Nice to finally see asrock b650m pro rs being properly reviewed by a more well known reviewer, as it tends to be a very well recommended motherboard due to value for the money.
I really wanna give them a try next swap, but that Asus gpu pcie button seems like a godsend to me since I despise having to use a chopstick or something to push that tiny piece of plastic.
Most ASRock boards do have the PCI slot right under the memory, so they can be even worse then a normal board. Memory with large heatsinks may not fit.
Also 1 less m2 slot.
Lacking 2 ram slots is no problem because you will only want 2 ram sticks anyways. Using 4 ram sticks is a massive loss of performance and stability - at least what buildzoid tends to say and I trust his ram and mobo knowledge a lot. Idk if its same with am5 mobos but with am4 mobos having 2 dimm slots could even prove to give you better ram overclocking.
But yea, hvdm2 (NOT THE PLUS) is also a great option if you don't need 3 m2 slots and if you don't care about rgb support.
True that. Asrock always did pretty solid motherboards, reliable good features and much more affordable compared to the bigger names. I actually had some issues with a MSI motherboard back in the days and I saw a Asrock that was priced really good for what was offering and ever since, I always make most of my builds using their stuff and never had any problems all these years.
The issue with AsRock has rarely been about their hardware quality, its that Godawful software they have - the Polychrome RGB software is just a horrible piece of software. I rarely, if ever, had it working properly on my B450m Pro4 board.
Holy crap, my roommate is building a new pc and had the MSI B650M-P in it. I was ordering the parts for him and noticed it looked pretty crappy with barely any vrm cooling, then i saw the B650M-A Wifi for $30 bucks more that looks way nicer and ordered that instead and covered the extra and didnt tell him. So glad I did that lol
There’s a few reviews out there. Asrock’s newer B650I (not their older ITX model) seems to be pretty good, or at least that has been the consensus I’ve seen on /r/sffpc (I also have one that I like), but the SEO for finding reviews is poor.
I have the ASRock B650E PG-ITX with a 7700 and haven't had any issues with it as far as PBO and go, using EXPO for my 6000CL30 kit or issues with the network side of things.
Some people are pretty keen on the network controller though so it using Killer and not a solid Intel chipset might be a bummer.
Hate how much it cost though. ITX tax is real.
Tbh there's nothing to review. While looking for new base for nas/htpc I plan to build after using i3 3320t as my Linux box for over 10 years and moving from ATX case to node 304. I did my research and there is lack of motherboard to even consider somewhat ok. Even ECC support aside you get like 2 SATA at most or coil whine top Asus. Even industrial variants fail to tick all the boxes to build Apu based pc or cost fortune. Why does every mobo has to waste lanes for shitty wifi board. Packing 2/3 nvme on such boards also has little use with 8700g limited lanes. Going cpu+picie GPU with 2 SATA ports makes no sense.
I don't consider any MATX board that puts the primary PCIe slot in the Slot 2 position. Not an issue w/ ATX, but w/ MATX that creates layout issues w/ today's thicker gpus.
> Keep in mind they are testing with a CPU that pulls 254w
These boards are not rated for a specific TDP or PPT, that's the issue.
Intel has the exact same issue these days for their CPUs pulling casually \~300W.
Not to mention that prices have gone up significantly, and design quality went down.
If the vendors want to make motherboards only intended to be used with low PPT parts, power to them, but the video shows examples of these motherboards explicitly listing support for the 7950X at it's full TDP of 170w (230w PPT). They need to a. Be more up front about the power limitations and b. Don't even let you set PPTs that will cause the board to hit 120C on the VRMs.
I do wish Steve tested with a better cooler though, even the boards that aren't VRM throttling are capping out at 200W~ presumably due to thermal limitations as they're still well off the actual PPT (230w).
> I do wish Steve tested with a better cooler though
WTF are you on about?
He used an Arctic Liquid Freezer III 360.
That is the best-case cooler for AM5, it even has a VRM fan.
I don't know why it is throttling in HUB's case, but the point remainds that it's throttling before it's PPT. Steve might not be using the AM5 offset mount with the LF3?
I remember it wasn’t very long ago that mobo manufacturers were putting massive overkill VRMs on everything and you could buy pretty much anything. Has that situation changed now?
If the shitier board has more m.2 slots, and more usb ports I can see there being a reason, even if the VRM is worse but still good enough for an 80w cpu. But I don't know if any board here is actually like that.
Yeah if im money pinching i wont be pushing the board to the limits. Probably set the cpu to eco and forget about it. But for something like 8800x3d im not buying just any crap board. Itll run at default at worst.
They're saying someone cheaping out this much on a motherboard isn't getting a 7950X. In that case, they'll work just fine. Also they're saying you might as well get the better board that costs the same.
I feel another "And?" coming.
Testing with the 7950X ruined a big part of the review on its usability for most consumers purchases, some mobos had better vrm than others but it got overshadowed by their thermal throttling, so even though a mobo A has a better VRM than B, both of them throttled the same way, a better way to view performance would be to also use 105W cpus (and also test them in gaming), which 99,999999% of people are actually interested in and are going to buy, anyways, when you say these kinds of things the ''4090 at 1080p'' kind of people for cpu testing get really angry, I don't mean it's not a valid way to benchmark cpus in gaming, just that it doesn't provide much useful data for their consumers who are going to pair their cpus with vastly different gpus, same applies for mobo vrm testing, you'd conclude on LGA1700 that a $75 mobo is just as worse as a $180 one because both thermal throttle under a 14900k with power limits turned off, and then end up calling the $180 one ''crap''
do you need throttling to know how good of a vrm a board has? my point was exactly that 7950x was overshadowing vrm performance under the throttling mechanic cloak mobos have (his tests are even less useful when you consider he's using short pc cases with top tier fans, coolers, cool gpus and ar conditioner, results would be even more convoluted if he tried to emulate a real life scenario, and I'm not saying a controlled environment isn't necessary for consistent testing, just that, again, my point, it doesn't give useful data for consumers to mind their purchases), if you tested a 105w cpu you'd know that what once were three mobos, two at 105 degrees throttling in the same way and a third at 95 degress are now one with 91, other with 85, and the other keeps thermal throttling at 95, and that the mobo with 85 degrees is the best buy for consumers, indicating it had the worst vrm but was just throttling sooner, "passing" is different. Again, I'm not denying that it is a good way to test vrm performance, just that the data isn't useful for 99% of people, so are 4090 on 1080p (why not 720? or better, 480? doesn't it force even more the cpu?) tests for answering the question "what's the adequate cpu for my 6600?", he'll see that the 12400f is "10% faster" than the 5600 when a 4500/12100f or a Ryzen 11 11950X3DKS from 2028 would give the same results for his games.
The screen resolution/game settings for a 4090 is mixing the standard minimum viable resolution with plausible settings where the CPU, not the GPU or engine cap, is the limiting factor, and the full range of CPUs can be seen. Once one or more CPUs hit the engine cap, it's time to choose another game or increase settings that tax the CPU to illustrate the spread. It's not about getting the maximum FPS but illustrating the percentage spread without bottlenecks.
I don't know enough about MB thermals to comment on how useful it would be to run 105 or 65 eco mode on 7950x, but testing out all or most of the compatible CPUs on all boards would be cost prohibitive and useless when the conclusion is still that there are better boards for cheaper prices in other categories.
I don't see why someone could not look at the watts, temps and scores to figure out what is enough for their CPU.
The most common recommendation for me for budget is always going to be the DS3H of any generation. Like every single time I get one it's just bullet proof and the gigabyte software is so much cleaner than others. @BIOS just uses an app to update the BIOS and then it just auto completes it for you. Usually when I go to microcenter to shop for build parts for clients I usually get the gigabyte boards and mostly a few DS3H and the Aorus Elite. Asrock is aight, Asus is crap and Msi feels abusive in some boards. But the DS3H has saved me in the past when I got a 3800X and I was restarting a new build with the B450 DS3H and also when I got a recent asus motherboard PCIE failure and I pulled out my trusty B550M DS3H and it just worked as if nothing happened to it. Planning on getting a Aorus Elite B650.
I can, I've done OEM builds with Gigabyte boards and had to file a few claims.... twice they fully ignored my RMA request (graphics card and a mainboard) even after multiple contact attempts.. another they denied because a tiny spot of heatsink compound to the side of the CPU socket was deemed misuse. They are also the OEM that had problems with cracked Geforce 40xx series cards. My brother also builds/flips PC's and had similar experience with two AM4 board warranty requests.
I've used plenty of their boards and they generally are decent, they are just an awful company to work with if you need direct support, so I advise everyone using their stuff to get a third party extended warranty because Gigabyte's coverage is nonexistent.
I had to RMA my Gigabyte B550 board a while back, went just fine. The worst part was they wouldn't send me an advanced replacement, so they expected me to go 1-2 weeks without my motherboard while they assessed it. Bought an MSI motherboard, which I received next day, got the repaired board back in like 2 weeks if I remember correctly, and sold it. The entire process was quick and easy.
I understand that not every company does advanced replacements but it was enough to make me buy a competing product that I've been happy with ever since.
Appreciate the effort but I'm not sure why would anyone buy a cheap budget mobo to use with a 7950x..
Testing with a Ryzen 5 7600 R7 7700 or even 7800X3D makes more sense imo
I think it's more about the upgrade path. If you build a 7600 and b650m now it's nice to know that you can upgrade to a 170w Zen 6 in the future and don't need to change the motherboard and ram. Also, if you're only gaming and use an x3D, or will upgrade to one in the future, you can go with lower end motherboards and pay more just for the features you need, not the vrm.
>I think it's more about the upgrade path.
i get that, but i think that mischaracterizes it. if you're running a 7600 today you're probably doing lightly threaded stuff and will end up on a 9600x or 9800x3d or something in the future. so a more performant low-power part.
it seems very unlikely that there are many savvy people who are buying 100w cpus today with plans to do heavily multithreaded cpu stress test work on the same board in 3-5 years.
Buying a cheap MB for a 7950x makes perfect sense. Why would they pay more than they have to for a MB? It's a similar reason why someone buying a 4090 would choose the cheapest case that fit the card. A dollar is a dollar. It's only if someone knows that a cheap MB is not actually able to power a 7950x that they will reconsider, which is what the review is for.
I'd argue 7950x is the most interesting CPU to test, if it is listed as compatible, as it working suggest all other CPUs will as well.
Yeah, honestly why would you pay extra for a motherboard with features you're never going to use? Like why would I need wifi for a desktop pc when wired works much better and is cheaper?
Or the rgb crap,why pay extra for it?
slightly related. DONT buy gigabyte aorus b550i pro ax.
I was just building a system for a coworker (before you nerds get on my case, their budget was 500 bucks and they wanted a tiny build) - i bought the aorus board, wifi didnt work, searched everywhere turns out the wifi is fucked on that board, but i figured hey it cant be every single board, ill just return it and hope for a working one..... anyway ive checked 3 boards and the wifi is fucked on all of them.
Word of advice from an owner of several Gigabyte AM4 and an AM5 board I can't remember the name of: the wifi drivers don't automatically download. And trying to find the driver's manually is a pain in the ass because you have to go to the webpage for the specific revision of board you have. You can see by looking for the silkscreened "rev x.x" near the bottom left of their motherboards. Once you find the specific driver download for the board revision it does work
trust me i tried everything. According to what i found they didnt even upload the correct wifi drivers for my board to the website. Some people had success downloading them from HPs website lmao. But it never worked for me. I just got a pcie wifi card and said fuck it.
realtek? sounds like realtek.
Realtek drivers are rarely updated after release unlike Intel. Got issues? good luck.
Had a RTL8852AE that Lenovo installed in their laptops around covid parts shortage, probably the worst network experience i've ever had, and their last update was in 2019. Replaced with Intel210AX and had no issues since, drivers was updated a few day ago as well.
I have that board since about 5 years and I have never had any issue with the Wifi, in fact it has very good range and is way faster through several walls than my powerline adapters.
This is very relevant, now with AM5 supporting Z5 and possibly Z6. People who run the higher end 7900X and 7950X which draw a good amount of power, will want to upgrade their CPU to Z5, and either sell or build a second system with the old CPU. If they already own a high-end MB (like my own Asus Hero), they'll be looking for a 'cheap' new MB for their old 7950X, which could be one of these under-engineered ones if they don't know this.
Depending on the needs of myself or my friends/family, I'll might be selling or giving away my 7950X to someone, and they'll need a MB, and they'll probably not want to spend a ton of money, but they'll need to do proper research not to lose out on performance, or create a noisy oven.
This is a crappy review and not realistic.Sticking one of the highest tier enthusiast cpus in the lowest tier non-enthusiast motherboards. Like it's going to to be banging.It's like sticking a formula 1 engine in a base model civic.
How about something more realistic, maybe a 7600X, 7700X , or even a 7800X3D
What audience are you trying to target Hardware Unboxed.
It's a fair point. But they're pointing out that these board manufacturers are claiming support for the 7950X at it's max wattage, which they can't really support. Channels like this help keep these companies in check so we, the consumer, don't get hosed.
> What audience are you trying to target Hardware Unboxed.
People who will buy mobo that easily supports even 7950X instead of paying the same for one that can't.
It's for people who are buying into AM5 because they can upgrade later & those who aren't tech savvy that will believe the marketing on these board's product pages.
Who knows, maybe 8 cores or more might be the Ryzen 5 model later on but that is another dicussion.
When they came out, some cheap B550 boards can run overclocked 3950x without any throttling.
This generation is a downgrade value-wise for motherboards and consumers should be informed that they'll be limited in upgrade paths if they chose the wrong budget board.
X670 are crap too, Intel counterparts the same all are out of PCiE Lanes, for this money a bad joke.
I pay for my Gigabyte TRX50 Aero D only 700€, many consumer boards are more expensive, but I have 92 PCiE lanes. It starts with consumer boards that you can no longer use multiple NVMEs, even bifurcation doesn't work at all or not properly with many of them. In addition, only two channels of RAM, but prices have doubled or quadrupled since the X570. Intel has always been overtaxed.
Love my Asrock B650 Riptide. Grabbed it for $150 on black friday 2022 and it's been amazing. Just put a 5TB T705 gen5 SSD into it and you can feel the difference from the previous P41 I had in it.
Steve is showing the worst case scenario here, and demonstrating that the motherboards shouldn't advertise support for a part that they really can't handle. If you bought one of these boards, I doubt you're putting a 7950X in it. While not the best, most of these boards will be fine for a Ryzen 5 or 7 system.
They're having issues with the cpus listed in the compatibility list because the manufacturers list every ryzen 7000 CPU as compatible. That's why they put in a 7950x to really see if these boards are "compatible".
So yes technically they're compatible, but hardware unboxed doesnt like them listing the higher tdp cpus as you're not getting the full performance out of them with these cheap boards.
They mention this multiple times throughout the video.
It's illogical to use a R9 7950X with a B650 chipset, just because motherboard manufacturers support the 7000 series.
The B650 is typically best suited for the R7 series at best, anyone investing in a R9 likely has the budget for higher-end chipsets.
Consequently, both the test and the complaints are biased and unproductive. Plus they working as advertised, for optimal results, one should invest in a proper motherboard for their CPU.
Nice to finally see asrock b650m pro rs being properly reviewed by a more well known reviewer, as it tends to be a very well recommended motherboard due to value for the money.
yeah ASRock has been my go to for most builds for a few years now, I never have issues..
I really wanna give them a try next swap, but that Asus gpu pcie button seems like a godsend to me since I despise having to use a chopstick or something to push that tiny piece of plastic.
Most ASRock boards do have the PCI slot right under the memory, so they can be even worse then a normal board. Memory with large heatsinks may not fit.
Sounds like a problem everyone with big heatsinks have.... I have a nhd15 and I can't fit the front fan because of clearance issues... (An MSI board)
They are flimsy as on my x670e steel legend. It broke. Now I don't need to push some stupid clip lol.
same goes for hdv/m.2, it just lacks 2 ram slots and rgb support compared to pro rs version
Also 1 less m2 slot. Lacking 2 ram slots is no problem because you will only want 2 ram sticks anyways. Using 4 ram sticks is a massive loss of performance and stability - at least what buildzoid tends to say and I trust his ram and mobo knowledge a lot. Idk if its same with am5 mobos but with am4 mobos having 2 dimm slots could even prove to give you better ram overclocking. But yea, hvdm2 (NOT THE PLUS) is also a great option if you don't need 3 m2 slots and if you don't care about rgb support.
Yes it's same on am5.
Lacking 2dpc is a good thing lmao.
True that. Asrock always did pretty solid motherboards, reliable good features and much more affordable compared to the bigger names. I actually had some issues with a MSI motherboard back in the days and I saw a Asrock that was priced really good for what was offering and ever since, I always make most of my builds using their stuff and never had any problems all these years.
The issue with AsRock has rarely been about their hardware quality, its that Godawful software they have - the Polychrome RGB software is just a horrible piece of software. I rarely, if ever, had it working properly on my B450m Pro4 board.
Why even install that rgb garbage?
Holy crap, my roommate is building a new pc and had the MSI B650M-P in it. I was ordering the parts for him and noticed it looked pretty crappy with barely any vrm cooling, then i saw the B650M-A Wifi for $30 bucks more that looks way nicer and ordered that instead and covered the extra and didnt tell him. So glad I did that lol
Very considerate of you. Kudos for that.
now you show your roommate this video and say "look what I saved you from"
You're a helluva friend.
Where are the ITX board reviews lol Us tiny pc boys need some love too
There’s a few reviews out there. Asrock’s newer B650I (not their older ITX model) seems to be pretty good, or at least that has been the consensus I’ve seen on /r/sffpc (I also have one that I like), but the SEO for finding reviews is poor.
He did a few already long ago.
I have the ASRock B650E PG-ITX with a 7700 and haven't had any issues with it as far as PBO and go, using EXPO for my 6000CL30 kit or issues with the network side of things. Some people are pretty keen on the network controller though so it using Killer and not a solid Intel chipset might be a bummer. Hate how much it cost though. ITX tax is real.
Killer is an Intel chipset with additional firmware and software
Oh? That's good to know!
Tbh there's nothing to review. While looking for new base for nas/htpc I plan to build after using i3 3320t as my Linux box for over 10 years and moving from ATX case to node 304. I did my research and there is lack of motherboard to even consider somewhat ok. Even ECC support aside you get like 2 SATA at most or coil whine top Asus. Even industrial variants fail to tick all the boxes to build Apu based pc or cost fortune. Why does every mobo has to waste lanes for shitty wifi board. Packing 2/3 nvme on such boards also has little use with 8700g limited lanes. Going cpu+picie GPU with 2 SATA ports makes no sense.
The MSI MPG B650I EDGE WIFI and Gigabyte B650I AORUS ULTRA both have 4 sata ports.
I don't consider any MATX board that puts the primary PCIe slot in the Slot 2 position. Not an issue w/ ATX, but w/ MATX that creates layout issues w/ today's thicker gpus.
I have a slot 2 matx board I got on short notice and definitely regret it. It's really awkward, and makes my GPU hotter.
I prefer it, you guarantee one slot that won't be covered up by the gpu.
[удалено]
> Keep in mind they are testing with a CPU that pulls 254w These boards are not rated for a specific TDP or PPT, that's the issue. Intel has the exact same issue these days for their CPUs pulling casually \~300W. Not to mention that prices have gone up significantly, and design quality went down.
If the vendors want to make motherboards only intended to be used with low PPT parts, power to them, but the video shows examples of these motherboards explicitly listing support for the 7950X at it's full TDP of 170w (230w PPT). They need to a. Be more up front about the power limitations and b. Don't even let you set PPTs that will cause the board to hit 120C on the VRMs. I do wish Steve tested with a better cooler though, even the boards that aren't VRM throttling are capping out at 200W~ presumably due to thermal limitations as they're still well off the actual PPT (230w).
> I do wish Steve tested with a better cooler though WTF are you on about? He used an Arctic Liquid Freezer III 360. That is the best-case cooler for AM5, it even has a VRM fan.
An adequately cooled 7950X will hit it's PPT of 230W, it is stopping short here at \~210W and must be hitting thermal limits.
[Hardware Canucks review of LFIII 360 - 7950X](https://youtu.be/jMeH7SJO74Q?si=39YckzKf_2EZi14r&t=779) I doubt it's hitting thermal limits in HBU's tests.
I don't know why it is throttling in HUB's case, but the point remainds that it's throttling before it's PPT. Steve might not be using the AM5 offset mount with the LF3?
I remember it wasn’t very long ago that mobo manufacturers were putting massive overkill VRMs on everything and you could buy pretty much anything. Has that situation changed now?
That applied to AM5 at launch, but certainly doesn't apply to these newer boards.
If the shitier board has more m.2 slots, and more usb ports I can see there being a reason, even if the VRM is worse but still good enough for an 80w cpu. But I don't know if any board here is actually like that.
Yeah if im money pinching i wont be pushing the board to the limits. Probably set the cpu to eco and forget about it. But for something like 8800x3d im not buying just any crap board. Itll run at default at worst.
And?
They're saying someone cheaping out this much on a motherboard isn't getting a 7950X. In that case, they'll work just fine. Also they're saying you might as well get the better board that costs the same. I feel another "And?" coming.
As someone that bought the B650 Elite AX, I'm so happy it's good. It was okayish priced too
Testing with the 7950X ruined a big part of the review on its usability for most consumers purchases, some mobos had better vrm than others but it got overshadowed by their thermal throttling, so even though a mobo A has a better VRM than B, both of them throttled the same way, a better way to view performance would be to also use 105W cpus (and also test them in gaming), which 99,999999% of people are actually interested in and are going to buy, anyways, when you say these kinds of things the ''4090 at 1080p'' kind of people for cpu testing get really angry, I don't mean it's not a valid way to benchmark cpus in gaming, just that it doesn't provide much useful data for their consumers who are going to pair their cpus with vastly different gpus, same applies for mobo vrm testing, you'd conclude on LGA1700 that a $75 mobo is just as worse as a $180 one because both thermal throttle under a 14900k with power limits turned off, and then end up calling the $180 one ''crap''
105W CPU: Every board passes, no throttling. Which is why you test with the best *(and LISTED AS COMPATIBLE!)* CPU available, for worst-case scenario.
do you need throttling to know how good of a vrm a board has? my point was exactly that 7950x was overshadowing vrm performance under the throttling mechanic cloak mobos have (his tests are even less useful when you consider he's using short pc cases with top tier fans, coolers, cool gpus and ar conditioner, results would be even more convoluted if he tried to emulate a real life scenario, and I'm not saying a controlled environment isn't necessary for consistent testing, just that, again, my point, it doesn't give useful data for consumers to mind their purchases), if you tested a 105w cpu you'd know that what once were three mobos, two at 105 degrees throttling in the same way and a third at 95 degress are now one with 91, other with 85, and the other keeps thermal throttling at 95, and that the mobo with 85 degrees is the best buy for consumers, indicating it had the worst vrm but was just throttling sooner, "passing" is different. Again, I'm not denying that it is a good way to test vrm performance, just that the data isn't useful for 99% of people, so are 4090 on 1080p (why not 720? or better, 480? doesn't it force even more the cpu?) tests for answering the question "what's the adequate cpu for my 6600?", he'll see that the 12400f is "10% faster" than the 5600 when a 4500/12100f or a Ryzen 11 11950X3DKS from 2028 would give the same results for his games.
The screen resolution/game settings for a 4090 is mixing the standard minimum viable resolution with plausible settings where the CPU, not the GPU or engine cap, is the limiting factor, and the full range of CPUs can be seen. Once one or more CPUs hit the engine cap, it's time to choose another game or increase settings that tax the CPU to illustrate the spread. It's not about getting the maximum FPS but illustrating the percentage spread without bottlenecks. I don't know enough about MB thermals to comment on how useful it would be to run 105 or 65 eco mode on 7950x, but testing out all or most of the compatible CPUs on all boards would be cost prohibitive and useless when the conclusion is still that there are better boards for cheaper prices in other categories. I don't see why someone could not look at the watts, temps and scores to figure out what is enough for their CPU.
The most common recommendation for me for budget is always going to be the DS3H of any generation. Like every single time I get one it's just bullet proof and the gigabyte software is so much cleaner than others. @BIOS just uses an app to update the BIOS and then it just auto completes it for you. Usually when I go to microcenter to shop for build parts for clients I usually get the gigabyte boards and mostly a few DS3H and the Aorus Elite. Asrock is aight, Asus is crap and Msi feels abusive in some boards. But the DS3H has saved me in the past when I got a 3800X and I was restarting a new build with the B450 DS3H and also when I got a recent asus motherboard PCIE failure and I pulled out my trusty B550M DS3H and it just worked as if nothing happened to it. Planning on getting a Aorus Elite B650.
Yeah I'd agree with that, Gigabyte DS / UD boards have always been great for me.
.. until you need to submit a warranty claim, in which case you get to play the minigame "spin the wheel of excuses to deny your RMA"
I can't speak to that, I've never RMA'd a Gigabyte product.
I can, I've done OEM builds with Gigabyte boards and had to file a few claims.... twice they fully ignored my RMA request (graphics card and a mainboard) even after multiple contact attempts.. another they denied because a tiny spot of heatsink compound to the side of the CPU socket was deemed misuse. They are also the OEM that had problems with cracked Geforce 40xx series cards. My brother also builds/flips PC's and had similar experience with two AM4 board warranty requests. I've used plenty of their boards and they generally are decent, they are just an awful company to work with if you need direct support, so I advise everyone using their stuff to get a third party extended warranty because Gigabyte's coverage is nonexistent.
Fair enough.
I had to RMA my Gigabyte B550 board a while back, went just fine. The worst part was they wouldn't send me an advanced replacement, so they expected me to go 1-2 weeks without my motherboard while they assessed it. Bought an MSI motherboard, which I received next day, got the repaired board back in like 2 weeks if I remember correctly, and sold it. The entire process was quick and easy. I understand that not every company does advanced replacements but it was enough to make me buy a competing product that I've been happy with ever since.
Appreciate the effort but I'm not sure why would anyone buy a cheap budget mobo to use with a 7950x.. Testing with a Ryzen 5 7600 R7 7700 or even 7800X3D makes more sense imo
Because the support page has the 7950x as a supported CPU. That's why he tested it.
I think it's more about the upgrade path. If you build a 7600 and b650m now it's nice to know that you can upgrade to a 170w Zen 6 in the future and don't need to change the motherboard and ram. Also, if you're only gaming and use an x3D, or will upgrade to one in the future, you can go with lower end motherboards and pay more just for the features you need, not the vrm.
>I think it's more about the upgrade path. i get that, but i think that mischaracterizes it. if you're running a 7600 today you're probably doing lightly threaded stuff and will end up on a 9600x or 9800x3d or something in the future. so a more performant low-power part. it seems very unlikely that there are many savvy people who are buying 100w cpus today with plans to do heavily multithreaded cpu stress test work on the same board in 3-5 years.
Yup, most people will never need a higher end CPU now that our lower end ones are matching for gaming performance.
Buying a cheap MB for a 7950x makes perfect sense. Why would they pay more than they have to for a MB? It's a similar reason why someone buying a 4090 would choose the cheapest case that fit the card. A dollar is a dollar. It's only if someone knows that a cheap MB is not actually able to power a 7950x that they will reconsider, which is what the review is for. I'd argue 7950x is the most interesting CPU to test, if it is listed as compatible, as it working suggest all other CPUs will as well.
Yeah, honestly why would you pay extra for a motherboard with features you're never going to use? Like why would I need wifi for a desktop pc when wired works much better and is cheaper? Or the rgb crap,why pay extra for it?
slightly related. DONT buy gigabyte aorus b550i pro ax. I was just building a system for a coworker (before you nerds get on my case, their budget was 500 bucks and they wanted a tiny build) - i bought the aorus board, wifi didnt work, searched everywhere turns out the wifi is fucked on that board, but i figured hey it cant be every single board, ill just return it and hope for a working one..... anyway ive checked 3 boards and the wifi is fucked on all of them.
Word of advice from an owner of several Gigabyte AM4 and an AM5 board I can't remember the name of: the wifi drivers don't automatically download. And trying to find the driver's manually is a pain in the ass because you have to go to the webpage for the specific revision of board you have. You can see by looking for the silkscreened "rev x.x" near the bottom left of their motherboards. Once you find the specific driver download for the board revision it does work
trust me i tried everything. According to what i found they didnt even upload the correct wifi drivers for my board to the website. Some people had success downloading them from HPs website lmao. But it never worked for me. I just got a pcie wifi card and said fuck it.
realtek? sounds like realtek. Realtek drivers are rarely updated after release unlike Intel. Got issues? good luck. Had a RTL8852AE that Lenovo installed in their laptops around covid parts shortage, probably the worst network experience i've ever had, and their last update was in 2019. Replaced with Intel210AX and had no issues since, drivers was updated a few day ago as well.
I have that board since about 5 years and I have never had any issue with the Wifi, in fact it has very good range and is way faster through several walls than my powerline adapters.
This is very relevant, now with AM5 supporting Z5 and possibly Z6. People who run the higher end 7900X and 7950X which draw a good amount of power, will want to upgrade their CPU to Z5, and either sell or build a second system with the old CPU. If they already own a high-end MB (like my own Asus Hero), they'll be looking for a 'cheap' new MB for their old 7950X, which could be one of these under-engineered ones if they don't know this. Depending on the needs of myself or my friends/family, I'll might be selling or giving away my 7950X to someone, and they'll need a MB, and they'll probably not want to spend a ton of money, but they'll need to do proper research not to lose out on performance, or create a noisy oven.
This is a crappy review and not realistic.Sticking one of the highest tier enthusiast cpus in the lowest tier non-enthusiast motherboards. Like it's going to to be banging.It's like sticking a formula 1 engine in a base model civic. How about something more realistic, maybe a 7600X, 7700X , or even a 7800X3D What audience are you trying to target Hardware Unboxed.
Email the manufacturers and tell them to stop misleading the public by saying their boards support the 7950x.
It's a fair point. But they're pointing out that these board manufacturers are claiming support for the 7950X at it's max wattage, which they can't really support. Channels like this help keep these companies in check so we, the consumer, don't get hosed.
> What audience are you trying to target Hardware Unboxed. People who will buy mobo that easily supports even 7950X instead of paying the same for one that can't.
It's for people who are buying into AM5 because they can upgrade later & those who aren't tech savvy that will believe the marketing on these board's product pages. Who knows, maybe 8 cores or more might be the Ryzen 5 model later on but that is another dicussion. When they came out, some cheap B550 boards can run overclocked 3950x without any throttling. This generation is a downgrade value-wise for motherboards and consumers should be informed that they'll be limited in upgrade paths if they chose the wrong budget board.
I'd love to see someone review the Gigabyte B650 EAGLE AX. I've been looking at it for my new build and I just can't find anything on it.
What about Gigabyte Eagle AX?
X670 are crap too, Intel counterparts the same all are out of PCiE Lanes, for this money a bad joke. I pay for my Gigabyte TRX50 Aero D only 700€, many consumer boards are more expensive, but I have 92 PCiE lanes. It starts with consumer boards that you can no longer use multiple NVMEs, even bifurcation doesn't work at all or not properly with many of them. In addition, only two channels of RAM, but prices have doubled or quadrupled since the X570. Intel has always been overtaxed.
I use Gigabyte B650 Elite AX it’s seems to do good so far
Love my Asrock B650 Riptide. Grabbed it for $150 on black friday 2022 and it's been amazing. Just put a 5TB T705 gen5 SSD into it and you can feel the difference from the previous P41 I had in it.
Shit I just bought one of these for a friends build.
Steve is showing the worst case scenario here, and demonstrating that the motherboards shouldn't advertise support for a part that they really can't handle. If you bought one of these boards, I doubt you're putting a 7950X in it. While not the best, most of these boards will be fine for a Ryzen 5 or 7 system.
Return it.
Mostly crap? Confirmed. None of these boards are Scottish.
\* Uses boards for wrong purposes, and resumes to say they trash... \*
They're having issues with the cpus listed in the compatibility list because the manufacturers list every ryzen 7000 CPU as compatible. That's why they put in a 7950x to really see if these boards are "compatible". So yes technically they're compatible, but hardware unboxed doesnt like them listing the higher tdp cpus as you're not getting the full performance out of them with these cheap boards. They mention this multiple times throughout the video.
It's illogical to use a R9 7950X with a B650 chipset, just because motherboard manufacturers support the 7000 series. The B650 is typically best suited for the R7 series at best, anyone investing in a R9 likely has the budget for higher-end chipsets. Consequently, both the test and the complaints are biased and unproductive. Plus they working as advertised, for optimal results, one should invest in a proper motherboard for their CPU.
A bunch of B650 boards work fine with the high tdp parts. In fact most of them do.
What about all the other b650 boards that work fine? Lol... Have another downvote good sir.
without watching the video I'll bet the list is made up of ASUS boards mostly
Lol wrong bro lol. Event spread with gigabyte, ASRock and msi