help AMD software is still broken

[AbydosOne]

42 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Basicly zen 1 is not supported at all on that chipset, you need zen+ or higher. 

50 minutes ago, PDifolco said:

But it's kinda weird, OP said he uses a 1600 on a x570 and that 2000 aren't compatible where it's the exact contrary...

1 hour ago, DandaCze said:

the're not https://www.zachstechturf.com/am4compatibility

I think at this point we need to take a long look at AMD's chipsets and realize they're just fancy PCIe switches + IO expanders. All Ryzen chips will literally function without them (Zen is an SoC besides RAM and graphics; the "A300"/"X300"/"PRO 500" "chipsets" were these; pretty much all Ryzen laptops too). AMD literally outsources their chipsets to ASMedia; you know what else ASMedia makes? PCIe switches and USB/SATA controllers. It's all just ASMedia IP in a trenchcoat.

 

The fact that AMD hasn't stopped board manufacturers from sneaking in "unsupported" support into their BIOSes is admittedly a plus (unlike a certain blue giant), but that "unsupported" was still AMD trying to create market segmentation ("plz buy X570 even though we know Zen3 works in X370 from four years ago") and/or fix their own success by making the list of supported CPUs (and microcode errata) small enough to continue fit in the old 64Mbit (IIRC) BIOS EEPROMs. When board manufacturers went to 128/256Mbit EEPROMs for the high-end boards, that issue was resolved and they could have every Zen1/+/2/3 CPU, but since AMD can't guarantee that every board will have the expanded BIOS area for every CPU, they don't want to admit universal support for Zen1/+ on 5x0 chipsets.

 

Heck, even the CPUs themselves are modular. Wendell at one point explained that you could use the Ryzen IO die with any CPU core architecture and it would work just fine as the motherboard platforms are all validated to communicate with the IO die, not the cores themselves. There's fairly little stopping AMD from strapping Zen4/5/ARM/RISC-V dies to an AM4 carrier (or any other of their Zen sockets) and never letting the platform die (except for, y'know, "market segmentation").

 

/rant (take all that with a grain of salt, it's just my synthesis from my observations of eight years of Ryzen)

[DandaCze]

1 hour ago, starsmine said:

OP is both confused and confusing

very very specific 1600s are supported as someone pointed out above, but you have to see an af in the model number under that. there are TWO different 1600s from AMD, The original zen 1 based one, and a ninja released zen+ one to get rid of zen+ stock. aka a lower binned ryzen 2600. 

I dont know who told him that he cant upgrade CPUs, that person mislead OP. It is compatible with the 2600... he is literally using one. 

Basicly zen 1 is not supported at all on that chipset, you need zen+ or higher. 

 

@DandaCze dont undervolt unless you are overclocking
But do overclock just for the fun of it. you are not going to break it with ryzen master, and it will last a decade just fine. I do recommended finding some cheap zen 3 chip to put in. 

ok but for the clarification i have R5 1600 AF

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, AbydosOne said:

I think at this point we need to take a long look at AMD's chipsets and realize they're just fancy PCIe switches + IO expanders. All Ryzen chips will literally function without them (Zen is an SoC besides RAM and graphics; the "A300"/"X300"/"PRO 500" "chipsets" were these; pretty much all Ryzen laptops too). AMD literally outsources their chipsets to ASMedia; you know what else ASMedia makes? PCIe switches and USB/SATA controllers. It's all just ASMedia IP in a trenchcoat.

 

The fact that AMD hasn't stopped board manufacturers from sneaking in "unsupported" support into their BIOSes is admittedly a plus (unlike a certain blue giant), but that "unsupported" was still AMD trying to create market segmentation ("plz buy X570 even though we know Zen3 works in X370 from four years ago") and/or fix their own success by making the list of supported CPUs (and microcode errata) small enough to continue fit in the old 64Mbit (IIRC) BIOS EEPROMs. When board manufacturers went to 128/256Mbit EEPROMs for the high-end boards, that issue was resolved and they could have every Zen1/+/2/3 CPU, but since AMD can't guarantee that every board will have the expanded BIOS area for every CPU, they don't want to admit universal support for Zen1/+ on 5x0 chipsets.

Manufactures have not sneaked in any unsupported chips. 
Zen+ was supported on the chipset, Zen 1 wasnt, "sneaking in" 1600AF and 1200AF was not sneaking in anything.

1 hour ago, AbydosOne said:

Heck, even the CPUs themselves are modular. Wendell at one point explained that you could use the Ryzen IO die with any CPU core architecture and it would work just fine as the motherboard platforms are all validated to communicate with the IO die, not the cores themselves. There's fairly little stopping AMD from strapping Zen4/5/ARM/RISC-V dies to an AM4 carrier (or any other of their Zen sockets) and never letting the platform die (except for, y'know, "market segmentation").

 

/rant (take all that with a grain of salt, it's just my synthesis from my observations of eight years of Ryzen)

To an extent. There is nothing stopping a lot of things other then spending over a dozen man months designing and testing a thing. They may have some modular aspects, but they are not plug and play.  There is a lot stopping AMD from strapping in ZEN4/5/arm/risc-v into an AM4 socket.

1 hour ago, DandaCze said:

ok but for the clarification i have R5 1600 (non AF)

That IS af
There is no chip labeled 1600AF

1600 is the product name,
Pinnacle ridge is zen +

you will only find the letters AF on the IHS, no where else. calling it an AF is something the community made up because no zen 1 chip has those letters in that combination on the IHS
 

[DandaCze]

Just now, starsmine said:

Manufactures have not sneaked in any unsupported chips. 

To an extent

That IS af
There is no chip labeled 1600AF

1600 is the product name,
Pinnacle ridge is zen +

you will only find the letters AF on the IHS, no where else. calling it an AF is something the community made up because no zen 1 chip has those letters in that combination on the IHS
 

sorry my bad

[AbydosOne]

23 minutes ago, starsmine said:

Manufactures have not sneaked in any unsupported chips. 
Zen+ was supported on the chipset, Zen 1 wasnt, "sneaking in" 1600AF and 1200AF was not sneaking in anything.

I forgot X570 predated B550/A520 by like over a year, so I guess Zen+ support makes more sense on the timeline.
 

27 minutes ago, starsmine said:

To an extent. There is nothing stopping a lot of things other then spending over a dozen man months designing and testing a thing. They may have some modular aspects, but they are not plug and play. 

I'm not saying it would be trivial, I'm just saying that AMD is a step ahead if they ever want to incorporate a different architecture onto their existing platforms because their designs are so relatively modular.