And AMD CPU will run perfectly fine in a reasonably priced board like a € 87 MSI B450 Tomahawk Max II. Want PCIe 4 - you can e.g. get an MSI B450 A Pro for € 80 right now, so even cheaper. That‘s the advantage of needing less power.
www.techspot.com
Real question is why buy intel in the first place. I get it if AMD is sold of ofc, otherwise it has to some very niche things like workloads that make use of AVX or something. Everything else is in AMD's favor. Also no boards should ever cause throttling like this, its awful.
Yes if they were labeled as such with the full explanation that this meant the the performance could be up to 35% less. But (unlike cars say) this explanation must be explicit so as to answer the question - how low end is this budget board. For boards most everyone thinks less functionality in terms of connectivity - The author here is correct NO ONE thinks that the core functionality (CPU speed) is being compromised. For the simple reason that the cost for the vendor of the budget vs expensive board is the same (here 125W power is the same). The vendors are trying to help INTEL by helping them improve the mpg without telling the buyer that it is compromising their performance. INTEL CPUs are not as energy efficient as AMD' at the same performance level. Intel are using the motherboards power spec to hide this: I.e .they measure power consumption instead of measure energy efficiency and ask buyers to assume the performance of the CPU under overpowered conditions is the same as under under-.powered conditions. This author has just proven that this assumption is a lie
No. AMD is running into SUPPLY issues; so the price is FAIR. The demand is exceeding the supply so prices MUST rise per the Supply&Demand law. Are AMD or Newegg or Amazon increasing their profit per cpu because the price is rising (I.e. has it risen higher than it should have if it was based on supply/demand only)? Yes. Profit is made or rising demand to compensate for the fact that losses are made on falling demand: you can't drop the price fast enough). Economics 101. Will this change soon - no. Read articles on world wide chip shortages. Read articles on Covid control measures and their severe (20%) restriction on manufacturing of chips and transporting and distribution of chips.
I think you missed the point. The INTEL spec for their B560 chipset means that vendors can and do put out motherboards where the combination of Intel CPU and Intel chipset mean a variable performance of the combination (I.e) Intel based computer (variable by 35%). It has always been assumed before that the vendor (Intel) would be putting out a combination that would give the maximum performance - I.e. the performance of the computer is the important purchase criteria. In the new world where in addition to performance some people are looking at energy efficiency, INTEL decided (without telling anyone) that they would vary the energy consumption of an INTEL based computer by varying the power available to the CPU using the chipset to do it. Thus one could choose a low power computer or a high power one based on the choice of motherboard. Some bragging rights - "I have an i5 computer that beats an AMD Ryzen 5 for power consumption" while completely hiding the this was achieve by lowering performance.
The key should be summarized like this. IGNORE the power consumption - all CPU's should be "unlocked" for power. Use the consumption numbers as a means to decide how much to spend on the PSU and the performance you want based on the CPU cooling that you can afford. All CPU/MB combos should have the same performance if PSU power exceeds needs and cooling keeps the CPU to 70deg. The CPU should never be the bottleneck for performance since it is so expensive. It is now with INTEL putting out multiple power level specs.
The bias is in people like you not acknowledging that there is a problem. The 11400 is not an high end CPU so it should not need an expensive board. Many Intel boards, even in the Z series, are known to have really bad VRMs that throttle and these OEMs need to be called out on their BS.
If you looked at Techspot‘s Intel board reviews, they are usually recommending *against* boards that follow Intel‘s specs.
The difference here is that you are quoting individual examples of what you consider poorly implemented products (what‘s wrong with the B450 Tomahawk‘s VRM, btw, it even handles a 2700x and 3950x just fine with good VRM temps).
So Intel gives clear guidelines to mainboard manufacturers which power settings they should have per default (I.e. one setting) that assures a mostly uniform performance across brands and models? And those correspond at least closely to the officially marketed values ?
The guidelines are being respected, they are minimal and every board he tested respects them. Like I said, some go further, some don't. His issue is with his expectations. Every CPU in his test achieved performance that was advertised by Intel. Before these new B chipset boards, every non-K CPU was locked completely on non Z motherboard and would behave like the worst case scenario in his review. His review isn't news really. These boards were reviewed before his rant.
And why not? You would expect to get at least nearly advertised performance from CPU on any board that supports CPU, right? Usually lower end motherboards lack "useless" features. Well, VRM is not so useless in this case but that's something not very visible on spec lists.
You're right. But. Using same CPU there should not be major differences between motherboards that support that CPU, right? That's problem here. It's more about motherboard and less about CPU. It basically makes people to buy CPU's that run way slower they expect from looking reviews.PS. Intel guarantees speeds that are printed on the box of the cpu, on the cpu itself and in BIOS(UEFI) by default. Boost speeds are a bonus feature
Oh, you don‘t need to wonder - it gets the same performance on the B450 Tomahawk vs. the B550 version. Techspot ran a test with the 3950x (that consumes more than the 5950x) on B350 vs 450 vs 550 and there were no thermal issues with the B450 Tomahawk.PS. I do wonder how much can MSI Tomahawk MAX (4 phase VRM) can take from ryzen 5950x (or 3950x) ...
www.techspot.com
Yeah, they do match specs but that is only because Intel does not specify all necessary specs. Most people are not experts and way Intel and AIB's do this is just misleading.
Most people expect to get same CPU speed with even cheaper motherboard. They don't expect to get all features more expensive boards offer. That's difference here.
Oh, you don‘t need to wonder - it gets the same performance on the B450 Tomahawk vs. the B550 version. Techspot ran a test with the 3950x (that consumes more than the 5950x) on B350 vs 450 vs 550 and there were no thermal issues with the B450 Tomahawk.
Note: I have no idea what your problem wrt the B450 Tomahawk‘s VRM is as it seems to do a very fine job. I
AMD B350 vs. B450 vs. B550 Tomahawk Motherboards
Over the past week we've been testing AMD B550 motherboard VRMs and today we'll look at MSI Tomahawk motherboards from the past few generations comparing B350, B450...
I hope...)
