What about A320 Mainboards ?

[KenjiUmino]

I'm wondering why i have never seen someone recommend a board with A320 chipset for a ryzen build.

 

the usual recommendation is B350 and maybe on very rare occasions X370 if someone wants to get really hardcore.

 

but what about A320 Mainboards?

 

they are the cheapest of the bunch and if someone wants to build a good multitasker on a tight budget this could help save a penny or two - or am i missing something?

 

what are the important differences between A320, B350 and X370?

 

wich would i need for overclocking? wich for ECC RAM? and what if i don't care about both and just want to save money wherever possible without cutting the wrong corners?

[RGProductions]

b350 boards are only about $20 more and infinity better.

[Princess Luna]

A320 you ignore, unlike Intel where motherboard matters nothing and you can get a h110m with an i7 7700 and profit that happens because Intel performance is very good even with low frequency 2133~2400mhz ram and not overclocked.

 

Ryzen though to reach its prime and be very competitive you need good 3000+mhz ram and overclock it to the limit, thus why the little extra you pay for the b350 is justified.

[KenjiUmino]

Just now, RGProductions said:

b350 boards are only about $20 more and infinity better.

"better" in wich way ? sometimes those $20 matter a lot

[rn8686]

Only B350 and X370 can OC, X370 also can CF/SLI. ECC compatibility is dependant on the motherboard manufacturer, Ryzen can support but that depends on the board. 

[Phate.exe]

Because Ryzen-based APU's aren't available yet, anybody building an AM4 machine needs to put a GPU in it and will probably be using it for gaming.  If it was a matter of "cheap mobo + APU + ram + psu + drives + box" basic computer, I think we'd see a lot more people recommending the cheapo boards, but since you've gotta throw another ~$100 at the thing for a GPU, the $20-25 price difference to get a B350 board is a drop in the bucket.

[Droidbot]

a320 - no oc, no ecc, no SLI

b350 - OC, no ecc, crossfire

x370 - OC, no ECC, xfire+SLI

[KenjiUmino]

1 hour ago, Phate.exe said:

If it was a matter of "cheap mobo + APU + ram + psu + drives + box" basic computer, I think we'd see a lot more people recommending the cheapo boards, 

one of the reasons why i am starting do look for ryzen stuff is a matter of "cheapest possible way to replace a laptop with i7 (MQ or HQ) and GTX 760m (so we need 4c/8t CPU and a dGPU)" - this would be for a friend that lives quite a distance away so i just want something that i can build and not need to care about any further.

no OC, no tinkering around. 

 

number of PCI-E / usb / sata also does not matter since there won't be any fancy upgrades - a graphics card, one SSD and a HDD or two - done

 

in this case i would rather save 20 bucks on the board and use that money to get a CPU with a higher clock out of the box

 

the question is: does the low end chipset offer the same raw performance as the other chipsets given everything else stays identical (same RAM, same CPU, same GPU and all that) 

[KuJoe]

I have both a B350 and A320 board, it all depends on the build. If you don't need the features of the B350 board then grab a A320 board and with the money you saved get some faster RAM or upgrade from a 1500X to a 1600.

 

I use my ASUS Prime A320M-K for my streaming PC, it's a very basic PC so it doesn't need a lot of PCI slots, SATA ports, or USB ports and I definitely don't plan to overclock it. I don't plan on ever putting more than 2 sticks of RAM in it and the 1700 runs nicely in it so I'm content with my choice. 

[KenjiUmino]

16 minutes ago, KuJoe said:

I have both a B350 and A320 board, it all depends on the build. If you don't need the features of the B350 board then grab a A320 board and with the money you saved get some faster RAM or upgrade from a 1500X to a 1600.

that was what i was thinking about - i just want to be sure that if i put a 1600 on a A320 board it does perform like a 1600 and not get held back.

 

like back when it mattered if you had intel chips on your board or some cheap VIA or SIS alternatives that held back the CPU noticeably.

[MyName13]

5 hours ago, Princess Cadence said:

A320 you ignore, unlike Intel where motherboard matters nothing and you can get a h110m with an i7 7700 and profit that happens because Intel performance is very good even with low frequency 2133~2400mhz ram and not overclocked.

 

Ryzen though to reach its prime and be very competitive you need good 3000+mhz ram and overclock it to the limit, thus why the little extra you pay for the b350 is justified.

You "just" need fastest ram and maximum clock rate, does it need to be turned to the east too?

 

For most people b350 are a bad choice, if you buy r3 1200 you could simply buy A320 and r5 1400 (instead of wasting money on b350 and a cooler), if you intend to overclock r5 1400 you also need a better cooler (so you might simply buy a320 and r5 1600).Everyone talks about cheap b350 motherboards and yet there are no reviews for them (take asrock's ab350m for example, in my country it's just 17€ more than asrock a320m).

[Droidbot]

2 minutes ago, MyName13 said:

You "just" need fastest ram and maximum clock rate, does it need to be turned to the east too?

 

For most people b350 are a bad choice, if you buy r3 1200 you could simply buy A320 and r5 1400 (instead of wasting money on b350 and a cooler), if you intend to overclock r5 1400 you also need a better cooler (so you might simply buy a320 and r5 1600).Everyone talks about cheap b350 motherboards and yet there are no reviews for them (take asrock's ab350m for example, in my country it's just 17€ more than asrock a320m).

Not really. 

 

This guy hit 85c max with the stock Wraith Stealth cooler on the 1400. No need for an aftermarket cooler. 

 

you don't have to see mobo reviews to see how good it is for OC. just check power phases and OEM specsheets and you'll be fine, it's really what reviewers do anyway. 

 

1600 + A320 is $250, 1400 + B350 is $220. or I can buy the 1600 and a B350 and OC down the track for $263. It's stupid not to buy a B350 board. 

[MyName13]

47 minutes ago, Droidbot said:

Not really. 

 

This guy hit 85c max with the stock Wraith Stealth cooler on the 1400. No need for an aftermarket cooler. 

 

you don't have to see mobo reviews to see how good it is for OC. just check power phases and OEM specsheets and you'll be fine, it's really what reviewers do anyway. 

 

1600 + A320 is $250, 1400 + B350 is $220. or I can buy the 1600 and a B350 and OC down the track for $263. It's stupid not to buy a B350 board. 

What are OEM spreadsheets?I can only find manuals on manufacturers' websites.How do you determine the number of phases and how many should there be (I heard that someone puts "fake" phases on motherboards)?There are few issues with your statements:

1)Not everyone wants to run a CPU at 85c

2)What will happen when new Zen CPUs come out (OC potential might be higher than now and future coolers certainly won't be enough on these low tier CPUs)

3)Why buy 1400 and b350 when you can buy a CPU with 50% more cores for just 25-35$ more (25€ on my market)?My point is that if you spend money on b350 board then you definitely want to push current and next Zen CPUs as far as you can (you need an aftermarket cooler for CPUs that come with wraith stealth), that might not be possible (either because of MB vrms, higher overclocking potential of future CPUs, or because of bad stock coolers).Adding another ~25€ for b350 after adding 25€ for 1600 might be too much (you can keep adding money like this for all components).

[Droidbot]

17 hours ago, MyName13 said:

What are OEM spreadsheets?I can only find manuals on manufacturers' websites.How do you determine the number of phases and how many should there be (I heard that someone puts "fake" phases on motherboards)?There are few issues with your statements:

1)Not everyone wants to run a CPU at 85c

2)What will happen when new Zen CPUs come out (OC potential might be higher than now and future coolers certainly won't be enough on these low tier CPUs)

3)Why buy 1400 and b350 when you can buy a CPU with 50% more cores for just 25-35$ more (25€ on my market)?My point is that if you spend money on b350 board then you definitely want to push current and next Zen CPUs as far as you can (you need an aftermarket cooler for CPUs that come with wraith stealth), that might not be possible (either because of MB vrms, higher overclocking potential of future CPUs, or because of bad stock coolers).Adding another ~25€ for b350 after adding 25€ for 1600 might be too much (you can keep adding money like this for all components).

Specsheets. The specifications? Come on, man. 

 

85c is within normal operating temperature. Chips with the Intel stock cooler and no OC hit temperatures like this. 

 

Smaller node, less temperature. AMD isn't Intel, they don't put toothpaste between the IHS and the chip. 

 

25EUR is nothing, many people would pay 25EUR/USD more for OC support so their chip can still kick ass down the track and they can use the board longer. 

Why does one have to push the chip to the limit? B350 is the midrange chipset, if one bought X370 one would push it to the limit obviously but with Ryzen's small OC compatibility people hit the same clocks on cheap boards than high end ones. 

I just showed you a video on a guy hitting 4.05Ghz with the Stealth, it's a good cooler. You seem to be stuck thinking that the AMD stock coolers are like the shitty Intel ones. Hint: They're not.