Expected price of MSI Meg X570?

Discussion in 'AMD MoBos' started by tangoseal, Jun 12, 2019.

  1. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
  2. JRZoid

    JRZoid [H]Lite

    Messages:
    91
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2019
    I do not know...Probaly not good they leaked and mentioned X570 wouldn't come cheap...but they already have the Bioses ready for the drop in for X470...
     
  3. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Even the Asus X570s are rumored to be very expensive. No less from asus.
     
  4. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Im going to go out on a leg and assume a $200 dollar 6 core Ryzen 3000 will fit nicely in a $979.99 MSI Meg

    I wouldnt put it past them to pull some crap like this.
     
  5. JRZoid

    JRZoid [H]Lite

    Messages:
    91
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2019
    ^ it won't be 200$ yet and yeah we like that budget....suggested will be 300-400$ for some time...
     
  6. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,572
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    i think mid range is suppose to be in the 200-300 dollar range, high end 300-500, something along those lines.. but yeah wouldn't doubt the msi meg potentially going over 500 given it's using a triple pcie4 m.2 configuration. i'd say 1000 is a stretch especially if the limited edition monoblock board from asrock is priced at 1000, 500-600 sounds more likely though for the meg.

    another board worth looking at if you're thinking of going with the 12 or 16 core and overclocking it is the gigabyte aorus xtreme which uses a 14+2 phase vrm.
     
  7. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    The aorus extreme isbhat Ibhad for my Threadripper and it's a hell of a good board.
     
  8. kirbyrj

    kirbyrj [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    24,682
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    I think I read that the X570 is going to cost about what you'll find Z390 boards for according to MSI. I wouldn't be surprised if there are decent options in the $200 range. I just wouldn't expect to see great budget boards in the sub-$150 category.

    Obviously the uber-high end like the Godlike, ROG Formula, Aorus xtreme are going to be all over the place. Probably in the $500 range. I wouldn't think they would be more money than the comparable X399 counterpart though.
     
  9. sethk

    sethk [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,657
    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    I wonder if they will be able able to hit Z390 pricing levels for similar features. The increase in lanes via the chipset plus PCIe 4.0 considerations (and cooling issues) probably makes this more expensive than Z390, I would think.
     
  10. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,572
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    oh i guess the meg price was given out already, it's going to cost 770 dollars..
     
  11. pendragon1

    pendragon1 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,280
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000


    skip to 130. "copy at time" wasn't working.
     
  12. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    700 fucking dollars and it's not even hedt? What's x599 gonna cost? 4799.99

    I.might just stick with x470. I have a 2080ti so gen 4 is useless to me
     
  13. travm

    travm Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    376
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2016
    Gen 4 isn't for graphics
     
  14. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Nope, its for those delicious 5GB/s NVMEs
     
  15. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    I was reading on WCCFTECH that the Gigabyte Aorus Master, the one right below extreme, has the same 14 phase power etc... and is like a $3xx.00 board. So I am not sure what makes the Extreme worth another $400.00. Something about this pricing model doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
     
  16. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,572
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    big thing is checking the m.2 slots, supposedly some of the lower end boards will have the 1 pcie 4.0 from the cpu then the other two m.2 slots will be pcie 3.0. recommend checking GN's latest news recap video, they go into more detail about the configuration options with the x570 chipset so that may effect where some are priced differently than others. where as the MEG will have triple pcie 4.0 m.2 slots. for MSI if it doesn't have the lightning branding on it m.2 heatsink then it's not pcie 4.0 or so they were telling the media people at computex.

    as far as being specific to the gigabyte boards, the extreme comes with 10GbE, the master comes with 2.5GbE, the extreme's chipset is passively cooled, the master isn't. the extreme's audio is better than the masters and the list goes on. the two big things that both do have though is the same VRM's and triple gen 4 m.2 slots. so it just depends on what is more important to you and if those things are worth the price difference.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2019
  17. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    The Master also has all 4.0 slots for nvme. Right on Gigabytes website.

    This is the board I will get if it is indeed in the 350ish range. Its a no brainer. I already have 10GB via Intel XFSR cards so that 2.5g port is already pointless. The 10G port on the extreme is just not needed, nor is all the board armor crap they put all over it.

    My usage scenario though. Not saying this is everyones.

    upload_2019-6-17_2-25-56.png
     
    noko likes this.
  18. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    ^ Interested over the Asus for the featureset and likely lower price but concerned over how wonky Gigabyte's firmware has been over the years.

    Asus on the other hand has pretty much nailed its BIOS/UEFI implementation.

    Since I live outside the USA, the horror stories about Asus RMA don't really apply (For me, they are quite bad for every manufacturer hahaha)

    MSI has also recently been pushing their products locally, also worth considering.
     
  19. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Gigabyte is not wonky. Have you not used one of their boards in years or something and are still left with a bad impression? Sure Asus has a good Bios setup but that ROG tax is retarded af.
     
  20. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Last was a H270 built for a friend. The UEFI randomly forgets odd settings (it turned off the iGPU on his 7700). The CMOS battery is still working though, so I suspect the UEFI resets itself to defaults every now and then. No OC and his other hardware is pretty standard. His build has a discrete GPU and the board's default is to turn off the iGPU when there's another GPU in the system. He needs the iGPU for his other external monitors.

    It's reached a point where he generally knows where to look in his UEFI to re-enable the external monitors attached to the board whenever it happens, and he's not normally used to that. Other than that, I guess there are no other problems with that build.
     
  21. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Oh yeah that was an older build and I think since the 200 series intel chipsets Gigabyte has had a lot more growth and attention to detail. They are directly competing now for top spot between Asus and MSI easily.
     
  22. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Kaby isn't that old yet. ;D

    In any case, a sibling recently picked up an X470 Ultra Gaming board and I have a 2600X coming in from an [H] Forumer. Let's see how that goes as I will likely be the one building it... I'll probably have that in a week or two.

    Edit: I do agree that the ROG tax is quite steep.
     
  23. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,656
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    https://www.amazon.de/MSI-MEG-X570-Godlike-DDR4/dp/B07ST23K9B/ 723 euros including 20% tax. Dear motherboard manufacturers, you are completely out of touch. Even the cheap MSI board which is not even capable of x8/x8 mode is over 230 euros. Suddenly even the X399 boards, including MEG Creation look like a steal.
     
  24. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    That's an 800us price.

    We dont pay vat though so I guess in dollara that's more like 650 usd.

    Take the $100 10gig card out and another $74 for the nvme card and you have realistically $475 motherboard without accessories.

     
  25. sethk

    sethk [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,657
    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    I wonder if this is a combination of high chipset price, PCIe 4.0engineering “tax” and an expectation that demand will exceed supply in which case the prices will work to control demand .
    Once you exceed a number users just expect a feature pack board and in a crowded market (50+ motherboard designs?) manufacturers are adding in doo-dads to distinguish each product from the other. That just leads to some crazy sounding combinations here.
    I just hope this is a smooth launch for AMD or all that engineering effort from board partners and inventory could lead to a massive debacle if some critical flaw is discovered late in the fame or post launch.
     
  26. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,572
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    buildzoid did a video going into detail about the MSI MEG Godlike x570 if you can handle his rambling.

     
  27. Dan_D

    Dan_D [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    54,810
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Which is probably about as useful for gamers as PCIe 4.0 is. We've seen massive improvements in SATA transfer rates since transitioning from the mechanical hard drive to the SATA based SSD and finally, the NVMe SSD. Even in RAID, going direct to the CPU, using cards that have more than 4x bandwidth, etc. we still haven't seen any real improvement in level load times which is all that SSD's COULD do for gaming. I'm as much of a storage whore as the next person, and I'm glad to see it, but if gaming is what your primarily concerned with X570 is likely going to be a big disappointment. If it holds ANY advantages over X470, its going to be in overclocking the Ryzen 3000 series and pushing memory clocks higher than we've ever seen on that platform. However, the latter may or may not truly end up being an advantage for gaming. We've had more bandwidth than we could need on HEDT since X58 and its meant nothing so far. Lower latency seems to show the only real improvement once your past about 3000MHz or so. As a result, I'm not sure X570 will do anything for us there either. Those higher clocked parts are going to have worse latency so that's another toss up.

    That leaves us overclocking. For 8c/16t Ryzens, I think the X470 boards will probably do fine. They might even hold their own on the 12 core parts. It's the 16c/32t Ryzen 9 3950X that I think may require X570 to get the most out of it. I don't know for sure, but this is how things look to me right now. I'll no more once I actually get X570 & Ryzen 3000 on the bench. Of course, the 3950X won't be available until later, so we'll probably be testing 8c/16t or 12c/24t parts at first.
     
    Deleted member 184142 likes this.
  28. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    ^ Do you think the X570/B550 boards can help with the motherboard POST times?

    I've been spoiled by Intel's speedy POST times and the time it takes for the Crosshair 7 to POST irritates me (it's minor, I know).

    If I'll end up paying 20$ for it (especially with an eventual B550 board), I'll do it since I'm keeping this build until it dies. I don't mind paying extra since I'll find uses for my old hardware since I don't really sell them off.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2019
  29. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,700
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    I have a 486dx4 100 that still runs after 25 years. You might be waiting a literal 150 years before your CPU stops working. Or more!
     
    MatthewK and noko like this.
  30. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    I find the other things tend to die before the CPU does, usually the board, the RAM, or the GPU. I do have 2 dead CPUs sitting in my office though (we have 50+ computers here), an E7200 and an i3 4170.

    My older machines always find work somewhere until it's too difficult to maintain. My AMD64 Newcastle 3200+ lived as a general office machine that was used 8-9 hours a day, 6 days a week until it's motherboard gave up sometime between 2014 and 2017. My E2160, Q6600 and i5 2400 are doing the same somewhere around here in the office, although I think the 2400 got assigned some light graphic design work. :D
     
  31. lightsout

    lightsout Gawd

    Messages:
    1,009
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2014
    We all complained about crappy AMD boards for years. Now they give us the good boards but man, is this even worse than Intel pricing? Feels like x99/x299 pricing not the mainstream socket.
     
  32. noko

    noko [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,357
    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    I really like the look at that board but the VRMs 12+2 50a that are an actual 12+2 design with no VRM doublers is rather awesome. I see it also comes with WiFi and BT 5. This might just beat out the ASUS C8H for me. I do like ASUS bios and their frequent updates.
     
  33. chameleoneel

    chameleoneel 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,021
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    extra memory channels are not the same as faster memory speeds. Quad channel means little for most workloads. But faster memory speed will give you benefits.


    Current Intel and AMD processors see good benefits well past DDR4 3000.

    Higher timings on faster RAM usually does not mean worse overall latency. If you can tweak the timings down, great. But lower timings are not necessary to benefit from the faster speed.

    https://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency

    *to find out the total "true latency" of your RAM: multiply the clock cycle time (= tCK can find in a good stats paper on your RAM or possibly in good software(Typhoon Burner shows you clock cycle times coded into your SPD/XMP profiles) or good bios) by the CAS latency number. This will give you your total latency in nano seconds.

    According to Crucial: Default DDR3 and 4 RAM speeds should have a latency between 13 - 14 nanoseconds. If your super fast RAM has the same total latency as that, even with "high" timings like 18 or 19 or even 20: you aren't losing anything to slower ram with lower timings. And are in fact, only benefiting from the faster overall MHZ.

    And according to that page, default DDR 2666 has a CAS latency of 18 and a totaly latency in nano secons, of 13.5. So, if you have DDR4 3600 or something, with CAS 18, you should actually have a much lower total latency than standard DDR 2666.

    As an example, my DDR4 3000's XMP setting has a clock cycle time of 0.667 ns and the CAS is 15. Which gives a total latency of 10 nano seconds. I would need a CAS of 21 to hit a total latency of 14ns, like standard DDR4 2666. But even at that slow CAS of 21, my RAM clock rate is 444mhz faster. So, overall performance shouldn't be far off. It is a balance. However, unless you are processing something which is highly sensitive to latency, but not clock rate; Then, you might maybe see a difference. I think you 'd probably struggle to find such a situation. But real time audio FX might do it. Although I could be totally wrong on that. Guess I'd have to do some testing. But, CAS 21 is ridiculous anyway, for DDR3000. So it doesn't really matter.

    I have that RAM actually overclocked further to DDR4 3333 with CAS 17. Lemme see if I can see the current tCK/clock cycle time, in my bios. *doesn't show in my bios. I dunno how to view current tCK. However, standard DDR 2666 has a total latency of 14ns at CAS 18. So, I'm probably at least a couple of ns lower total latency, at DDR 3333 CAS 17. Plus I have all that extra speed in MHZ.

    This site also shows Aida and others, scaling faster with higher MHZ but also higher CAS and other timings.
    Skylake
    https://www.legitreviews.com/ddr4-m...nding-the-best-ddr4-memory-kit-speed_170340/3
    Ryzen
    https://www.legitreviews.com/ddr4-m...tform-best-memory-kit-amd-ryzen-cpus_192259/2
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2019
  34. Dan_D

    Dan_D [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    54,810
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    I'll agree with you on the extra memory channels.

    I've actually tested this and as far as gaming goes, you really get almost nothing going past DDR4 3200MHz. It seems to be the point of diminishing returns. I've gone with RAM clocked as high as DDR4 4000MHz and found this to be the case. Games just aren't sensitive to memory clock speed or adding channels. dual or quad really makes no difference. In some cases, timings matter far more than anything else. On my own system, generally speaking, RAM clocked at DDR4 3000MHz at 16,16,16,36@1T is faster than my DDR 3600MHz RAM at 3400MHz. I think that's clocked at 18,19,19,39@1T.
     
    chameleoneel likes this.
  35. chameleoneel

    chameleoneel 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,021
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Well with gaming, you can't be GPU limited, if you want to see benefits from RAM speeds. Based on all the articles I've read: Generally speaking at 1080p in modern games: you need something faster than a GTX 980 ti, to see really see RAM benefits for gaming.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2019
  36. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,656
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    AMD or Intel has nothing to do with POST times. It all comes down to what you have on the board. My Z68M-ITX/HT board which has pretty much no extra chips etc on it POSTS in like 2 seconds; hell, they even had a BIOS option for actual extra delay so you have time to hit the key to enter BIOS ! Other ITX boards were just as quick in my experience. On other side, ATX boards like X99 Deluxe or X399 Taichi are taking much more time to POST, simply because of all the extra controllers, extra RAM modules...
     
  37. mda

    mda [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,655
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    TBH I have no idea what influences POST time.

    My past Intel boards and my AMD socket A and 939 boards have all posted pretty quickly while my Crosshair VII has not. Don't know how the X99 and X399s did, but most of the first gen Ryzen boards also took a while to POST. I haven't noticed POST times on any of my previous boards until I got my Crosshair VII.

    I don't know if 'POST time' is the accurate description for this, but I'm referring to the time between hitting the power button and when you actually see something on the screen, which is now normally the motherboard splash screen/brand logo.

    Again, this is admittedly very minor.
     
  38. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,572
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    it's due to the memory training, with it enabled it's about 20-30 seconds to boot, disabled it's damn near instant even with quick boot disabled.
     
  39. Dan_D

    Dan_D [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    54,810
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Motherboard / system POST times are influenced by many factors. Chief among them are the option ROM's or "OROMs" your motherboard has. Whether you are in UEFI or legacy BIOS or UEFI+Legacy mode makes a difference. The more complex your system configuration, the longer the POST times are likely to be. Having your drive controllers in RAID mode impacts this etc.

    I've been working on computers for over two decades. In that time I've serviced thousands of systems of all types and at every imaginable price range. Over the years I've seen about a dozen bad CPU's. Almost all of them died because they were taken out by a surge or something which fried the motherboard as well. The ones which were genuinely defective or died on their own is less than half that total. While hardly a scientific study, its a massive sample size. :) CPU's rarely die, even when overclocking them. Since the Pentium III days, CPU's have had all kinds of thermal protection in them to prevent them from dying. The Pentium 4 being the first that would throttle to save itself. Athlon's didn't do that back then but got the features the next generation or so.

    If these leaked prices are true, it's worse than X99/X299 HEDT prices. We are seeing prices that are above that of many dual CPU workstation motherboards.

    If that's true then that would explain much of the cost.

    I hadn't ever heard that about the GPU being such a factor in that. I'll actually test that. Although, at 1080P, its almost a moot point as you are dealing with a resolution that's largely CPU limited, even on older cards like the 980Ti and 1080Ti. So if there is a benefit to higher RAM speeds beyond DDR4 3200MHz, then I'd imagine its probably academic. For example, an overclock of a few hundred megahertz at CPU limited resolutions could result in big gains, but we are talking 350 vs. 400FPS. In resolutions where the GPU does most of the work, the difference becomes 1-2FPS.

    As I said, POST times are influenced by a variety of factors. That said, I haven't noticed a real difference between similarly equipped X470 and Z390 motherboards or even X399 and X299 vs. those either.
     
  40. drescherjm

    drescherjm [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,527
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    I watched several of the reviews that buildzoid did of the X570 boards. Some of these have gone over the top on VRM designs (12+ phase / no doublers ...) . Not sure exactly what to make of that.