B550 Board for an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

DEL 707

DEL 707

DEL 707

Soldato
Joined
20 Mar 2004
Posts
4,625
As per the title, I'm looking to upgrade, going from my Ryzen 7 2800X to a Ryzen 7 5800X and I'm looking for suggestions on motherboard.

I was looking at the MSI B550 MAX Tomahawk.

I'm moving over the 3200Mhz RAM from my old build and my SATA SSD.
I would like to upgrade to a M.2, but I'm going to leave that till next year when I'm hopefully able to get my hands on a graphics card.
 
DEL 707 said:
my Ryzen 7 2800X
Click to expand...

I think you mean 2700x or 1800x ;)

DEL 707 said:
I was looking at the MSI B550 MAX Tomahawk.
Click to expand...

It's a great board.

DEL 707 said:
I would like to upgrade to a M.2, but I'm going to leave that till next year when I'm hopefully able to get my hands on a graphics card.
Click to expand...

You're unlikely to see more than a 5-10% difference even in the most extreme cases, and no difference in your day to day.
It's not a terrible idea, but I wouldn't personally recommend it being a high priority if you have ample space.
 
Would get the msi b550 gaming edge over a tomahawk, tomahawk has two ethernet ports 1gb and a 2.5gb, the gaming edge has wifi plus 2.5gb ethernet otherwise they are the same.
 
Dg834man said:
Would get the msi b550 gaming edge over a tomahawk, tomahawk has two ethernet ports 1gb and a 2.5gb, the gaming edge has wifi plus 2.5gb ethernet otherwise they are the same.
Click to expand...
Have been testing the Gaming Edge Wifi lately and it's a cracking board all round ... potentially better than some of the X570 boards i've played with too..

B550 is a great platform
 
Cooler running said:
You're unlikely to see more than a 5-10% difference even in the most extreme cases, and no difference in your day to day.
It's not a terrible idea, but I wouldn't personally recommend it being a high priority if you have ample space.
Click to expand...
In non processing limited situations loading time difference can be relatively lot higher between NVMe and SATA:
https://www.realhardwarereviews.com/silicon-power-us70-1tb-review/11/
Though they used 24 core Threadripper to run the tests, so any processing which multithreads is performed fast...
Not sure if it was that or COD Ghosts and Saints Row 3 having less compressed and differently stored assets.
 
EsaT said:
In non processing limited situations loading time difference can be relatively lot higher between NVMe and SATA:
https://www.realhardwarereviews.com/silicon-power-us70-1tb-review/11/
Though they used 24 core Threadripper to run the tests, so any processing which multithreads is performed fast...
Not sure if it was that or COD Ghosts and Saints Row 3 having less compressed and differently stored assets.
Click to expand...

I agree that there are some workloads which show the NVME speeds as being significantly faster, only that the 5-10% is the norm.

There is also dependence on specific models and associated technologies such as Gen4 PCIE. My main point is just that if you take the difference between a SATA SSD and a HDD, it's huge, but you get severe diminishing returns trying to extract the full speed of NVME drives. They often claim to be 5x, 10x, 100x, faster than SATA SSD's, but this is almost never see this outside synthetic benchmarks designed to test that aspect of the drive.
 
Cooler running said:
often claim to be 5x, 10x, 100x, faster than SATA SSD's, but this is almost never see this outside synthetic benchmarks designed to test that aspect of the drive.
Click to expand...
Especially IOPS numbers are basically useless for home use.
Normal home/gaming PC is unlikely to have very many threads accessing drive simultaneously.
Or especially with many read/write commands in queue per thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom