News Report: AMD B550 Motherboards Confusingly Restart AGESA Version Count

[Admin]

The AGESA version name for the upcoming B550 motherboards may leave you scratching your head.

Report: AMD B550 Motherboards Confusingly Restart AGESA Version Count : Read more

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

I understand major version updates usually mean something big has changed ... but it seems a bit ludicrous to call this AGESA v2 1.0.0.0 instead of just naming it AGESA 2.0.0.0 -- or 1.0.1.0, or 1.0.2.0, or any number of potential options. Having AGESA 1.0.0.0 from the original Zen launch, and now AGESA v2 1.0.0.0 with B550 launch, is not at all a sensible solution IMO.

 

[poodie13]

I disagree. Version AGESA 2.0.0.0 would indicate it is a newer version of AGESA 1.0.0.5
The V2 provides a hint that it might not be compatible. But AGESA rev2-1.0.0.0 might be less ambiguous?

 

[InvalidError]

I understand major version updates usually mean something big has changed ... but it seems a bit ludicrous to call this AGESA v2 1.0.0.0 instead of just naming it AGESA 2.0.0.0 -- or 1.0.1.0, or 1.0.2.0, or any number of potential options.

One of the reasons AMD cited for lack of backwards compatibility is structural changes in BIOS layout for Zen 3 and beyond. If you start over from a mostly clean slate, it makes sense to upgrade the product name "(AGESA MkII) and reset version numbering.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

One of the reasons AMD cited for lack of backwards compatibility is structural changes in BIOS layout for Zen 3 and beyond. If you start over from a mostly clean slate, it makes sense to upgrade the product name "(AGESA MkII) and reset version numbering.

But the same AGESA still gets used on all the boards that get updated with a new BIOS, right? I fail to see how "AGESA 2.x" doesn't convey this just as well as "AGESA v2 1.x" It's redundant versioning codes. Imagine if Microsoft released Windows v2 10 -- except the "10" technically isn't a version, so maybe Windows 10 v2.

AGESA v2 1.0.0.0 literally reads as "AGESA version 2 version 1 point 0 point 0 point 0." Why go whole hog and call it "AGESA version 2 release 1 subversion 0 minor version 0 patch 0?" But really, it's AGESA release 2, version 1.0.0.0 -- and v2 doesn't convey that.

 

[InvalidError]

I fail to see how "AGESA 2.x" doesn't convey this just as well as "AGESA v2 1.x"

For the most part, this is all internal version numbering and ultimately does not matter to end-users who will be installing BIOS F50 or whatever the board-specific BIOS version numbering scheme is based on board-specific BIOS versions in the board-specific CPU support tables, not AGESA (or whatever else AMD could have renamed it to if it wanted) versions.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

For the most part, this is all internal version numbering and ultimately does not matter to end-users who will be installing BIOS F50 or whatever the board-specific BIOS version numbering scheme is based on board-specific BIOS versions in the board-specific CPU support tables, not AGESA (or whatever else AMD could have renamed it to if it wanted) versions.

True, though for enthusiasts who care about such things, it's unnecessarily messy. Hopefully (and I fully expect someone will disappoint me), the motherboard vendors clearly mark what AGESA revisions are being used in all BIOS releases.