I am pretty sure that this was in their roadmap, or an early leak from a reputable leaker (e.g. MooresLawIsDead on YT).!

It is also a very obvious step forward, NOT supporting USB4 on the next AMD platform (chipset) would be a serious mistake on AMD's part, even though very few people will actually make use of it. Any new technology is always a real marketing tool as it WILL be highlighted, and tested when the platform arrives. However, it's cost will be part of the descision, as always.

"If" AMD's next "chipsets" follow the same concept as the first AM5 chipsets then we will see two chips, the full one, and a cut-down one, and then they can use two of the full chips to produce three market segments whilst still only designing, producing and supporting a single piece of silicon. If so, it wound IMHO be insane for AMD to not support USB4 on the middle chipset (B750 assumed), and to drop it on the budget option.!

Whether or not AMD decides to bake USB4 into the CPU silicon itself is a separate question from the chipset is not a question, the question "when", and when in what market segments.?

Tek-Check- I am not sure whether 8000 CPUs will add any new lanes, apart from USB4 controller for two ports; perhaps another four lanes for the chipset link
- X770 and B750 chipsets should finally get at least x8 Gen4 chipset link
- Promontory chipset needs to upgrade chipset link to minimum x8 Gen4, in line with what Z790 offers; so four more Gen4 lanes

I checked the AM5 socket pinout at Wikichip, there are only 28 PCIe lanes, and too few "Reserved" pins to serve as a future PCIe expansion. The chipset link is going to be Gen5 x4. AMD might also enable some more flexibility if the two Promontory chips will be allowed to take four lanes each instead of daisy-chaining.

However, I'm not sure if the information is reliable, the exact pin configuration may be confidential information and published info may be just a guess.

Tek-CheckIt's neither "pathetic" nor "anemic".

It is indeed both.

Tek-CheckBoards would have been even more expensive had they all shipped with USB4 ports.

They might actually have been able to justify their prices then, since literally the only difference to X570 is PCIe 5.0 which most users don't care about because they can't use it.

Tek-Check"Cutting the number of PCIe lanes..."? Zen4 CPUs provide four more usable lanes (x24 Gen5) than Raptor Lake CPUs (x16 Gen5+ x4 Gen4). There are more and faster PCIe lanes on Zen4 CPUs than on any desktop CPU in history, not counting workstation segment.

"Slightly better than Intel" is not the winning argument you appear to think it is, sorry. And I don't care how many lanes Zen 4 offers, what I care is that it doesn't offer at least 24 lanes for pure PCIe devices. Which means you can't run a GPU at x8 (let alone x16) and a quad M.2 adapter card at x16, because AMD has discovered it loves artificial market segmentation as much as Intel. Sharing lanes between M.2 drives and PCIe slots, what's that?

If AMD was smart, and not run by a**holes, they would give out more PCIe 4.0 lanes instead of fewer PCIe 5.0 lanes. But corporate greed is an amazing thing.

TumbleGeorgeThe support is there because now, as you can see from the mobile implementation, it just doesn't have the desktop hardware installed on the board. Given the wishful tone of the news, it shouldn't be. The presence of USB4 is mandatory. I wouldn't buy an AM5 platform while it continues to be cut. A 10Gb/s internet controller, standard on all motherboards except those with the lowest budget class A720 "chipset", is also mandatory. We are not in the stone age, riding it with slow retro links. :D

I hope you're not one of those people that complained about AM5 being to expensive at launch. Both the things you're asking for are niche market items that would simply increase the prices of motherboards even more.

Most people don't have a 10Gb/s connection of any kind, and most people around the world don't even have a 1GB/s internet connection. The vast minority of people have a NAS network.

Most people don't need and won't utilize a USB4 connection. The general consumer still buys mostly garbage USB3 thumb drives that more often than not run at USB 2.0 speeds.

Would both be nice? Sure, but the cheap motherboards are cheap for a reason, and it's because they don't have (and won't have) 10Gb/s and USB4.

Yes, where is the poll valid for the population of the planet with questions about whether there is a need or desire to use or not technologies with higher parameters than those offered to them? Let it be current information from this year, not collected a decade ago.

EatingDirtI hope you're not one of those people that complained about AM5 being to expensive at launch. Both the things you're asking for are niche market items that would simply increase the prices of motherboards even more.

There's this small thing called "economy of scale" that makes things cheaper the more you use them. And no, USB4 is not niche no matter how much you may claim it to be. "New" is not the same as "niche".

AssimilatorThere's this small thing called "economy of scale" that makes things cheaper the more you use them. And no, USB4 is not niche no matter how much you may claim it to be.

Anything with the moniker USB could never be seen as niche. Universal does not work with that world. A Universal niche is an oxymoron.

AssimilatorIt is indeed both.

They might actually have been able to justify their prices then, since literally the only difference to X570 is PCIe 5.0 which most users don't care about because they can't use it.

"Slightly better than Intel" is not the winning argument you appear to think it is, sorry. And I don't care how many lanes Zen 4 offers, what I care is that it doesn't offer at least 24 lanes for pure PCIe devices. Which means you can't run a GPU at x8 (let alone x16) and a quad M.2 adapter card at x16, because AMD has discovered it loves artificial market segmentation as much as Intel. Sharing lanes between M.2 drives and PCIe slots, what's that?

If AMD was smart, and not run by a**holes, they would give out more PCIe 4.0 lanes instead of fewer PCIe 5.0 lanes. But corporate greed is an amazing thing.

I have to agree "pathetic" and "anemic" seems like the right words to describe the situation. The ability to run x16/8x GPU and x16 quad M.2 adapter card (and still be able to add a x4 10GB NIC down the road) would have been a real winning point to buy into AM5.

A Computer GuyI have to agree "pathetic" and "anemic" seems like the right words to describe the situation. The ability to run x16/8x GPU and x16 quad M.2 adapter card (and still be able to add a x4 10GB NIC down the road) would have been a real winning point to buy into AM5.

Exactly.

Technological progression means getting MORE for LESS, not LESS for MORE. Back in the Athlon 64 days, dual x16 PCIe slots were the norm on high-end boards. Then Intel introduced X99 and the HEDT segmentation nonsense, then started hiking HEDT prices to the point where nobody is willing to pay for it just to get a decent number of PCIe lanes, which caused HEDT to start dying, which pushed prices up even further. And since AMD apparently has no better marketing strategy than "copy Intel by ripping people off", their own HEDT platform is similarly dying.

Dual full-length x16 PCIe slots with 24 lanes between them is all I'm asking for, AMD and motherboard manufacturers. I'm not even asking for 16+16 lanes, just 24! And guess what, Zen 4 already offers 24 lanes of PCIe 5.0, except the 8 lanes of so-called "general purpose" are ALWAYS allocated to M.2 SSD slots, even if those slots aren't populated.

Why can't we instead ALLOCATE THOSE LANES TO THE SECOND PCIe SLOT BY DEFAULT and as M.2 SSDs are plugged in, that slot LOSES lanes? Like how AM4 worked?

Or, since each chipset ITSELF puts out 8, again "general purpose" lanes, why not assign THOSE to the second PCIe slot? They're "only" PCIe 4.0 lanes but the bandwidth honestly doesn't matter, the lane count does.

This isn't rocket science and it isn't an unreasonable request. It does, however, require AMD and motherboard manufacturers to pull their collective finger out and THINK anout what is GOOD and USEFUL for customers, then actually implement the same. Rather than 20 M.2 SSD slots or RGB bright enough to eclipse the Sun or any one of the other completely useless "features" that have fallen out of a marketer's anus, just GIVE US OUR PCIe SLOTS BACK.

SirEpicWinAm I missing something here?
The asus rog crosshair x670e already have USB4 ports in it's specs
rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-crosshair/rog-crosshair-x670e-extreme-model/spec/

Yea, what am I missing here? I have a X670E Hero that has two USB4's on the back. Part of the reason I purchased this mobo was it was one of few AM5 mobos that had USB4 as well as the other features I needed/wanted. USB4 wasn't absolutely needed in my scenario but I wanted to be able to utilize it when I had hardware that had USB4.

Maybe what I have isn't truly USB4 and was lied to? Or maybe they are talking about native USB4 support for all mobos opposed to just a few? Maybe it means it will be part of the CPU lanes opposed to the mobo? Or maybe USB4 speeds are actually much faster than what the USB4 on the current AM5 motherboards offer.

Can anybody clarify this as I was actually planning on buying the USB4 device this weekend to use. This is all news to me and I read tech stuff all throughout the day.

usb4 is done by a controller,

you have a build in controller,

anybody can install usb4 controller at an expense of 4x pcie lanes.

TumbleGeorgeThe support is there because now, as you can see from the mobile implementation, it just doesn't have the desktop hardware installed on the board. Given the wishful tone of the news, it shouldn't be. The presence of USB4 is mandatory. I wouldn't buy an AM5 platform while it continues to be cut. A 10Gb/s internet controller, standard on all motherboards except those with the lowest budget class A720 "chipset", is also mandatory. We are not in the stone age, riding it with slow retro links. :D

Yeah! How dare they spend their time focused on realistic economic constraints and giving non-egotistical people who actually buy their products when they should bow before the chest-beating of the first person to respond to news articles on a technology website! Yeah! Lisa Su should be completely ashamed and should arrive in a limousine to hand deliver products to such people!

:rolleyes::roll:

JAB CreationsYeah! How dare they spend their time focused on realistic economic constraints and giving non-egotistical people who actually buy their products when they should bow before the chest-beating of the first person to respond to news articles on a technology website! Yeah! Lisa Su should be completely ashamed and should arrive in a limousine to hand deliver products to such people!

:rolleyes::roll:

Considering prices of over $100, for literally empty micro-atx motherboards with A620, these manufacturers really think about people.

AssimilatorThere's this small thing called "economy of scale" that makes things cheaper the more you use them. And no, USB4 is not niche no matter how much you may claim it to be. "New" is not the same as "niche".

Yes, I understand economies of scale, however electronics don't always follow economies of scale because of the added materials involved. Once you hit market saturation, USB4 will always cost more than USB3 because of the added materials, same with 10Gb/s LAN.

USB4 is new-ish, we'll probably see it in AM6, we may see low end motherboards with USB4 for AM6, as I'd expect the I/O controller on the CPU to support it. It would be down to motherboard makers to decide whether or not it's worth the cost of actually putting it on the board rather than additional USB3/3.2 ports.

As for 10Gb/s ports, we may see it on mid-range motherboards on AM6, as many AM5 boards in the mid-range are already replacing the 1Gb/s with 2.5Gb/s. 10Gb/s still remains niche though, so I don't expect the demand for it to grow all that fast. Most residencies around the world can't even obtain faster than 1Gb/s connections right now, and the utility of downloading 100GB in a few seconds for the average consumer is... limited.

EatingDirtUSB4 will always cost more than USB3 because of the added materials

Tell me more about? I understand that you are trying to perpetuate the mythology to justify corporate greed. But hints alone are not enough to be convincing.

farmertrueYea, what am I missing here? I have a X670E Hero that has two USB4's on the back. Part of the reason I purchased this mobo was it was one of few AM5 mobos that had USB4 as well as the other features I needed/wanted. USB4 wasn't absolutely needed in my scenario but I wanted to be able to utilize it when I had hardware that had USB4.

Maybe what I have isn't truly USB4 and was lied to? Or maybe they are talking about native USB4 support for all mobos opposed to just a few? Maybe it means it will be part of the CPU lanes opposed to the mobo? Or maybe USB4 speeds are actually much faster than what the USB4 on the current AM5 motherboards offer.

Can anybody clarify this as I was actually planning on buying the USB4 device this weekend to use. This is all news to me and I read tech stuff all throughout the day.

The title of this news piece is confusing, it should be "Next-gen AM5 Motherboard Platforms Could Natively Support USB4" i.e. via the CPU and chipset.

It's entirely possible to get USB4 support on current-gen AM5 boards by using an add-on controller, which as @M440 noted is what your motherboard does:

• 2 x USB4® ports with Intel® JHL8540 USB4®

The tradeoff is that add-on controllers consume valuable PCIe lanes that could better be utilised for other connectivity. You're fine.

WirkoI checked the AM5 socket pinout at Wikichip, there are only 28 PCIe lanes, and too few "Reserved" pins to serve as a future PCIe expansion. The chipset link is going to be Gen5 x4. AMD might also enable some more flexibility if the two Promontory chips will be allowed to take four lanes each instead of daisy-chaining.

However, I'm not sure if the information is reliable, the exact pin configuration may be confidential information and published info may be just a guess.

24+4 Gen5 lanes from CPU is plenty for desktop. Motherboard vendors can easily install PLX PCIe switch chips and increase the number of Gen4 lanes or have mixed support for Gen5 and Gen4 devices. It's all about imagination how to implement available lanes. One can be creative about board design.

Board vendors are also free to wire the chipset independently, without daisy-chaining. I have not heard anywhere that AMD does not allow this configuration.

Assimilator

• 2 x USB4® ports with Intel® JHL8540 USB4®

The tradeoff is that add-on controllers consume valuable PCIe lanes that could better be utilised for other connectivity.

Intel's TB chip uses only four PCIe 3.0 lanes. That's almost nothing, especially when there is PCIe switch chip available or when the chip can be wired either on the chipset or on CPU. Let's not split hair in half where not necessary.

EatingDirtYes, I understand economies of scale, however electronics don't always follow economies of scale because of the added materials involved. Once you hit market saturation, USB4 will always cost more than USB3 because of the added materials, same with 10Gb/s LAN.

And I've never argued against that. But I've also seen no indication that USB4 and/or 10GbE use so much more material, or material with higher purity, or different more expensive material, to justify the prices being charged for such products.

Tek-Check24+4 Gen5 lanes from CPU is plenty for desktop. Motherboard vendors can easily install PLX PCIe switch chips and increase the number of Gen4 lanes or have mixed support for Gen5 and Gen4 devices. It's all about imagination how to implement available lanes. One can be creative about board design.

Since PLX got bought out they went pure server market and now their chips are unaffordable for the desktop. Seems like there is nobody else willing to step into that market, which puzzles me because how freaking complicated could a PCIe multiplexer be?

AssimilatorThey might actually have been able to justify their prices then, since literally the only difference to X570 is PCIe 5.0 which most users don't care about because they can't use it.

Gen 5 is not the only difference. CPU has additional x4 link for NVMe drive or other peripheral, X670 chipsets have two 20Gbps ports, and eight more USB 2.0 ports. A decent upgrade.

I agree that PCIe Gen5 was deployed too early, but switch chips can easily be used to provide variable connectivity.

AssimilatorSince PLX got bought out they went pure server market and now their chips are unaffordable for the desktop. Seems like there is nobody else willing to step into that market, which puzzles me because how freaking complicated could a PCIe multiplexer be?

Several boards do have those switch chips, especially Z790 boards that allocate x8 link from GPU for Gen5 NVMe drives.
PCIe switches are not as popular anymore, but that does not mean that board vendors cannot be encouraged or influenced to use them more.

Tek-CheckSeveral boards do have those switch chips, especially Z790 boards that allocate x8 link from GPU for Gen5 NVMe drives.
PCIe switches are not as popular anymore, but that does not mean that board vendors cannot be encouraged or influenced to use them more.

I don't understand why an extra chip would be needed for this, since pretty much every AMD motherboard in existence can already bifurcate x16 slots to two x8 or four x4 lanes. And if I use the latter bifurcation then install a quad M.2 card into such a slot, I can access all four drives on that card no problem.

Assimilator"Slightly better than Intel" is not the winning argument you appear to think it is, sorry. And I don't care how many lanes Zen 4 offers, what I care is that it doesn't offer at least 24 lanes for pure PCIe devices. Which means you can't run a GPU at x8 (let alone x16) and a quad M.2 adapter card at x16, because AMD has discovered it loves artificial market segmentation as much as Intel. Sharing lanes between M.2 drives and PCIe slots, what's that?

If AMD was smart, and not run by a**holes, they would give out more PCIe 4.0 lanes instead of fewer PCIe 5.0 lanes. But corporate greed is an amazing thing.

This is nonsense. You cannot blame AMD for lack of imagination of board designers.
Look at the diagram I posted and do not spread falsehoods regarding the number of PCIe lanes from CPU.
24 Gen5 lanes are offered by CPU for PCIe connectivity, x16 (or x8/x8) for GPU/AIC, and two x4 links for NVMe drives.
Again, motherboard vendors are free to install PCIe switch chip between CPU and other slots that can effectively double the number of lanes into 48 Gen4 lanes. It's up to them.

Two x16 slots can easily be designed to run in x16 Gen4 mode, if electrically wired and have PCIe switch chip sitting atop.
Also, quad AIC with four NVMe drives can run in x8 Gen5 slot in x16 Gen4 mode if AIC vendor installs PCIe switch chip on the AIC itself. Two Gen5 lanes can be configured to serve each Gen4 NVMe drive at it full speed. I don't see the issue here.

AssimilatorI don't understand why an extra chip would be needed for this, since pretty much every AMD motherboard in existence can already bifurcate x16 slots to two x8 or four x4 lanes. And if I use the latter bifurcation then install a quad M.2 card into such a slot, I can access all four drives on that card no problem.

If quad drive AIC has x8 Gen5 link, each drive could be accessed individually IF AIC vendor installs PCIe switch chip on the AIC itself to provide x4 Gen4 link to each drive. I don't see a problem.

AssimilatorIf AMD was smart, and not run by a**holes, they would give out more PCIe 4.0 lanes instead of fewer PCIe 5.0 lanes. But corporate greed is an amazing thing.

This is nonsense too. It's up to motherboard vendors to use available lanes creatively. With 24 Gen5 lanes, a lot of stuff is achievable with PCIe switch chip. You can double Gen4 lanes, you can quadruple Gen3 lanes, etc. Plenty of stuff is possible.

A Computer GuyI have to agree "pathetic" and "anemic" seems like the right words to describe the situation. The ability to run x16/8x GPU and x16 quad M.2 adapter card (and still be able to add a x4 10GB NIC down the road) would have been a real winning point to buy into AM5.

This does not make sense. Motherboard vendors and AIC vendors are responsible for designing boards and peripherals that can creatively use available 24 Gen5 lanes. You can have two time Gen4 lanes and four times Gen3 lanes from CPU with PCIe switch chip without losing bandwidth.

For 10GbE NIC you just need two Gen3 lanes from the chipset. Where is the problem? What exactly is "pathetic" and "anemic"? Perhaps imagination of board vendor engineers?

TumbleGeorgeYes, where is the poll valid for the population of the planet with questions about whether there is a need or desire to use or not technologies with higher parameters than those offered to them? Let it be current information from this year, not collected a decade ago.

It is up to proponents of the idea that we need more and faster connectivity to provide such evidence in order to convince tech industry that such need is indeed present. Simple.

ADB1979Whether or not AMD decides to bake USB4 into the CPU silicon itself is a separate question from the chipset is not a question, the question "when", and when in what market segments.?

If AsMedia USB4 chip is robust and finally in full working condition, AMD does not need to integrate it on desktop CPU. We don't know what talks were in the background. I am curious whether there is enough space on Zen5 silicon to add two USB4 controllers. It'd be good to find out. Whatever the case, native USB4 will be there in next iteration, discrete or integrated.

AssimilatorThere's this small thing called "economy of scale" that makes things cheaper the more you use them. And no, USB4 is not niche no matter how much you may claim it to be. "New" is not the same as "niche".

Also, do not forget that there is USB4 20 Gbps (Gen 2x2) and USB4 40 Gbps (Gen 3x2).

Tek-CheckBoard vendors are also free to wire the chipset independently, without daisy-chaining. I have not heard anywhere that AMD does not allow this configuration.

I've never seen this mentioned anywhere as a possibility, so I'm assuming that the hardware (the I/O die) itself doesn't allow that.

kapone32Anything with the moniker USB could never be seen as niche. Universal does not work with that world. A Universal niche is an oxymoron.

You are cherrypicking and trying to do semantic massage by forgetting the number 4. Silly.

AssimilatorDual full-length x16 PCIe slots with 24 lanes between them is all I'm asking for, AMD and motherboard manufacturers. I'm not even asking for 16+16 lanes, just 24! And guess what, Zen 4 already offers 24 lanes of PCIe 5.0, except the 8 lanes of so-called "general purpose" are ALWAYS allocated to M.2 SSD slots, even if those slots aren't populated.

Not always. One Gen5 NVMe drive is mandatory. This can be delivered via M.2 slot or via PCIe slot, if a vendor provides AIC mount.

AssimilatorWhy can't we instead ALLOCATE THOSE LANES TO THE SECOND PCIe SLOT BY DEFAULT and as M.2 SSDs are plugged in, that slot LOSES lanes? Like how AM4 worked?

This is possible if board vendor guarantees Gen5 support for at least one NVMe drive via AIC mount with M.2 interface.

AssimilatorOr, since each chipset ITSELF puts out 8, again "general purpose" lanes, why not assign THOSE to the second PCIe slot? They're "only" PCIe 4.0 lanes but the bandwidth honestly doesn't matter, the lane count does.

This is also possible. Some Gigabyte boards have one x16 slot from CPU and other slots use lanes from chipset.

AssimilatorThis isn't rocket science and it isn't an unreasonable request. It does, however, require AMD and motherboard manufacturers to pull their collective finger out and THINK anout what is GOOD and USEFUL for customers, then actually implement the same. Rather than 20 M.2 SSD slots or RGB bright enough to eclipse the Sun or any one of the other completely useless "features" that have fallen out of a marketer's anus, just GIVE US OUR PCIe SLOTS BACK.

It's up to motherboard vendors to be imaginative and inventive with connectivity. AMD has nothing to do with this. They only specify minimal requirements for connectivity. Everything else is up to board vendors.

WirkoI've never seen this mentioned anywhere as a possibility, so I'm assuming that the hardware (the I/O die) itself doesn't allow that.

There is no limitation in hardware. It's just a bit inconvenient space-wise, but it's totally doable.
The only thing is waste of x4 Gen5 link, as each chipset is x4 Gen4.
You have 28 lanes in total on CPU: x16 link for GPU, x4 for NVMe drive and another x4 and x4 can link one chipset each.
I have not seen any documentation stating that this is not allowed and that daisy-chaining is the only way. Have you?

Tek-CheckYou are cherrypicking and trying to do semantic massage by forgetting the number 4. Silly.

Cherry Picking? USB means what? Universal Serial Bus. That means that it is a universal connector. The revision is also not niche but the newest standard. I would give you young in terms of software development but Thunderbolt will never replace USB and Occulink is only good for Graphics so......by 2024 every board released will have better USB 4 support because the software has improved.

kapone32Cherry Picking? USB means what? Universal Serial Bus. That means that it is a universal connector. The revision is also not niche but the newest standard. I would give you young in terms of software development but Thunderbolt will never replace USB and Occulink is only good for Graphics so......by 2024 every board released will have better USB 4 support because the software has improved.

It does not matter what it means. Don't be attached to the name. There are several types of USB. The newest and fastest one, at 40 Gbps, was not available from AsMedia for initial AM5 boards. Nobody else produced it at that time. RealTek is working on host controller as we speak. There will be solutions available by next year.