• 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 5 rumours

I would expect AM5 to be Zen 5 and at least a refresh if they maintain 2025+ as their target for it.

I don't think there's much actual information on Zen6 yet so we can't really know which platform it'll appear on.
 
Eddie99 said:
They haven't committed to it in order to leave their options open, but it seems likely Zen6 will be on AM5.
Click to expand...
Given that AMD tried to row back on support for 300/400 chipsets for AM4 despite committing to it then I wouldn't be at all surprised if Zen 5 ends up being the last line of cpus supported especially with the longer release cycles for Zen these days.
 
Joxeon said:
Given that AMD tried to row back on support for 300/400 chipsets for AM4 despite committing to it then I wouldn't be at all surprised if Zen 5 ends up being the last line of cpus supported especially with the longer release cycles for Zen these days.
Click to expand...

Not exactly true, not all motherboard's had the BIOS chip support for Zen 3 on 300 and 400 series motherboards, the BIOS chips on some of those motherboards only had a 16MB BIOS chip, those with 32MB chips were supported, AMD had the AGESA code for 300 and 400 series motherboard's, it was board vendors who couldn't support it, other than those with a big enough BIOS chip, at the time like the MSI B450 Tomahawk which got a BIOS update for Zen 3 straight away.

More motherboards were later supported but only with the loss of support for Zen 1 and 2 as board vendors removed the code for those CPU's to fit it in the smaller BIOS chips.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Not exactly true, not all motherboard's had the BIOS chip support for Zen 3 on 300 and 400 series motherboards, the BIOS chips on some of those motherboards only had a 16MB BIOS chip, those with 32MB chips were supported, AMD had the AGESA code for 300 and 400 series motherboard's, it was board vendors who couldn't support it, other than those with a big enough BIOS chip, at the time like the MSI B450 Tomahawk which got a BIOS update for Zen 3 straight away.

More motherboards were later supported but only with the loss of support for Zen 1 and 2 as board vendors removed the code for those CPU's to fit it in the smaller BIOS chips.
Click to expand...
Factual debunk bug. :)
 
humbug said:
other than those with a big enough BIOS chip, at the time like the MSI B450 Tomahawk which got a BIOS update for Zen 3 straight away.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, the MSI B450 Tomahawk only had a 16MB ROM, and the MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX was released specifically to deal with this limitation, there is a significantly pared back BIOS for the original board which removes all the prettyness and easy of use for a more traditional BIOS, and you also loose some CPU support as well. Other than that, yes it was a question of ability to deliver compatibility in its maximum state.
 
humbug said:
Not exactly true, not all motherboard's had the BIOS chip support for Zen 3 on 300 and 400 series motherboards, the BIOS chips on some of those motherboards only had a 16MB BIOS chip, those with 32MB chips were supported, AMD had the AGESA code for 300 and 400 series motherboard's, it was board vendors who couldn't support it, other than those with a big enough BIOS chip, at the time like the MSI B450 Tomahawk which got a BIOS update for Zen 3 straight away.

More motherboards were later supported but only with the loss of support for Zen 1 and 2 as board vendors removed the code for those CPU's to fit it in the smaller BIOS chips.
Click to expand...
That’s not true at all, it was AMD who initially blocked support despite some board manufacturers saying they were happy to support the new chips.

Straight from the horses mouth.

Q: What about (X pre-500 Series chipset)?
A: AMD has no plans to introduce “Zen 3” architecture support for older chipsets.

The Exciting Future of AMD Socket AM4

In 2016, we made a pretty bold commitment to you: we would continue to support AMD Socket AM4 until 2020. It was a big promise, especially given what people were accustomed to with other platforms. In the four ensuing years, the humble Socket AM4 has been on an incredible trajectory: 4X more...
community.amd.com community.amd.com
 
Joxeon said:
That’s not true at all, it was AMD who initially blocked support despite some board manufacturers saying they were happy to support the new chips.

Straight from the horses mouth.

Q: What about (X pre-500 Series chipset)?
A: AMD has no plans to introduce “Zen 3” architecture support for older chipsets.

The Exciting Future of AMD Socket AM4

In 2016, we made a pretty bold commitment to you: we would continue to support AMD Socket AM4 until 2020. It was a big promise, especially given what people were accustomed to with other platforms. In the four ensuing years, the humble Socket AM4 has been on an incredible trajectory: 4X more...
community.amd.com community.amd.com
Click to expand...
Not doubting that AMD both wouldn't have minded more current chipset sales plus an easier time doing the BIOS code, but I always though there were two parts to this.
As in motherboard makers are not that keen to offer free updates instead of new sales. Unless a perception of better support gets them more sales than that other motherboard manufacturer, of course.

That AMD was willing to take all the blame for dropping Zen 3 support for older chipsets suited a lot of motherboard manufacturers who could then claim they really were on the side of the consumer. Which isn't too distract that for some boards for some manufacturers, they really did have to drop the beta Zen 3 support and even PCIe 4.0 support after already doing some of the work.

My point is, both were probably not keen on extra free support for old motherboard. AMD took all the blame, motherboard manufacturers were happy to say they tried but where prevented. And that even public statements cannot always be taken at face value, especially if it means protecting OEM relationships.
 
Last edited:
KompuKare said:
Not doubting that AMD both wouldn't have minded more current chipset sales plus an easier time doing the BIOS code, but I always though there were two parts to this.
As in motherboard makers are not that keen to offer free updates instead of new sales. Unless a perception of better support gets them more sales than that other motherboard manufacturer, of course.

That AMD was willing to take all the blame for dropping Zen 3 support for older chipsets suited a lot of motherboard manufacturers who could then claim they really were on the side of the consumer. Which isn't too distract that for some boards for some manufacturers, they really did have to drop the beta Zen 3 support and even PCIe 4.0 support after already doing some of the work.

My point is, both were probably not keen on extra free support for old motherboard. AMD took all the blame, motherboard manufacturers were happy to say they tried but where prevented. And that even public statements cannot always be taken at face value, especially if it means protecting OEM relationships.
Click to expand...

Right, Asus even tried to blame AMD for overvolting the SoC which blew those Ryzen 7000 CPU's, clearly Asus's fault but when Asus tried to push blame on to AMD what did AMD do? Nothing, they kept salient because the last thing you want to be doing is starting feued with your partners, even if those partners are being ####.

The fact is the BIOS would not fit on the BIOS chips these motherboard vendors put on a lot of these boards, those few where it did fit got the BIOS right away, in the end it was motherboard vendors who edited the code to remove Zen 1 and 2 support so it would fit in these chips, probably after AMD had a quiet behind the curtain word with them.
 
I have a B450 MSI board with the 16mb BIOS chip, still supports all the CPUs I think but the BIOS UI is stripped down and you can no longer save profiles (have to save to/load from another drive) which isn't a big deal to me really.
 
humbug said:
Right, Asus even tried to blame AMD for overvolting the SoC which blew those Ryzen 7000 CPU's, clearly Asus's fault but when Asus tried to push blame on to AMD what did AMD do? Nothing, they kept salient because the last thing you want to be doing is starting feued with your partners, even if those partners are being ####.
Click to expand...

Was an agesa issue not an Asus issue, other board vendors had the same issues
 
With the success of Apple silicon, especially in power efficiency, recent offerings from Qualcomm and even Nvidia looking to get in on the action, I wonder how much life is really left in the x86 architecture. Less than a decade I expect.

Are AMD and Intel ready and able to pivot to RISC and maintain their market position or will they be replaced?
 
Last edited:
clv101 said:
With the success of Apple silicon,
Click to expand...

Where is this success, it is still only in Apple products what is that on a global scale of sales for laptops and desktops? Also it only works as the product it is attached to becomes e-waste if you want to modify it at all, on chip GPU, on chip RAM, exactly what the planet doesn't need, this type of waste needs to be discouraged.
 
Journey said:
Incorrect, the MSI B450 Tomahawk only had a 16MB ROM, and the MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX was released specifically to deal with this limitation, there is a significantly pared back BIOS for the original board which removes all the prettyness and easy of use for a more traditional BIOS, and you also loose some CPU support as well. Other than that, yes it was a question of ability to deliver compatibility in its maximum state.
Click to expand...

The ROM size wasn’t the entire issue with offering support. Signal quality and strength was an issue with some boards as corners had been cut on some boards but not others. This lead to re-drivers needing fine tuning if used, leading to a pile of worms to deal with. Another issue was ASMedia being the chipset vendor added yet more worms.

It’s impressive AMD, the board vendors and ASMedia managed to work the kinks out so well TBH. The X570S chipset and board topology is definitely better for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom