It looks like mini PCIe not M.2.

Like Asrock solution, wondering how many more manufacturers will go down the route of add-in card chipsets.

Yeah I do not understand

Ferrum MasterIt looks like mini PCIe not M.2.

Read the side of the PCB lol its a M.2 to PCIe x 4.

That’s some stupid ass engineering. The chipset is just used as an expensive pcie re-driver. 4 lanes in, 4 lanes out. No other functionality. :facepalm:

It's M.2 but keyed like an PCIE x4 slot. Thats my take on it

You can compare the bottom end male connector size to the M.2 female connector size at the top. It's the same size. Just differently keyed. Therefore it is M.2 sized, just not M.2 standard.
miniPCIE is abit bigger than M.2. You can easily compare them by looking for M.2 to miniPCIE adapters.
PCIE x4 slot is way too big and takes up too much space for it to be there. You can also just search for M.2 to PCIEx4 addon cards and just see how big the connector is when compared to the M.2 slot next to it.

Of course this is all speculation and Asus might be using something totally custom. Can TPU please get an answer from their PR department? TQ

Aye... this the the unusual M.2 Key E slot then.

DrediThat’s some stupid ass engineering. The chipset is just used as an expensive pcie re-driver. 4 lanes in, 4 lanes out. No other functionality. :facepalm:

I struggle to see any feature above B650E on this board. Is there any feature that warrants the second chipset or is this only upsell of B650E?

Is'nt this just the southbridge, moved to another location?

Southbridge does'nt have that of a special role; other then connecting your avg sata, PCI-E slots, USB ports, audio and what more.

The actual chipset is for years inside the CPU these days.

Tek-CheckI struggle to see any feature above B650E on this board. Is there any feature that warrants the second chipset or is this only upsell of B650E?

For mITX, absolutely not. This is just masturbation by the motherboard manufacturers so that they can pretend they're innovating, and thus charge you more.

JismIs'nt this just the southbridge, moved to another location?

Southbridge does'nt have that of a special role; other then connecting your avg sata, PCI-E slots, USB ports, audio and what more.

The actual chipset is for years inside the CPU these days.

"Chipset" has been used to refer to what was formerly the southbridge ever since northbridges were integrated into the CPU. Not sure where you've been during that time...

yeah that is what i was saying. Only the northbridge is the actual chipset in my books. The southbridge pretty much connects all the less important things to one and another.

Indeed, AMD have seriously exposed themselves by missing a high-end modern southern chipset and replacing it with two pieces of misery.

... yeah I'm going to pick more minimalist parts for my next build

Tek-CheckI struggle to see any feature above B650E on this board. Is there any feature that warrants the second chipset or is this only upsell of B650E?

It’s the only upsell of the x670E compared to the non-E version. In this case the second chipset does absolutely nothing but give the manufacturer the ability to add the ’E’ to the product name. In a more fully featured board there would be more stuff connected to the second chipset (I believe it supports something like 12+ lanes out). This boards 4 lanes in, 4 lanes out, is just pointless.

TumbleGeorgeIndeed, AMD have seriously exposed themselves by missing a high-end modern southern chipset and replacing it with two pieces of misery.

The decision was deliberate and makes complete sense. Instead of having to design separate chipsets for mid-range and high-end, make one chipset for mid-range and just double it up for high-end - this is cheaper and helps with inventory. The trade-off is that you need double the space, but for the intended market of high-end - large motherboards with tons of connectivity - that isn't a problem.

But if you are stupid enough to do what ASUS has done here, and put a high-end double chipset on the absolutely smallest board that doesn't have enough room to expose the connectivity that is the whole point of the high-end chipset, thus entirely negating the whole point of using that chipset, then you are going to run into space constraints! ASUS have not solved a problem, they've invented one and then come up with a solution to it, to make themselves look smart and their products look good - because they are utterly incapable of innovating usefully, i.e. in a manner that adds value to consumers. Hence my "masturbation" comment.

If ASUS was actually smart, they would place the chipsets on the rear of the board and use a metal backplate covering the entirety of the back side of said board, to dissipate the chipsets' heat. But again, they're intellectually bankrupt, so they'll never do something as simple and effective as this.

Finally! Chipsets should have been add-ons from the beginning!

Jismyeah that is what i was saying. Only the northbridge is the actual chipset in my books. The southbridge pretty much connects all the less important things to one and another.

Northbidge is a glorified memory controller.

zlobbyFinally! Chipsets should have been add-ons from the beginning!

Except that this does not work in the way you hope it does.

You will not be able to change how anything on the board works by changing this.

AssimilatorThe decision was deliberate and makes complete sense. Instead of having to design separate chipsets for mid-range and high-end, make one chipset for mid-range and just double it up for high-end - this is cheaper and helps with inventory. The trade-off is that you need double the space, but for the intended market of high-end - large motherboards with tons of connectivity - that isn't a problem.

But if you are stupid enough to do what ASUS has done here, and put a high-end double chipset on the absolutely smallest board that doesn't have enough room to expose the connectivity that is the whole point of the high-end chipset, thus entirely negating the whole point of using that chipset, then you are going to run into space constraints! ASUS have not solved a problem, they've invented one and then come up with a solution to it, to make themselves look smart and their products look good - because they are utterly incapable of innovating usefully, i.e. in a manner that adds value to consumers. Hence my "masturbation" comment.

If ASUS was actually smart, they would place the chipsets on the rear of the board and use a metal backplate covering the entirety of the back side of said board, to dissipate the chipsets' heat. But again, they're intellectually bankrupt, so they'll never do something as simple and effective as this.

I disagree from a user perspective. You are really looking at things from AMD's point of view and the benefit to them, which in no way concerns me. I will immediately contradict you by giving an example of the X570 chipset and its improved version without active cooling X570s. The new (then) version of PCIe 4.0 implemented in place with the corresponding controllers in a single chip. The same could be done with the X670, a single chip with an integrated PCIe 5.0 controller for the needs of interfaces that are physically far from the CPU.
Anyway, this was left out in the name of profit for the 600 series chipsets. I hope at least in the next 700 series, we have the X770 as some kind of iteration of the X570, but much more modern.

TumbleGeorgeI disagree from a user perspective. You are really looking at things from AMD's point of view and the benefit to them, which in no way concerns me. I will immediately contradict you by giving an example of the X570 chipset and its improved version without active cooling X570s. The new (then) version of PCIe 4.0 implemented in place with the corresponding controllers in a single chip. The same could be done with the X670, a single chip with an integrated PCIe 5.0 controller for the needs of interfaces that are physically far from the CPU.
Anyway, this was left out in the name of profit for the 600 series chipsets. I hope at least in the next 700 series, we have the X770 as some kind of iteration of the X570, but much more modern.

Even if x670e was a single chip solution, there is no way in hell to have all the ports, slots and connectors it can provide on an itx form factor board.

it makes literally zero functional sense to have more than the single chip x670 on an itx board. Edit: brainfart, the single chip one is b650e.

DrediEven if x670e was a single chip solution, there is no way in hell to have all the ports, slots and connectors it can provide on an itx form factor board.

it makes literally zero functional sense to have more than the single chip x670 on an itx board. Edit: brainfart, the single chip one is b650e.

Yes you are right when it comes to small size motherboards it doesn't make much sense. But I mean the general case. Regardless of your rightness, that hasn't stopped miniITX motherboards from the recent past with the highest consumer grade chipsets from both AMD and Intel. :)

TumbleGeorgeYes you are right when it comes to small size motherboards it doesn't make much sense. But I mean the general case. Regardless of your rightness, that hasn't stopped miniITX motherboards from the recent past with the highest consumer grade chipsets from both AMD and Intel. :)

Yeah, people are idiots and buy the big number. That’s the general case as well.


and in this motherboards case, the idiocy is simply super blatantly visible.

Interesting.

It looks like the only thing you gain from the chipset upgrade is a PCI-e x1 slot coming from the riser card. How do you use it, though? :wtf:

Nice effort, but I don't see the point.

ChaitanyaLike Asrock solution, wondering how many more manufacturers will go down the route of add-in card chipsets.

Not an add in here though, it's just because they could, as it serves no real purpose expect bragging rights.

AusWolfInteresting.

It looks like the only thing you gain from the chipset upgrade is a PCI-e x1 slot coming from the riser card. How do you use it, though? :wtf:

Nice effort, but I don't see the point.

It’s an m2 slot, not pciex1. Just looks a bit off, due to uncommon component selection.

DrediIt’s an m2 slot, not pciex1. Just looks a bit off, due to uncommon component selection.

What is it, though? It looks very much like PCI-e x1 to me.