• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

X570 motherboards

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Quite true, I'm taking a pass on anything over $200, even $130-$150 for a board is pushing it for me.

Boards, Videocards.. this is quickly becoming a rich person's game. Funny to be getting squeezed out of the game that I used to be in 'because I didn't have money to do other things as a kid'...
 
I’m sorry but when did this notion come about that computers are 1) inexpensive at the bleeding edge and 2) that you have to have the latest greatest to get anything done?

Complaining that launches of components on the latest and greatest architecture/process/chipset etc are not budget friendly is a little ridiculous. In 94 a 17” CRT cost $450ish and now you can get a 12c 24t modern top of the line processor for that. A 9800+ GTX was $229 and for that now you can get a RX 590 and three free games.

If you’re referring to barrier of entry, a 4 core arm rpi ranges from $35 to $55 and you can get a decent internet/remote work laptop for $200, and I haven’t even started talking about the used market. A new 200GE build will roughly run you $400 all said and done, $550 if you buy it prebuilt from a mom n pop or have a friend help or prices are weird where you live whatever. A used Dell Optiplex w/ a quad core 4th gen i5 and 8gb of ram is roughly 300 or less if you get one with or without a hard drive. Maybe you can squeeze out a full 4c 8t i7 model and still come in under cost of a new system. The only difference really is going to be some ipc increases, instruction sets (maybe), add on features (thunderbolt usb 3.1 etc), nothing that really impacts the daily performance of the machine and warranty period depending on where you find the used machine

How are you ever supposed to get price drops on components if new components never come out at a price point that drives them lower? For years we dealt with intel slowly raising and raising and raising the overall cost to build a system (you can throw in nvidia too if you want) and you’re going to complain now that amd is coming in and actually causing prices to come down on the components that actually matter and instead are getting all wound up over parts you don’t have to have to run these latest and greatest chips.

Plus say you were looking at building an 8 core sys but decided to wait for zen 2, well hey look you just saved yourself a little money cause the 8 core is now cheaper! That comment just doesn’t really make sense, there is an entry point for computers at any price point for every need.

Adding for reference: 336BA9CB-77B5-4B59-8DD1-D585B87B6979.jpeg
 
Looking more and more like NDA is going to lift on the 7th :/ there goes my hopes of a sunday night preorder... really want to see boards and reviews before i buy anything
 
The only thing i don't like about the asus board is it using one 8 pin and one 4 pin for the cpu power delivery. Im guessing i can still plug the 8 pin cable in and just leave 4 of the 8 hanging/unattached.
 
phillyman36 said:
The only thing i don't like about the asus board is it using one 8 pin and one 4 pin for the cpu power delivery. Im guessing i can still plug the 8 pin cable in and just leave 4 of the 8 hanging/unattached.
Click to expand...

Just curious why does that bother you?
I know it is an oc feature
I have zero interest in over clocking
 
Arocks memory recommendation

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.to...cpus-memory-recommendations-asrock,39756.html

With a major pet peeve of mine. No slight against AMD or Asrock since everyone does this.
How the hell do they get away with saying the board supports up to (I know up to is a nifty way of saying less than) ddr 4666 but then you look at what’s supported it’s ddr 3200.
How are they allowed to do such a thing and not lose a lawsuit?

*I know it likely supports faster memory just irritates me we support up to this number but then it actually turns out to be a different number
 
Fanatical Meat said:
Arocks memory recommendation

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.to...cpus-memory-recommendations-asrock,39756.html

With a major pet peeve of mine. No slight against AMD or Asrock since everyone does this.
How the hell do they get away with saying the board supports up to (I know up to is a nifty way of saying less than) ddr 4666 but then you look at what’s supported it’s ddr 3200.
How are they allowed to do such a thing and not lose a lawsuit?

*I know it likely supports faster memory just irritates me we support up to this number but then it actually turns out to be a different number
Click to expand...
Haven't checked in a while, but I believe it's because DDR4-3200 is the highest JEDEC standard.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
I know guys, just really irritates me. I don’t understand how they are allowed to do this.
Click to expand...
I don't quite know what you mean by "allowed to do this"? Why wouldn't they? It's just overclocking support, for the RAM.

Look at a (hypothetical) mobo's specs, for DRAM speeds, they list things like: 4600(*OC),4333(*OC),4000(*OC),3600(*OC),3400(*OC),3200,2667,2400,2133,1866. (*OC: Overclocked speeds. Also dependent on CPU/APU's memory-controller tolerance.).

That's just a contrived example, don't take it literally. But generally, they follow the same sort of pattern.

The listed speeds with (*OC), they've achieved with lab testing, and the listed speeds without the (*OC), are officially-supported JEDEC-standard speeds.
 
JEDEC standards are often weird anyway. For example, their standard for DDR4-3200 is something like CAS/CL 20. You generally can't buy DIMMS with those timings . . . at least not in the US.

The takeaway here is that if you were to buy DDR4-3200 CAS/CL14 and run it @ default on an x570 board, you would get whatever is the fastest SPD setting for your DIMMs. Many DIMMS don't even have SPD for DDR4-3200 except for their high-speed XMP setting (which I think it would not use when booting @ default). My DDR4-3733 on my R7 1800x, for example, has SPD timings for DDR4-1333 (lulz) all the way up to DDR4-2133. If you used these DIMMS, they would default to DDR4-2133, even though the motherboard "supports" DDR4-3200.

You could possibly reprogram the SPD settings. At your own risk.
 
VirtualLarry said:
I don't quite know what you mean by "allowed to do this"? Why wouldn't they? It's just overclocking support, for the RAM.

Look at a (hypothetical) mobo's specs, for DRAM speeds, they list things like: 4600(*OC),4333(*OC),4000(*OC),3600(*OC),3400(*OC),3200,2667,2400,2133,1866. (*OC: Overclocked speeds. Also dependent on CPU/APU's memory-controller tolerance.).

That's just a contrived example, don't take it literally. But generally, they follow the same sort of pattern.

The listed speeds with (*OC), they've achieved with lab testing, and the listed speeds without the (*OC), are officially-supported JEDEC-standard speeds.
Click to expand...

Hard to explain but I’ll try. Keep in mind this isn’t meant to be a technical discussion, this isn’t fact on the board but I’ll keep it realistic, I’ll try to keep comparisons similar, keep in mind most to follow will be a general public thing not a system builder thing.

I find it amazing what tech companies get away with, so the previous board will likely have supports ddr 4666 prominently displayed on the front of the box but when you dig deep on their website memory support stops at ddr 3200. The box says very prominently ddr 4666, why is it now ddr 3200?
I realize 3200 is an AMD thing on the chip, so why does AMD state they support up to ddr 5000 but the sweet spot is 3600/3733 memory but again backing up to the chip it’s 3200.
Basically it cannot be both it’s one or the other. Ideally I’d prefer board & chip makers be required to state the maximum supported for 2 dim & 4 dim use, I’d like to see those numbers equally presented, same font, same color and same size.

I’ll compare it to cars, let’s say I take be best sample engine off the production line, then remove all unnecessary parts, then add a special highly refined fuel and start selling the car as getting 89 miles per gallon!
**but you may get less mileage**
**if you don’t get the same mileage I have no liability**
I don’t think any consumer would tolerate this behavior in any other industry other than healthcare.

Simple way for me to say it is:
How do you support something that is unsupported?
 
@Fanatical Meat

Actually auto manufacturers often do the same thing. They advertise specific hp/mileage info for turbocharged vehicles while running 91 octane pump gas (or higher). On 87 octane gas, you get worse performance to retard detonation. It's sort of the same thing. You won't know this until you go into the manual or maybe look at the inside of the gas cap.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
How do you support something that is unsupported?
Click to expand...
You're missing the bigger picture. There's "supported" (technically works), versus "supported" (defined by ratified standards bodies, and produced by standards-compliant mfgs).

That's what I was pointing out in my description of how mobo mfg's list supported DRAM speeds. They list 4600 (*OC) as a "supported" DRAM clock speed, because their board was tested to support that clock speed in their labs. They list "supported" 3200 (no OC) DRAM clocks, because that is the highest standards-based DRAM specification that is mfg'ed today.

Also, don't confuse mobo DRAM "supported" speeds, with AMD's "supported" DRAM clock speeds. The two are not the same, although in the real world, generally, you can push to the higher mobo-supported speed, assuming that you don't have a CPU with a "dud" memory controller, and you buy (binned) XMP-rated DRAM of that faster clock speed.

Basically, there's officially standards-based "supported" DRAM, which is non-overclocked, strictly JEDEC-standard stuff, that the CPU and mobo supports. And then there's the overclocker market "support", for XMP DRAM and pushing the CPU's memory controller past it's "officially standard" limits (but generally doable, in practically all cases).

Think of it this way, it's kind of like rating a car's top speed. The car itself, can push 120MPH. But because there are no legal highway speed limits higher than 70MPH, they list 70MPH as the car's "official, standard" top speed. Get it?
 
phillyman36 said:
Do we know if the x570 motherboards will get released early or is it still the 7th for those as well?
Click to expand...

Allegedly a firm in Israel was selling early product at a huge markup. Not recommended. I haven't seen any news about x570 pre-releases anywhere . . .
 
DrMrLordX said:
Allegedly a firm in Israel was selling early product at a huge markup. Not recommended. I haven't seen any news about x570 pre-releases anywhere . . .
Click to expand...

Yeah I saw some of those on Ebay. Not ordering anything overseas. Just hoping maybe Friday they start to show up on Amazon or Newegg. Do we know when reviewers are allowed to show more of the boards?(NDA for mobo the 7th as well?)
 
I have only heard 7/7 as the full NDA lift date. Interestingly enough, 7/1 was supposed to be an unboxing embargo lift for either boards or CPUs (I don't know which) and I haven't seen any new unboxing vids since then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top