News Ryzen 7 7800X3D Delivers Similar Gaming Performance On X670 And A620 Motherboards

[Admin]

Korean YouTuber compares the Ryzen 7 7800X3D's performance on A620 and X670 motherboards.

Ryzen 7 7800X3D Delivers Similar Gaming Performance On X670 And A620 Motherboards : Read more

 

[hotaru.hino]

For the meantime, gamers who particularly want a Ryzen 7 7800X3D for a gaming rig will be fine with a A620 motherboard

I feel like this advice should be taken with an asterisk. Namely, you're going to work that VRM pretty hard if the boards were only designed to handle 88W PPT processors all day.

I'd say if someone really went this route, they should at least get some heat sinks with thermal tape to put on the VRM components.

 

[thisisaname]

Funny CPU cooler cost twice the price of the motherboards, I would also assume the B650 is more likely to be able to handle the next generation of CPU.

Edit a more cost appropriate cooler may have shown a greater loss of performance?

 

[hotaru251]

you don't want a highend gaming cpu on an extreme budget MB..

you are betetr off gettign a betetr mb, worse cpu & upgrading in future when prices drop.

 

[BillyBuerger]

Newegg has three different ASRock motherboards that all look extremely similar (same design) but with different things cut down to meet different price points.

• ASRock A620M-HDV/M.2 supports 65W CPUs with an obvious cut on the VRMs and only one M.2 SSD slot for $85.
• ASRock A620M-HDV/M.2+ supports 120W CPUs with more VRMs and two M.2 SSD slots for $100.
• ASRock B650M-HDV/M.2 looks to be your normal B650 style motherboard that I assume can handle any AM5 CPUs for $120.

I'm sure there's other details that are slightly different but it's nice to see some pricing options for a more budget system. You can pick something that fits in your budget and has the specs you need instead of having to pay for more crap than you'll ever use. Personally I would go for the middle one for the second SSD slot and pair it with a 7600 (non-X) if I were building system that fits in with what I do with my PCs. No overclocking an I would never expect to upgrade to a higher powered CPU. Possibly a newer AM5 CPU in the future but still in the 65W range. But I usually only upgrade when I feel the need for a whole new system, not just one component.

 

[TechieTwo]

Asrock produced the A620M-HDV/M.2+ mobo specifically to handle 120w CPUs, i.e. so gamers could have a low cost mobo that runs X3D CPUs. It has a higher capacity VRM design.

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

What a misleading title. You don't write "similar performance" when there is a 3%-5% drop in performance.

The idea of combining a $500 CPU with a $100 board with a PCIe3.0 chip lane is idiotic to begin with. The A620 has half the bandwidth of B boards, and you can't even measure that in those tests.

Who spends $500 on a gaming CPU, only to buy an A620 chipset that is targeted at prebuilds you find at Wallmart.

 

[hotaru.hino]

You don't write "similar performance" when there is a 3%-5% drop in performance.

Most people aren't going to really notice a difference in practice.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

That's actually impressive, goes to show the depth of options you get with AM5 now. The whole A620 motherboards aren't good for anything argument is also laid to rest.
All things considered I'd say the sweet spot for MOBOs are the B650 range.

 

[Elusive Ruse]

Most people aren't going to really notice a difference in practice.

3% gaming and 5% synthetic. The X670 was also had an Arctic 420 AIO to cool the CPU while the A620 had a budget air cooler.
But you are right 3% is a draw when it cokes to gaming.

 

[hannibal]

This says a lot how efficient AMDs best gaming CPU is!
Ofcourse most people will go to good b650 just to get features, but there is that budget rout also.

 

[healthy Pro-teen]

What a misleading title. You don't write "similar performance" when there is a 3%-5% drop in performance.

The idea of combining a $500 CPU with a $100 board with a PCIe3.0 chip lane is idiotic to begin with. The A620 has half the bandwidth of B boards, and you can't even measure that in those tests.

Who spends $500 on a gaming CPU, only to buy an A620 chipset that is targeted at prebuilds you find at Wallmart.

I would go R7 7700 and B650M-HDV/M.2 which can handle a 7950X just fine proven by Hardware unboxed. Cheaper, with similar gaming perf to 7800X3D+A620 and much better features and upgrade path.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

Who spends $500 on a gaming CPU, only to buy an A620 chipset that is targeted at prebuilds you find at Wallmart.

Well, not very many people. It's the reverse, and that's the point. Those who start on a budget board, can pop in a new CPU, and on they go. In gaming, the 2-5fps is not noticeable, and although it's 3-5% in CB23, that's similar in my book.

 

[CelicaGT]

I don't give a crap about 3% to 5% now. I give a crap in five or six years when I'm upgrading to my next GPU. I'd never pair a high end CPU with a low end motherboard for the same reason. I didn't buy anything I have now for flat out performance worrying about singular percentage points at ridiculous framerates no one would play at. I did purchase it on the premise it -could- do that, as it is an indicator of its potential longevity as a gaming platform. A low end motherboard with limited bus speeds and IO is going to become a hindrance loooong before that high end CPU will, and THAT is why I recommend not doing it.

 

[King_V]

What a misleading title. You don't write "similar performance" when there is a 3%-5% drop in performance.

The idea of combining a $500 CPU with a $100 board with a PCIe3.0 chip lane is idiotic to begin with. The A620 has half the bandwidth of B boards, and you can't even measure that in those tests.

Who spends $500 on a gaming CPU, only to buy an A620 chipset that is targeted at prebuilds you find at Wallmart.

Seriously?? It says "similar gaming performance"

Of the average FPS of the games tested:

Shadow of the Tomb Raider	-2.7%
Forza Horizon 5	-1.0%
Cyberpunk 2077	0.0%
Total War: Three Kingdoms	+4.0%

So, no, not at all misleading. Basically a dead-heat. The only thing misleading here is your false assertion that the title is misleading.

 

[King_V]

5% less performance is not "a dead heat"

maybe stop lying

The VideoCardz article was honest, and it put the difference right in the title.

Tomshardware's title on the other hand, is misleading/dishonest, a 5% drop in performance is not "similar".

False assertion? What are you talking about?

I pointed out that these differences need to be in the title. Unlike other outlets that correctly pointed out the difference, the Tomshardware title is misleading by claiming the performance is "similar" when it is clearly not.

I am 100% correct for pointing this out.

Moving the goalposts, are we? Now the title was supposed to match your expectations based on OTHER articles, which you didn't mention earlier? Or were we supposed to read your mind.

You misquoted the title, and you DIDN'T do the math from the numbers in this article.

 

[hotaru.hino]

5% less performance is not "a dead heat"

maybe stop lying

The VideoCardz article was honest, and it put the difference right in the title.

Tomshardware's title on the other hand, is misleading/dishonest, a 5% drop in performance is not "similar".

False assertion? What are you talking about?

I pointed out that these differences need to be in the title. Unlike other outlets that correctly pointed out the difference, the Tomshardware title is misleading by claiming the performance is "similar" when it is clearly not.

I am 100% correct for pointing this out.

The only way to prove your assertion is to gather a random sample of people and present them with the two systems running in a blind test and ask them which is the faster system. If a vast majority of people can't tell, then it's "similar."

 

[TerryLaze]

The only way to prove your assertion is to gather a random sample of people and present them with the two systems running in a blind test and ask them which is the faster system. If a vast majority of people can't tell, then it's "similar."

No, that would prove noticeable and unnoticeable, which is a much bigger difference than similar, 5% can be similar for someone and too much of a difference for someone else.

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

For once I actually agree with TerryLaze. With that said, the 5% is the outer lying effect, with 3% being margin of error. For me, this is similar.

Also worth noting in a gaming sense, that 5% often adds up to 1,2, or 3 FPS in game. Which is not noticeable. Similar? Yes, again it's similar.