1% of PC users were interested in then AMD and Intel would not sell them.  There would be no profit in it.  (Remember how AMD initially did not release the Ryzen 7 5700G for DIY?).  This tells me the biggest group of people who go to best buy and grab a newer CPU or some ram are not building whole new desktops they are just upgrading old ones. 

Maybe I'm just old school but the way I first got into building computers in the 90's was by upgrading various parts of my PC.  Upgrading the CPU since that was a BIG part of Intels marketing ... so of course I switched to AMD.  Which at the time just meant swapping the CPU because they used the same exact socket.  Upgrading the ram from 4MB to 8MB, adding a larger IDE HDD.  Things like that.  I saw and heard of quite a few people even high school kids that did that sort of thing. 

[leadeater]

24 minutes ago, Uttamattamakin said:

I am thinking about the much larger more systemically important group who just buy a PC at Best Buy or off Amazon for the lowest price that they can...

Yea they don't upgrade CPUs, like that's even more rare. People buy systems like that for a reason, because they can't do it themselves. That's not a bad thing but this just isn't a problem for them.

 

You're talking about the hyper ultra rare minority so small it's hard to see them at all. And this doesn't make that any worse, a lot of those systems come with custom boards with massively cutdown features and pure garbage VRMs so you're worrying about whether or not you can hitch up a 4T tailor to the vehicle forgetting that it's 1.3L I4.