![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Ryzen 4000...new chipset?
- Thread starter alxlwson
- Start date
owcraftsman
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2007
- Messages
- 1,119
It is my understanding AMD is not making the chipset for 4000 series but someone else is. Rumor has it Asmedia will do the honors and it will be X670 chipset and the last with AM4 socket. The upcoming 5000 series will be AM5 and also a new chipset. I've read this from numerous sources that have been accurate in the past, non official, so believe it or not.
pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 52,235
there is only rumor about the asmedia thing so guess away.
owcraftsman
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2007
- Messages
- 1,119
so ya +1 pendragon1 . My thoughts/guesses, insane or not, are instead of a full fledged (hot) southbridge chipset the 4000 will be in part on the CPU die. Makes sense to me because of the ease in which it could be done with the chiplet architecture and it's the only real way to improve substantially on the 3000 series performance with the 4th gen AM4. Unlike moving the memory controller to the CPU die from days gone by, they will put the PCIe 4.0 bus in part on the CPU die which will fix the limitations of the current implementation. Maybe not all PCIe lanes but at least some of the storage lanes and possible GPU lanes with the latter being wishful thinking.
Most of the PCI lanes are already on the CPU. The PCH lanes are on the south bridge as a way to get some extra lanes. With pcie4, I don't even see the point of PCH lanes anymore.
jeremyshaw
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 12,511
Because there are usually just two slots taking all 20 user lanes from the CPU, regardless if they really need 4 (main M.2 slot) or 16 (main PCIe slot) lanes. Either way, things like Ethernet, second/third M.2 slot, WiFi, etc are all usually added via the southbridge's PCIe lanes. Sometimes extra x1/x4 slots, extra USB 3.x controllers, or TB3 controllers. Every once in a while, actually fast ethernet is added (5GbE or 10GbE) which requires more than one lane, since the controllers are usually PCIe 2.0 or PCIe 3.0.
If you're wondering why aren't all lanes just from the CPU, then I don't really know. Smaller socket? Ease of routing? There are 32 PCIe lanes on die for the Zen 2 client IO die, though only 24 are used in the final product. Same was true of Zen/Zen+ main dies, too. Maybe their Xeon-D competitor uses those lanes for something (probably the dual 10GbE MACs integrated into the I/O...). Possibly also for yields, IP licensing costs, AM4 socket limitations stemming from its origins as a Bulldozer (OEM only with Bristol Ridge) socket, etc.
crazycrave
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,884
B550 has everything I need for 4000 series already and Nvidia's new PCI Express 4.0 support is there . .
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
I expect a little more energy efficient than the X570. With that said I purchased my ASUS X570 WS PRO-ACE + R9 3900X with the idea that I would likely still be using it in 2029.
Cool story and all... But your stream and the topic are completely irrelevant to this thread.
Make another thread about your exploits, sounds interesting.
horrorshow
Lakewood Original
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2007
- Messages
- 9,441
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,823
If the AM5 is true, got a good year + before that happens?
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5000-zen-4-am5-desktop-cpus-ddr5-usb-4-support-2022/
I am in this boat, but figure just wait till the new CPU's are out and then decide what to buy, since i am jumping ship from my i5-8600.
But we know how much new memory comes when it hits,. DDR4 will also go up due to less production..
https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-5000-zen-4-am5-desktop-cpus-ddr5-usb-4-support-2022/
I am in this boat, but figure just wait till the new CPU's are out and then decide what to buy, since i am jumping ship from my i5-8600.
But we know how much new memory comes when it hits,. DDR4 will also go up due to less production..
jeremyshaw
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 12,511
More 2.5GbE+ NICs, especially in mITX boards (none on current X570 mITX).
crazycrave
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,884
I'm just going forget it .
2.5gbe or 10gbe, USB 3.2 Gen 2 headers, drop/lose the fan? I mean, x570 is nice, but b550 tends to have a lot more options for a lot less $. Maybe AMD will finally allow the use of the extra CPU PCIe lanes and have two direct pcie 4.0 x4 nvme slots (aka, don't need to go through chipset). I mean, they have options for o make it better if they chose too. That's the question though, will they
. I can't answer that until we know some details.CEO_OF_CBT
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2020
- Messages
- 212
CEO_OF_CBT
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2020
- Messages
- 212
This from another forum discussing the possible improvements
I'll address this. There will almost certainly be an X670 chipset. There are two reasons behind this. The first comes down to cost. The X570 chipset is derived from the I/O die of the Zen 2 architecture itself and is incredibly expensive to produce. The cost of X570 was higher than that of Z370 and Z390. Intel chipsets are well known for their high costs. It's why in previous generations, Intel boards were always so much more expensive than their AMD counterparts. While exact numbers aren't generally known, Intel chipsets were rumored to be 3x as expensive as their AMD counterparts.
AMD's X570 chipset is extremely costly, power hungry and runs hot. It was not suitable for scaling down the way we'd seen X470 > B450. A B550 version of X570 produced by AMD would likely have been too expensive to make any sense. This is why ASMedia was tapped to design the chipset. It's likely they are working on X670 if the rumors are true. The benefit of X670 would be lower costs, updated VRM designs, reduced power consumption compared to X570, and updated feature sets such as 2.5GbE NICs, etc. as mentioned above.
To give you an idea, the X570 chipset pulls almost 3x the power of X470. It's the reason why they almost all have active cooling on them.
so ASMedia will be able to bring down cost, power draw and heat?...why couldn't AMD have designed that for the X570?...new CPU's almost always bring with them new chipsets so I'm expecting it but B550 boards were able to run a bit more efficiently because they didn't require as many PCIe 4 slots...won't X670 have the same issues?...I recently bought one of the newer X570 boards which came out 12+ months after the initial boards and it already has 2.5GB LAN etc and is one of the best boards in terms of VRM
that being said I hate the chipset fan more in theory rather then because of any noise issue...everything else being equal a mobo without a fan is always better then one with it...one less component to worry about failing down the road
In a word, "no." B550 motherboard efficiency has more to do with updates to VRM designs and being an entirely new ASIC that's purpose built to be a chipset. It's not simply because it doesn't have as many PCIe 4.0 lanes. PCIe 4.0 lanes increase motherboard cost because of requirements for signal integrity increasing PCB complexity. I don't think PCIe 4.0 itself makes a chipset use more power. It didn't seem to be the case on X470 boards which were patched and then repatched to enable and then disable PCIe 4.0 signalling. B550 motherboards also tend to be lower end than their X570 counterparts and have far less integrated hardware. This too brings down power consumption. Most X570 boards are pigs in this regard. They aren't too far off of X399 or X299 motherboards in this area.
X570 is a Zen 2 I/O die that's been modified and added onto in order to create a chipset. It's likely that this was done as a means to create a high end enthusiast chipset, but the approach was a mistake. I think AMD tried to pull the business in house to reap more profits the way Intel does. While AMD has produced chipsets in the past, it's experience in doing so is far less than that of its competitors and companies like ASMedia. AMD's approach simply didn't work as well as they had hoped. In my opinion, given its origins, scaling X570 down or disabling features for segmentation wasn't really beneficial cost wise. In other words, a B550 chipset built on X570 as a foundation wouldn't have brought costs or power consumption down. At least, not enough to make any sense.
ASMedia, while not generally thought of as an ASIC manufacturing powerhouse is actually quite prolific in the market. They design and build a vast array of specialized ASIC's, (voltage controllers and other things) and are likely able to do a better job at this than AMD is. So yes, ASMedia can absolutely create a feature compatible or improved chipset that uses less power and costs less to make than AMD can. They've proven this time and time again. X370 and X470 were theirs too if I am not mistaken. B550 is, and it certainly uses less power. It uses 5-7w, instead of X570's 15w. AMD's approach, while easy from a design perspective wasn't the most cost effective or easiest to manufacture.
CEO_OF_CBT
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2020
- Messages
- 212
It's not just that, but the fact that the b550 chipset does NOT support pcie 4.0. It only has to support the normal pcie 3.0 links to second NVME, second GPU, network card, USB, SATA, etc. X570 needs a full blown pcie 4.0 host controller. This was the big difference why they couldn't just take it and cut it down to work. It is like the difference between 10gbe and 1gbe when 10gbe was new. All the chips require a lot more power to run and you couldn't just make them cheaply. I'm hoping X670 will take what they've learned and be able to reduce the power consumption and prices down a little bit which would leave some room for multigig ethernet, usb gen 2 headers, etc. x470 simply enabled pcie 4.0 lanes to the GPU direct from CPU. It did nothing to change the link speed to the chipset or anything else. The B550 is better than the x470 because the x470 still has pcie 2.0 links from the chipset! B550 has pcie 3.0 links, so if you install a second nvme you can get close to pcie 3.0 x4 speeds depending on how heavily loaded the bus is. With 400 series you could only ever get pcie 2.0 x4 speeds (around 2000MB/s minus some efficiency) which is 1/2 the speed of 3.0 (4000MB/s minus all the other shared traffic and such).