Motherboard makers release revised models of existing boards all the time. But what is unusual here is that all these new additions are entry-level, and released rather quietly. Let's find out why.
Motherboard makers release revised models of existing boards all the time. But what is unusual here is that all these new additions are entry-level, and released rather quietly. Let's find out why.
THE only reason I'd wait for AM5 X770only buy a 600 series AM5 board at this point if 25-50% off
I will wait because of much better designs. The current AM5 boards are mostly terrible.THE only reason I'd wait for AM5 X770
Those are less demanding on the CPU than rendering, so the test should be just fine.There should be at least one test in games. Most people don't use PCs for rendering.
I gotta shed some light on this. you're both right but the second guy is being dismissive of the first, which is fine and technically correct so I'll explain why...but most people won't know why you're correct and may assume you're...just not a nice guy. anyways here's the point.Those are less demanding on the CPU than rendering, so the test should be just fine.
Steve, I would first like to thank you for the hours that you put into articles like these. You sir, have the work ethic of a bulldozer!
I do have a question to ask however. It's clear that none of these boards do well in CineBench with an R9-7950X but do you think that they were really meant to?
Under less strenuous circumstances, these boards just might shine. I wouldn't ask you to redo all of your testing with a different CPU (because that would be unreasonable to ask) but how about testing only the three worst of these boards with something like the R7-7800X3D with CineBench and a few CPU-intensive games like Starfield, Hogwarts: Legacy and CP2077? Hell, even try it out with a few rounds of Fortnite (which you'd probably do anyway).
Using a relatively low-power CPU that doesn't overclock like the R7-7800X3D might change your opinion of these boards from "Avoid at all costs" to "Great value for gaming but garbage for productivity".
These might turn out to be the better-priced budget AM5 motherboards that so many gamers have been waiting for. If the worst three actually do alright on the scenario I proposed, then it would be safe to say that the rest would be ok as well.
Even if you don't do the gaming tests, just the worst three boards doing CineBench or Prime95 with a 7800X3D might show that these boards are situationally decent. I could be wrong, I'm just theorising here but I think that little test might do a great service for budget gamers looking to jump onto AM5 but have found the entry price to be somewhat intimidating.
Thanks again for all you do.
Why would you pair an R9 7950X with a low end mobo that's just ridiculous the only CPU's that should be going into these are APU's or 7600/X 7700/X or a 7800X3D at most anything over that and you wasted your money on a top tare CPU
There should be at least one test in games. Most people don't use PCs for rendering.
Steam download and install is nowhere as demanding as rendering. Steam will max maybe two cores, and rendering can max them all.I gotta shed some light on this. you're both right but the second guy is being dismissive of the first, which is fine and technically correct so I'll explain why...but most people won't know why you're correct and may assume you're...just not a nice guy. anyways here's the point.
guy number 1 demanding a gaming only test. watch your cpu usage while downloading a steam game, let alone installing something massive. Your cpu usage, if the rest of your hardware and ethernet connection are capable, will shoot up to 100% usage, for a very long time and will mimic a cinebench run, if not more depending how long it takes the game to download/install.
so if you buy a piece of trash board thats failing those cinebench tests and you're just using it for gaming, chances are it'll hit those temps during a massive download or install that properly utilizes your hardware. Even if it's getting too hot for 5 seconds, too hot is too hot.
1: They're advertised to work with Ryzen 9 processors (they don't).
2: They're advertised to offer exceptional power deliver and in some instances superior overclocking (neither is true).
3: They don't allow you to upgrade to a more powerful AM5 processor in the future, which is kind of the point of AM5.
4: There are boards such as the Asrock HDV which cost the same amount or less and allow you to use any Ryzen processor, Ryzen 9 included.
When I read "affordable", I thought there was one itx b650 that was affordable..