• 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.

Poll: Ryzen 7950X3D, 7900X3D, 7800X3D

Will you be purchasing the 7800X3D on the 6th?

  • Total voters
    191
  • Poll closed .
Hotwired said:
Remind me how it's AMD's fault that motherboard prices are high.

There's more than half a dozen board makers doing AM5 and somehow none of them, not even the value oriented ones, are cleaning up with cheap motherboards.

What is the gun AMD is holding to their heads that makes AMD responsible for the price.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it is AMDs fault, but those same manufacturers are making cheap(er) Intel motherboards.
 
Hotwired said:
Putting the socket aside, can you actually see a manufacturer selling the same spec (or close enough) for more.
Click to expand...
Probably not, haven't looked. You were 5alking about cheap motherboards though, there are B760M boards for around £130 on the Intel 1700 side but nothing at that level on the AMD AM5 side. Don't they usually release something like a A6xx chipset for AMD board that deal with the cheap end?
Not seeing anyone make those boards at the minute (although I've not looked hard). Although probably not relevant to this conversation as pairing a board like that with a 7950X3D does seem like a bit of a mismatch.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
It was AMD who made the split of the B650 into B650 and B650E. AMD didn't split the B550 into PCI-E 4.0 optional B550 and PCI-E 4.0 only B550E - they only made it the PCI-E 4.0 capable B550. So it is AMD who decided to do this,and didn't make PCI-E 5.0 enforceable as a minimum for B650. Remember the A620,is starting at well over £100,ie,the cost of what the B550 cost,with the same connectivity and no overclocking. There is zero reason for the B650 to exist,only for AMD to throw their OEMs a bone to make overpriced "entry level" motherboards. If AMD "enforced" PCI-E 5.0 on B650,there would be no need for a B650E.

The B650/B650E/X670/X670E use Promontory 21.The pair of Promontory 21 in X670E chipsets costs less than the repurposed I/O chiplet in the X570 motherboards,so it's nothing to do with chipset cost either. Intel B760 motherboards under £200 can have PCI-E 5.0 too,so it can't be a PCB cost issue due to PCI-E 5.0 signalling.

It' get's worse with mini-ITX motherboards(which I use) and these have less issues with single length(the chipset is close to the main slot and M2 slots). To get PCI-E 5.0,you can get £200~£230 B760/Z790 motherboards with it. With AM5,its £300+ for a PCI-E 5.0 mini-ITX motherboard and £250+ with a PCI-E 4.0 mini-ITX motherboard(even the M2 slot is locked to PCI-E 4.0!).

I don't see the point of paying £100s for a new platform with new expensive RAM and extremely expensive motherboards,for it to be hobbled to last generation PCI-E speeds. This is especially true with the RX6600/RX6600XT/RTX3050 being hobbled to PCI-E 8X,and both AMD and Nvidia pushing up GPUs a tier. So it's most likely the RX8600XT will be 8X and the RTX5060 too. You already are seeing the RTX4060 only being an 8GB card and essentially using a 107 series dGPU(which was reserved to the 50 series cards),and the RTX4070/RTX4070TI using the class of dGPU used in the RTX3060/RTX2060/GTX1060. That means the possibility of an increasing number of sub £500 graphics cards having hobbled PCI-E bus width,memory bandwidth,Cache amounts and VRAM amounts. This makes them more reliant on the PCI-E link speed.

Ironically those who will buy higher end dGPUs will be less affected(because they tend to have more VRAM,more memory bandwith and larger Cache amounts).
Click to expand...

Thing is I take your comment and look at middle intel boards at £500 and highend at £750-£1100 and wonder why those boards are so ridiculous priced as well. In fact at the higher end, in general with like for like spec, I am seeing AM5 boards cheaper than their Intel boards.
 
humbug said:
AM5 boards absolutely are more expensive, and i don't know why, its something i might look in to.

What ever it is this is a choice by board vendors.

There was a time when equivalent AM3 and 300 series AM4 boards were cheaper than Intel, but they were also of a lower quality.

Intel B660 Gaming X AX: £190

AMD B650 Gaming X AX: £240
Click to expand...
Wouldn't the reason the Intel Board is cheaper is because it's on DDR4?
 
humbug said:
AM5 boards absolutely are more expensive, and i don't know why, its something i might look in to.

What ever it is this is a choice by board vendors.

There was a time when equivalent AM3 and 300 series AM4 boards were cheaper than Intel, but they were also of a lower quality.

Intel B660 Gaming X AX: £190

AMD B650 Gaming X AX: £240
Click to expand...
Are there any Intel B660 DDR5 boards to compare? To note I am pretty sure you need to compare a B760 board. They are still cheaper by way people wondering, was just interested if B660 ever had DDR5.

To note the B760 Gaming X DD5 board is actually cheaper at £181 for those wondering so AMD users just being ripped tbh.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
oops.... yeah well spotted :)

The B760 Gaming X AX is £200, (DDR5) still £40 cheaper.
Click to expand...
If you look at the board features side by side, the AMD board has some extras which probably accounts for the price difference. For example, looks like it has a slightly better vrm, Front USB-C® 20Gb/s, proper M2 cooling with no slots uncovered like on the Intel board. You could argue it's not worth the extra though.
GoogalyMoogaly said:
So make DDR4 AM5 boards?
Click to expand...
That's why AM4 still exists and sells very well.
 
Last edited:
LtMatt said:
If you look at the board features side by side, the AMD board has some extras which probably accounts for the price difference. For example, looks like it has a slightly better vrm, Front USB-C® 20Gb/s, proper M2 cooling with no slots uncovered like on the Intel board. You could argue it's not worth the extra though.

That's why AM4 still exists and sells very well.
Click to expand...

Ok fair enough.

Why tho? Are they starting to feel like they need to cut the Intel boards down a bit to shift them? In the past board vendors have complained about Intel boards stacking up in warehouses as they couldn't shift them.
 
Maybe the board partners realise that is you but a X670 then you're not going to need another board for the next five or six years so they're charging accordingly seeing as they won't be getting much repeat business. Not that I'm cynical or anything :cry:
 
BigBANGtheory said:
I predict low sales from such a product
Click to expand...
Intel seems to feel it'll do well enough to bother with it. As Matt says, AM4 boards are still selling well. Might make it cheaper to transition over if they already have decent DDR4 RAM.

LtMatt said:
If you look at the board features side by side, the AMD board has some extras which probably accounts for the price difference. For example, looks like it has a slightly better vrm, Front USB-C® 20Gb/s, proper M2 cooling with no slots uncovered like on the Intel board. You could argue it's not worth the extra though.

That's why AM4 still exists and sells very well.
Click to expand...
Could they not also produce variations without that extra stuff to shave a bit off? I'm quite fond of an m.2 heatsink but there might be people who do care about that. Who decided to put the extra stuff on the AMD board but not on the Intel ones and why?

I get that AM4 still exists but we were talking about AM5 board weren't we? I don't think you'll get a 7800X3D/7900X3D/7950X3D in an AM4 board. You could however put a 13900K in the cheap Intel ones I believe. How many people would actually want to is probably a different matter, but maybe a 7600/7700 would interest some.

Gavster said:
Maybe the board partners realise that is you but a X670 then you're not going to need another board for the next five or six years so they're charging accordingly seeing as they won't be getting much repeat business. Not that I'm cynical or anything :cry:
Click to expand...
I do wonder how many people upgrade that often though to make that a consideration. People might have upgraded AM4 CPUs and might upgrade AM5 CPUs because they can, but how many would've if it meant a new motherboard each time?
 
I think it's stabbing in the dark without a board manufacturer snitching on their costs and pricing strategy to the public for absolutely no benefit to them.
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Probably not, haven't looked. You were 5alking about cheap motherboards though, there are B760M boards for around £130 on the Intel 1700 side but nothing at that level on the AMD AM5 side. Don't they usually release something like a A6xx chipset for AMD board that deal with the cheap end?
Not seeing anyone make those boards at the minute (although I've not looked hard). Although probably not relevant to this conversation as pairing a board like that with a 7950X3D does seem like a bit of a mismatch.
Click to expand...

Intel boards aren’t selling anything like what was anticipated. It’s possibly a case of manufacturers facing a situation of high stock levels and low demand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom