News AMD's AM5 Platform Launches With Only DDR5 Support for Ryzen 7000, Dual-Chipset Design

[InvalidError]

I love the "ddr5 cost too much at 256$", says the gamers playing on their 2000$+ covid priced GPU...

$246 for DDR5 is too much when it performs between 5% worse to 10% better than a $100 kit of DDR4.

Nobody recommends paying 100% more for GPUs that are only 10% faster either. Some people with money burning holes through their pockets will buy them regardless and that's about it.

 

[VTXcnME]

This is why I was never interesting in bleeding edge tech. I'll be upgrading my Zen+ with a Zen 3 CPU and will soldier on until at least the 2nd generation of AM5.

100% agree. I'm still waiting to finish my replacement build going from 1800X/RX580 GPU to the Ryzen 5800/RTX3000 series GPU. Mostly because GPU prices are still stupidly expensive. It's getting better though. I'm hoping when 4000 series GPU's come out, they'll drive previous gen down again. We'll see. Either way, I'm not really out much waiting. When I was younger I was all about the newest/fastest tech... at whatever expense. Now? It's not that critical, there'll always be someone faster.

If what I've read online (and here) is true regarding speeds of DDR5 vs DDR4 memory.... AMD might be throwing away any inroads they've made against intel over the last few years.

 

[gruffi]

Even low-end DDR5 currently costs about twice as much as decent DDR4 while often causing worse performance due to increased latencies.

Performance gains from faster (and far more expensive) DDR5 are slim to none in most cases, which is a horrible proposition for performance per dollar.

If you are a gamer then DDR5-4800 practically offers the same performance as DDR4-3200. While DDR5-6000+ can offer some significant gains in some titles. For your daily work you won't notice a difference to DDR4, even with "bad" DDR5. So, claiming DDR5 "often causing worse performance" is highly exaggerated and misleading. That's not really the case.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

My main issue with the Chiplet strategy is that I was "hoping" that the B650 Single Chiplet was going to be equivalent to X570 in Connectivity.

Basically 1x B650 = 1x X570:

And X670 would just be double the connectivity options.

And hopefully they figure out how to stop wasting 1x SATA 6Gbps per PCIe lane.

1x PCIe Gen4 link should be worth 3x SATA 6Gbps ports with some bandwidth room to spare.

Or find a way to have the SATA co-exist with the PCIe ports.

Or match Intel's Z690 in total PCIe lane connectivity options.
Z690 gives you 16x PCIe 4.0 lanes & 12x PCIe 3.0 lanes.
If you convert the PCIe 3.0 lanes -> 4.0 lanes, you'll get 6x lanes worth of bandwith.

Let's say you lop off 2x of those PCIe 4.0 lanes and dedicate them to 8x SATA 6 Gbps ports

Then you could have 20x PCIe 4.0 lanes that are flexibly assigned & 8x SATA 6 Gbps ports for 4x PCIe Gen 4.0 or 2x PCIe Gen 5.0 connection to the cIOD.

Then double that with X670 and you'd have the ultimate connectivity machine =D

 

[spongiemaster]

I love the "ddr5 cost too much at 256$", says the gamers playing on their 2000$+ covid priced GPU...

The only reason people were paying that much for GPU's is because you can mine with it and make some if not all the money back. You can't mine with memory. The cost is the cost.

 

[InvalidError]

If you are a gamer then DDR5-4800 practically offers the same performance as DDR4-3200.

For more than double the cost, which is horrible value.

While DDR5-6000+ can offer some significant gains in some titles.

For 4-5X the cost, which is even worse value.

Can you name any component for which any sane person would recommend spending 100+% more for ~0% net performance gain (win some, lose about as many) or 300+% for 10-15% extra performance in some specific games and tasks while still barely breaking even in many others? Doesn't make much sense unless your livelihood depends on those specific things that DDR5 is significantly better at.

For the rest of people, the closest thing to affordable DDR5 currently available is often worse than DDR4 that costs half as much.

 

[spongiemaster]

For more than double the cost, which is horrible value.


For 4-5X the cost, which is even worse value.

Average improvement over 40 games doesn't matter if you only play 4 or 5 which do see big gains. Also, anyone buying DDR5 is doing so for a completely new build. Going with DDR5 does not increase the total system cost by 4 or 5x.

 

[hannibal]

DDR5 mainly benefit is some productivity tasks... So trying to find game benefits is... well not so usefull. There are some gains, but mainly the benefits are in productivity tasks.

 

[InvalidError]

Also, anyone buying DDR5 is doing so for a completely new build.

Even if you do completely new builds, it still doesn't make much sense to drop major money on minor performance. The $500 extra you spend on ultra-high-end DDR5 that still barely manages to consistently outperforms bargain basement DDR4 would be much better spent on a pest of other things unless you are already using the best-of-the-best of everything else.

 

[jkflipflop98]

I just put 32 gigs of DDR5 5200 in my system and it wasn't that expensive.

 

[thisisaname]

If it comes out in around August, will the price and availability of the Mobo/CPU and Memory be good in say January 2023?

 

[InvalidError]

If it comes out in around August, will the price and availability of the Mobo/CPU and Memory be good in say January 2023?

If you are looking for something close to price parity, that typically takes about two years from launch which would land in late 2023.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I was hoping for MoBo PCH parity with Intel's Z-series chipset and Z690.

Intel did a good job on the feature set for the Z690 and I was hoping that AMD would surpass that with AM5.

 

[ddcservices]

I find it somewhat funny how people are trying to translate performance of DDR5 on Zen4 based Ryzen with Intel, because Intel was ahead in previous generations. If you have a CPU that supports multiple RAM types, then there has to be connectivity between the memory controller and the rest of the CPU that is generalized, and that may eliminate some of the benefits of DDR5 in the first place, because it's not just about speed.

Computex starts on May 24th, so we won't have long until we get more solid information from AMD about all this stuff, and it will eliminate a lot of the guessing that is going on. PCIe 5.0 support will also be somewhat interesting in this first generation, and we will find out from AMD what is going into the CPU and chipsets.

 

[thisisaname]

If you are looking for something close to price parity, that typically takes about two years from launch which would land in late 2023.

While it will not be at parity how much over parity do you think it will be?

 

[InvalidError]

While it will not be at parity how much over parity do you think it will be?

Price parity will happen sooner or later: when memory manufacturers wind down DDR4 production, DDR4 prices will rise and pass DDR5.

As for how low DDR5 prices are going to come, DDR5 chips are fundamentally the same as all other DRAM standards before it, so there is next to no cost difference there. DDR5 should bottom out at similar prices to DDR4, except for an extra ~$7 for the on-DIMM VRM and command buffer chip.

 

[Wolverine2349]

DDR5 latency is high and seems kind of meh in performance. DDR4 is better right now. And you cannot even run Alder Lake in Gear 1 with DDR5 which hurts.

I like that Intel gives a choice for both and DDR4 is just as good if not better on Alder Lake right now.

I know AMD CPUs infinity fabric being in sync with RAM speed is extremely important for performance more so than Intel. Will Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 be able to run Infinity fabric at 2400MHz or faster which will be needed for minimum spec DDR5 4800MHz (2400MHz non DDR rate). Given Zen 3 is lucky to hit 2000MHz.

I imagine 2400MHz will be doable, but it will probably stop there and buying anything higher than DDR5-4800 will be useless for Ryzen 7000?? Otherwise they would have to use DDR4 or change architecture. I hear Zen 4 is basically make improvements to Zen 3 and add to them where as Zn 5 is going to be a bigger design change.

 

[Wolverine2349]

I find it amusing the tables have turned in this regard. Intel's offering a DDR4 upgrade path to LGA 1700 now and AMD isn't with AM5. And when DDR3 was becoming a thing, AMD boasted you could have a DDR2 upgrade path to their new parts.

In a way yes. Like how AMD used to be more consumer friendly and it was Intel who tried and ripped people off because they had no competition

Now that AMD was on top for just a little bit, they are becoming greedy and offering less upgrade paths and forcing new mobos and such.

We will see with Intel what they continue to do with future CPU releases and such.

Interesting now is there is competition between both.

Though I wonder if because Intel is much bigger and has more resources they could afford to offer DDR4 for Alder Lake where AMD does not want to expend resources for DDR4 support for Zen 4??

Its in both Intel and AMD's best interest to innovate and offer best compatibility and competitive pricing down the road as both now have great products and competition is great which benefits all of us.

 

[InvalidError]

I know AMD CPUs infinity fabric being in sync with RAM speed is extremely important for performance more so than Intel. Will Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 be able to run Infinity fabric at 2400MHz or faster which will be needed for minimum spec DDR5 4800MHz (2400MHz non DDR rate). Given Zen 3 is lucky to hit 2000MHz.

You don't have to run IF : DRAM at 2:1, it could run at 3:1 too for 5400+MT/s. Another option would be running low-latency DDR5-4400 when decently priced DIMMs become available and run IF at 2200MHz, shouldn't be far-fetched at 5nm and a fresh new CPU substrate+socket design made specifically for this with hindsight from Zen 2+3..

 

[Wolverine2349]

You don't have to run IF : DRAM at 2:1, it could run at 3:1 too for 5400+MT/s. Another option would be running low-latency DDR5-4400 when decently priced DIMMs become available and run IF at 2200MHz, shouldn't be far-fetched at 5nm and a fresh new CPU substrate+socket design made specifically for this with hindsight from Zen 2+3..

You do not have to, but isn't there a significant performance penalty if you do not? Even on Intel I think there is, but especially on AMD Ryzen isn't 1:1 important for optimal performance?

 

[-Fran-]

You do not have to, but isn't there a significant performance penalty if you do not? Even on Intel I think there is, but especially on AMD Ryzen isn't 1:1 important for optimal performance?

What matters is the IF speed, so as long as it is not slow, it doesn't matter much it's not 1:1 with the RAM speeds. I haven't personally tested this, as I run 1:1 on my two PCs, but I've talked to people has different ratios, putting the priority on the IF speed and there's only a small penalty compared to 1:1 kits on some applications, but you get way more throughput for the RAM.

Regards.

 

[KananX]

Now that AMD was on top for just a little bit, they are becoming greedy and offering less upgrade paths and forcing new mobos and such.

That’s nonsense. It’s 100% a technical decision to omit DDR4, it has to do with size limitations as was written by the author or some guy here, as Intel is on their own node and monolithic and AMD will use cutting edge 5nm they can’t afford to waste space on a outdated memory spec that isn’t really important once ddr5 prices come down.

Also X370 etc was just enabled for Ryzen 5000 so your comment barely makes any sense. We will also see how AM5 will be with compatibility through the generations, we don’t know it yet, but Lisa Su said it will be a long term platform.

 

[Wolverine2349]

That’s nonsense. It’s 100% a technical decision to omit DDR4, it has to do with size limitations as was written by the author or some guy here, as Intel is on their own node and monolithic and AMD will use cutting edge 5nm they can’t afford to waste space on a outdated memory spec that isn’t really important once ddr5 prices come down.

Also X370 etc was just enabled for Ryzen 5000 so your comment barely makes any sense. We will also see how AM5 will be with compatibility through the generations, we don’t know it yet, but Lisa Su said it will be a long term platform.

Yeah probably just quoting what so any say about Intel all these years when they were on top from Core 2 Duo in July 2006 all the way until July 2019 with Zen 2 release.

DO you think Intel was greedy forcing changes to new sockets and motherboards, or were their technical reasons for it despite them being way ahead of AMD. Like there are technical reasons for AMD requiring DDR5 for Zen 4??

 

[-Fran-]

Yeah probably just quoting what so any say about Intel all these years when they were on top from Core 2 Duo in July 2006 all the way until July 2019 with Zen 2 release.

DO you think Intel was greedy forcing changes to new sockets and motherboards, or were their technical reasons for it despite them being way ahead of AMD. Like there are technical reasons for AMD requiring DDR5 for Zen 4??

Intel did not need to swap a lot of chipsets and socket generations every other year; just look at the baffling Z390 generation and the stupid dumb reasons behind it. All of the sockets using DDR3 and then DDR4 could have had 3 or 4 CPU generations with minimal to no drop in functionality or features. Intel took the approach of "small increments" at the expense of the consumers buying into the new platforms and AMD just took the "stick to one socket for a long time" (this time around) and they'll keep doing that for AM5, so deciding to stick with only DDR5 would pay off in the long run (as in "save money"). Technically speaking, AMD went from DDR3 with the Dozer family directly to DDR4 and now doing the same for Zen4, but will keep subsequent Zen releases in AM5 with the same-ish DDR5 support. The upfront cost is going to be higher, but you'll save money down the road with CPU swaps and even RAM swaps without changing the motherboard. Just look at the immediate history of AM4 and just compare it to the equivalent Intel generations. Sure, fanbois and apologists will say "BUT MUH NEW FEATOORS", so compare the "new vs old" per jump of chipset. With Z690 you can use PCIe5 on GPUs and splitting it on PCIe cards for NVMe PCIe5 support, which is kind of funny. Everything else runs of PCIe4 and no one realices or is missing the fine print on purpose.

Both AMD and Intel are greedy, but they do things differently and you as a consumer need to stop and think which one you dislike less or just like more.

Regards.

 

[Wolverine2349]

Intel did not need to swap a lot of chipsets and socket generations every other year; just look at the baffling Z390 generation and the stupid dumb reasons behind it. All of the sockets using DDR3 and then DDR4 could have had 3 or 4 CPU generations with minimal to no drop in functionality or features. Intel took the approach of "small increments" at the expense of the consumers buying into the new platforms and AMD just took the "stick to one socket for a long time" (this time around) and they'll keep doing that for AM5, so deciding to stick with only DDR5 would pay off in the long run (as in "save money"). Technically speaking, AMD went from DDR3 with the Dozer family directly to DDR4 and now doing the same for Zen4, but will keep subsequent Zen releases in AM5 with the same-ish DDR5 support. The upfront cost is going to be higher, but you'll save money down the road with CPU swaps and even RAM swaps without changing the motherboard. Just look at the immediate history of AM4 and just compare it to the equivalent Intel generations. Sure, fanbois and apologists will say "BUT MUH NEW FEATOORS", so compare the "new vs old" per jump of chipset. With Z690 you can use PCIe5 on GPUs and splitting it on PCIe cards for NVMe PCIe5 support, which is kind of funny. Everything else runs of PCIe4 and no one realizes or is missing the fine print on purpose.

Both AMD and Intel are greedy, but they do things differently and you as a consumer need to stop and think which one you dislike less or just like more.

Regards.

If both Intel and AMD are greedy, why is it that AMD kept same socket for whole Zen to Zen 3 generation? Where as Intel changes them.

Are there other ways AMD is greedy where Intel is by requiring socket changes so often.

Though to be fair, AMD even though socket stayed the same, its just as much f a problem if the chipset needs to be changed for new CPUs which happened at times. Though to be fair some micro code updates AMD has allowed older chipsets to support Zen 3 going back to X470 or even X370 I think but not sure how reliable it is?? I mean even Intel stuck on LGA 775 for a long while going from the first Pentium 4 Prescott in Spring 2004 all the way to the best Core 2 Quads released in Spring 2008. Though a new chipset and board were required when Core 2 Duo hit in most cases.