AMD Bristol/Stoney Ridge Thread

[FlanK3r]

Its possible with update agesa code lock teh chip? And after with older agesa to do unlocked again? because Im thinking about A12 9800, but Im not sure what happen after launch desktop boards (BIOS with new code?)...

 

[The Stilt]

Its possible with update agesa code lock teh chip? And after with older agesa to do unlocked again? because Im thinking about A12 9800, but Im not sure what happen after launch desktop boards (BIOS with new code?)...

No.
AGESA cannot control the chip at the level which is required to do something like that. They can make it more difficult (i.e with SMU), but not prevent it completely. The configuration comes from the fuses, which can be only set once. They can be overriden, but you need some special hardware and information to do that. It cannot be done with the software, no matter the level it operates.

 

[Abwx]

What happened to the screen shots of the motherboard they are no longer working..?? Could you please repost them??

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-09/gigabyte-b350m-d2-ds3h-mainboard-amd-sockel-am4-zen/

 

[DrMrLordX]

What's up with these AM4 boards with black PCBs? The Asus trial board used to hit 4.8 GHz on an A12-9800 looked the same. Btw the total lack of VRM cooling on that Gigabyte board is really disappointing. And 4+3 seems weird but whatever.

 

[hojnikb]

What's up with these AM4 boards with black PCBs? The Asus trial board used to hit 4.8 GHz on an A12-9800 looked the same. Btw the total lack of VRM cooling on that Gigabyte board is really disappointing. And 4+3 seems weird but whatever.

It's not wierd at all. Chipset and iGPU needs a seperate phase, thats why its like that. Also the board could be limited to 95W chip, in which case with decent vrms there really is no need for extra cooling.

 

[AtenRa]

Those are low end Mobos, much like socket 1151 H110 and B150.

 

[SpaceBeer]

With a difference that this "low-end" board has 4 DIMMs, M2, USB 3.1, RAID and probably supports CPU OC. I know you can't expect a lot with power phase design like this (and without heatsinks), but it's not about performance, it's about feeling of being locked
In my opinion, this board (and similar ones) would be a great choice even for Zen CPUs (if you are not interested in OC or CF/SLI). Though we still have to wait to see the price (I doubt it will be less than 80$/€, and that is not so low-end, it more mid-range)

 

[LTC8K6]

With a difference that this "low-end" board has 4 DIMMs, M2, USB 3.1, RAID and probably supports CPU OC. I know you can't expect a lot with power phase design like this (and without heatsinks), but it's not about performance, it's about feeling of being locked
In my opinion, this board (and similar ones) would be a great choice even for Zen CPUs (if you are not interested in OC or CF/SLI). Though we still have to wait to see the price (I doubt it will be less than 80$/€, and that is not so low-end, it more mid-range)

Well, one has 2 dimms and one has 4. One is clearly a much lower end board than the other.

 

[AtenRa]

The board bellow only has 2x Memory slots, single 16x PCIe slot, no M2 and should be no more expensive that those H110 boards. This is entry-level AM4 cheap motherboard.

 

[SpaceBeer]

Yes, I was talking about the other one. Still, it's good if B350 chipset (if this really is GA-B350M-DS3H) has all of those things and you don't have to go for "premium" board if you need those features (you have to go for H170 if you need RAID or Z170 if you want to OC just a little bit).

It might be the same as with FM2+, where A68H were quite decent low-end MBs, and A78 weren't so bad compared to A88 (you had RAID, 4 DIMMs, OC features).

 

[hojnikb]

The board bellow only has 2x Memory slots, single 16x PCIe slot, no M2 and should be no more expensive that those H110 boards. This is entry-level AM4 cheap motherboard.

I wonder if it's cheaper to add a sata/usb hub for extra ports or just add a320 chipset

Also i do wonder whats the cheapest/bare minimum vrm config ?
3+3 ?

 

[The Stilt]

I wonder if it's cheaper to add a sata/usb hub for extra ports or just add a320 chipset

Also i do wonder whats the cheapest/bare minimum vrm config ?
3+3 ?

4+2 (VDD_CR / VDD_SoC) will be the most common config. 3-phase "NB" (VDD_SoC) config is extremely rare and supported just by a single controller model (AFAIK). Gigabyte seems to be using three phase VDD_SoC so that they can skimp in the component quality. Those 4+3 phase Gigabyte boards appear to be using ISL95712, which is a jellybean part (the very reason they are using it). Four integrated gate drivers and analog outside the communications (SVI2).

The proper, digital VRM controllers (IR / Infineon) support >= 2 secondary output phases. Those can be doubled or even quadrupled, but it is definitely not necessary as long as the board is designed properly and high quality components are used. You can design a 2-phase circuit which can supply < 120A of constant current, so the number of the secondary phases supported by the controller is the least of the issues. However as always, quality comes at cost...

Quality > quantity, with no exceptions made.

For a 8C/16T Zeppelin I wouldn't even consider a motherboard with a 4+2 phase config. While a making a board with sufficient 4+2 phase VRM is entirely possible (as previously said), none of the manufacturers will use high enough quality components in their boards to make a 4+2 phase configuration good enough. A native 6+2 phase configuration will be used on the high quality mainstream / high-end boards. There will most definitely be doubled (4+1 to 8+2, etc) solutions too, especially in the cheaper "enthusiast" / "high-end" boards.

The VRM requirements on Zeppelin & Raven are not demanding due the high power draw, but due the high current draw.

 

[hojnikb]

How about cost wise ? Is a bare minimum vrm noticeably more expensive than something used on fm2+ or 1151 board ?

I'm just trying to figure out the bare minimum pricing for entry level boards.

 

[The Stilt]

How about cost wise ? Is a bare minimum vrm noticeably more expensive than something used on fm2+ or 1151 board ?

I'm just trying to figure out the bare minimum pricing for entry level boards.

I'd say all desktop boards, intended for a desktop CPU / APU / SoC < 65$ are garbage, regardless of the brand or the platform. Socket 1151 motherboards are pretty much the closest match we currently have for AM4, IMO.

While the AM4 infra is similar to FM2+, it is much more demanding for both of the power planes (but especially for the CPU plane, due compability requirement with Zeppelin).

 

[hojnikb]

I'd say all desktop boards, intended for a desktop CPU / APU / SoC < 65$ are garbage, regardless of the brand or the platform. Socket 1151 motherboards are pretty much the closest match we currently have for AM4, IMO.

While the AM4 infra is similar to FM2+, it is much more demanding for both of the power planes (but especially for the CPU plane, due compability requirement with Zeppelin).

Garbage in what sense ?

I've had nothing but good experience with cheap board in the ~50€ range. Granted, the builds i've done are usually with lower end cpus like i3s and pentium, but still. I have yet to have one fail on me.

 

[The Stilt]

Garbage in what sense ?

I've had nothing but good experience with cheap board in the ~50€ range. Granted, the builds i've done are usually with lower end cpus like i3s and pentium, but still. I have yet to have one fail on me.

Component quality, design and features.

 

[superstition]

Garbage in what sense ?

Flexibility. One pays for convenience as a rule.

Take the old ultra-cheap socket 754 board I have from ECS. It works just fine at stock, even after all these years. But, it has sub-par VIA audio, fails with a BCLK overclock of 6 MHz, has an iGPU that isn't supported by anything beyond XP, has liquid caps, no VRM sink, etc. The Sempron 3100+ 90nm CPU in it was known as being a strong overclocker but one simply can't overclock it with that board.

Treated with care and matched with undemanding CPUs these cheap boards will normally work alright. But, when you try to do more with them (run RAM beyond the board's rating, run CPUs near the top of the supported list, unplug cables and devices too often, run them with more recent CPUs or operating system) they can have issues. Even the thinness of a board and its size can lead to issues. I've read a lot of complaints on Newegg about cheap boards bending too much when being installed, for instance. Sometimes they aren't even the full form factor.

Sometimes, though, even paying for an expensive board yields poor support with things like BIOS update frequency/quality. But the higher-end boards typically have more copper, better MOSFETs, more RAM phases, digital power delivery, isolated audio, protections for static discharge, better chokes, better physical support for heavy GPUs, more gold on the connectors, stiffer PCBs, more robust slot latches, more fan headers, etc.

Boards like that ECS aren't garbage, though. The true garbage boards are the ones that claim to support something that they don't — like the AsRock "Fatality" 970 board that can't really support high wattage FX CPUs. The other garbage aspect is when boards ship with big bugs that never get fixed, like the Gigabyte UD3P 2.0's refusal to boot with a multiplier above 22. That seems like an intentional flaw designed for segmentation. However, I still recommend that board for budget builds with the 8320E since a 4.4 GHz overclock is good enough for a budget FX build given the rebate and the bundle pricing at Micro Center.

 

[DrMrLordX]

It's not wierd at all. Chipset and iGPU needs a seperate phase, thats why its like that. Also the board could be limited to 95W chip, in which case with decent vrms there really is no need for extra cooling.

Not gonna comment on 4+3, I think The Stilt already said what needed to be said there. But no cooling + 4+2/4+3 config = OC disappointment. I saw this a lot on the OCN forums when somebody showed up with XYZ motherboard wondering why their Kaveri OC didn't go the way they wanted it to go, or why there was funky iGPU throttling with such and such BIOS/UEFI revision . . . man I am glad I did not have to put up with any boards like that.

Yes, I was talking about the other one. Still, it's good if B350 chipset (if this really is GA-B350M-DS3H) has all of those things and you don't have to go for "premium" board if you need those features (you have to go for H170 if you need RAID or Z170 if you want to OC just a little bit).

It might be the same as with FM2+, where A68H were quite decent low-end MBs, and A78 weren't so bad compared to A88 (you had RAID, 4 DIMMs, OC features).

See above, watching people fight with "lesser" chipset motherboards could be painful at times. If all you want is stock clocks and you aren't pushing your system very hard, you can get away with it. The lack of quality shows when you start to ask for more from your system.

4+2 (VDD_CR / VDD_SoC) will be the most common config. 3-phase "NB" (VDD_SoC) config is extremely rare and supported just by a single controller model (AFAIK). Gigabyte seems to be using three phase VDD_SoC so that they can skimp in the component quality. Those 4+3 phase Gigabyte boards appear to be using ISL95712, which is a jellybean part (the very reason they are using it). Four integrated gate drivers and analog outside the communications (SVI2).

I thought there was something strange there . . . thanks for the commentary.

For a 8C/16T Zeppelin I wouldn't even consider a motherboard with a 4+2 phase config. While a making a board with sufficient 4+2 phase VRM is entirely possible (as previously said), none of the manufacturers will use high enough quality components in their boards to make a 4+2 phase configuration good enough. A native 6+2 phase configuration will be used on the high quality mainstream / high-end boards. There will most definitely be doubled (4+1 to 8+2, etc) solutions too, especially in the cheaper "enthusiast" / "high-end" boards.

The VRM requirements on Zeppelin & Raven are not demanding due the high power draw, but due the high current draw.

Honestly I hope we see at least one or two 8+2 designs (or 4+1 designs with doublers) in B350 so that people who buy in now won't get burned later when they try to go Summit Ridge or Raven Ridge. Maybe Asus will come through for us. The more 4+2 boards we see now, the worse things will get down the road when people try putting together "budget" Summit Ridge systems and then get all confused when throttling happens.

Either that, or Summit Ridge needs to be taken off the compatibility lists for some of the boards hitting the market in this month or the next.

 

[The Stilt]

Either that, or Summit Ridge needs to be taken off the compatibility lists for some of the boards hitting the market in this month or the next.

You don't honestly expect this to happen, do you?

Three major manufacturers (ASRock, MSI and Gigabyte) are selling 125W and 220W "compatible" motherboards, which in reality cannot reliabily (without protections kicking in, at stock) support even the 125W rated parts in conditions which are better than the infrastructure specifications require. ASRock is the worst violator by a landslide and they still claim that their 970 Performance and 990FX Extreme6 motherboards equipped with a fake (no hardware for doubling), analog "8+2 phase" VRM support 220W TDP parts. People have been complaining about throttling issues on these boards even on stock 125W parts, since the day they were released. ASRock "solved" the issue by adding notes:

- 125W TDP parts * For cooling the CPU and its surrounding components, please install a CPU cooler with a top-down blowing design.
- 220W TDP parts ◊ For cooling the CPU and its surrounding components, please install a decent liquid cooling system.

Even their FM2+ motherboards suffer from similar issues, despite the power draw of the APU is much smaller. For example with their Extreme6+ A88X motherboard the VRM ran close to 80°C even at idle. And that's their top FM2+ motherboard. I found it pretty odd since the only components they skimped on that motherboard were the random chinese mosfets and the PCB itself. The PCB on ASRocks is in it's own class, because it is literally paper thin. I accidentally bent the board so much that some of the SMD components popped of, just by lifting the board out of the box.

I cannot see things improving, unless AMD themselves start really enforcing the specifications. And in their current state, they neither have the authority or leverage to do that.

These issues are unfortunately not limited to just ASRock, the lower-end motherboards from every single manufacturer is affected. The competition is brutal.

 

[kallisX]

do i need to buy all new memory for this crap? or is it ddr3 backward compatible like newer intel chips?

 

[The Stilt]

There is no DDR3 support for AM4.

 

[dark zero]

There is no DDR3 support for AM4.

Yup, no DDR3 support for AM4. Intel Kabylake was supposed to be DDR4 exclusive too...

 

[VirtualLarry]

Intel Kabylake was supposed to be DDR4 exclusive too...

That makes no sense. Preventing those who bought DDR3 Skylake boards from upgrading, and incurring more validation costs, having to re-validate the memory controller, after removing DDR3 support? I don't buy it.

 

[jpiniero]

Yup, no DDR3 support for AM4. Intel Kabylake was supposed to be DDR4 exclusive too...

You're thinking of Cannon Lake (which I guess includes Coffee Lake now), which doesn't support DDR3L at all.

 

[DrMrLordX]

You don't honestly expect this to happen, do you?

I can dream. And yeah the Extreme 6+ is a major disappointment. Anyone who bought that . . . ugh.

There is no DDR3 support for AM4.

Does Bristol Ridge even have DDR3 support in its IMC? I'm thinking not.