Deleted member 209350
D
Deleted member 209350
Which B450 mobo would you recommend then that can handle this?
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000) - *** NO COMPETITOR HINTING ***
- Thread starter Jamin280672
- Start date
Which B450 mobo would you recommend then that can handle this?
From Asus only B450 mobo with non-garbage VRM would be mini-ITX B450-I.
Gigabyte uses pretty much identical VRMs to Asus in their B450 boards
Asrock B450 M Pro4's VRM is quite decent. (Fatal1ty Gaming K4 should have same VRM)
MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon has also decent, somewhat better VRM.
It also has good capacitors.
The Stilt (only holder of second highest ever CPU overclock) measured the best efficiency and lowest temps for it in this review when loading stock 2700X with X264 encoding.
https://www.io-tech.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/b450-VRMInfo.png
https://www.io-tech.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/b450-VRM.png
Flimsiness shows really well in those temps.
VRM of Asus board actually overheated in 12 minutes causing throttling and Gigabyte's VRM reached 101C before 20 minutes.
Here's bigger list of VRMs:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html
Deleted member 209350
D
Deleted member 209350
Well nothing of what you just said gives me confidence in the B450
You think im better off just going for the X470 instead then?
Well nothing of what you just said gives me confidence in the B450
You think im better off just going for the X470 instead then?
No.
AMD has no competitive pressure from intel to increase the TDP of their chips to the 170W figures that an i7 9900K reaches.
7nm process will bring TDP reductions, not increases.
Except for those few exceptions overal VRM quality of B450 mobos is definitely shamefull.Well nothing of what you just said gives me confidence in the B450
You think im better off just going for the X470 instead then?
That VRM of Asus and Gigabyte would basically be good only for 65W TDP CPUs for long term.
But that MSI certainly has also some spare room over power consumption of 2700X.
Though at the time of review price of that MSI was questionably high compared to X470 mobos.
Google translate can actually do mostly understandable job, if you want to check review:
https://www.io-tech.fi/artikkelit/testissa-amd-b450-emolevyt-asrock-asus-gigabyte-msi/
And not all X470 have proper VRMs.
X470 TUF has same garbage VRM design.
What happens if you put a 105W 2700X and overclock it? Will work properly but we will continue to spread myths?
DDR4 Boost does involve some PCB engineering. It is to do with optimising and isolating the paths between the CPU and the memory. Keeping them short and free of interference improves speeds. I am sure other manufacturers do similar.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 1,212
as has been said already - nobody really knows 100%
AMD said they will support the AM4 socket until 2020, that doesn't mean all AM4 chips will work in all AM4 motherboards...
It will be a shame if the previous gen motherboards don't work (ie x3## chipset already works with the 2000 chips and thus hopefully x4## chipset will work with 3000 cpus), but the recent chat about power supply suggests the Ryzen 9 chips (3800x and 3850x) will need the new x5## chipset, but the others "could" be ok with the x470 (and thus possibly x370)?
That sucks if true. I had my eye on the 3850X if rumour were to become reality.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 1,212
it's a catch 22... the consumer wants them to push the envelope while maintaining the same socket, to develop chips that are as powerful as possible, with a little power-consumption (and cost). But, the consumer also wants them to be constrained by the decisions made when creating the oldest chipset for that socket type.
so, what do we want? potency or ensured backwards compatibility?
If the new R9 chips are borderline on the limit for x470 boards then what can they do? Presumably they can't have a statement saying that R9 chip 1 is ok with model x from company y, up until point z, but R9 chip 2 is only happy with yadda yadda...
Either they need to define the chipset spec for the new chips and ensure that even the worst of the new motherboards is ok to supply the power for the new chips, or it will be a mess of people complaining that their board isn't working while others say it should (much like the mess with Ryzen and memory...)
so, what do we want? potency or ensured backwards compatibility?
If the new R9 chips are borderline on the limit for x470 boards then what can they do? Presumably they can't have a statement saying that R9 chip 1 is ok with model x from company y, up until point z, but R9 chip 2 is only happy with yadda yadda...
Either they need to define the chipset spec for the new chips and ensure that even the worst of the new motherboards is ok to supply the power for the new chips, or it will be a mess of people complaining that their board isn't working while others say it should (much like the mess with Ryzen and memory...)
Last edited:
Well I want potency. I don't mind buying a new mobo. But then am I an "enthusiast"?
It's nothing at all to do with chipset, merely the power delivery that is available on your motherboard. If the R9 3850 needs 130w at base spec TDP, then if you have a lower end board it may struggle to provide enough power.
If you are running a 2700X now, you could whack the voltage up, so the VRM are working harder and see how hot they get or if your systems becomes unstable, it's not exact but would simulate higher power draw. If you already run your 2700X overclocked, then you could measure the power at the wall now, then set it back to stock and re-measure the power draw and this will illustrate the amount of power the board is supplying now and give you some idea how much above the 105w TDP it can cope with.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2013
- Posts
- 1,212
the majority of people here are "enthusiasts" - we're posting on a forum about cpu's, for "fun".... But, at lot of people buying pc parts aren't and just expect compatibility between components without having to wade through motherboard spec sheets.
Why? Your GTX 1080 is 180W, how much power do you think that CPU will need? Definitely not 350-400W? lol
It would be quite easy for AMD to take the stance that Ryzen 9 is only officially supported on X570 motherboards, however vendors have the option to add BIOS support for X470 boards if their design and build is up to it. Hell, maybe even offer a "Ryzen 9 certified" badge if AMD want to maintain their current "consumer hero" image and maintaining AM4 compatibility as far as feasible.
So if Asrock reckon their X470 Taichi can handle 16c/32t at 5GHz then test it and apply for "Ryzen 9 certified", and they probably would. Asus would likely not bother because it's fewer half-baked X570 boards they can flog (even though the Crosshairs could probably handle the Ryzen 9).
So if Asrock reckon their X470 Taichi can handle 16c/32t at 5GHz then test it and apply for "Ryzen 9 certified", and they probably would. Asus would likely not bother because it's fewer half-baked X570 boards they can flog (even though the Crosshairs could probably handle the Ryzen 9).
Yeah, if you bought a no-name Chinese death trap. GTX 1080 + 16 overclocked 7nm cores would probably be about 450W at a rough guess.
450W consumption from the components won't overload a 600W power supply.