AMD Entry-level A620 Chipset Nears Launch, Promises Motherboards Starting at $125

[john_]

While this could be a nice option for a system that would have to remain upgradable with new CPUs in the long term, without costing too much, AMD really took disastrous choices this time. They held back low wattage and X3D models, they haven't predicted the slow adoption of DDR5, they delayed a cheap chipset for the market after getting the first indications from motherboard makers of the pricing for the new AM5 motherboards. A620, non X and X3D CPU models should have been announced from day one.

 

[Assimilator]

AMD continuing to fail to understand that there's no bad products, only bad prices.

 

[john_]

AMD continuing to fail to understand that there's no bad products, only bad prices.

Retail market is a small percentage of the whole market. So I am guessing that if AMD sell 7600X at $299 at retail, they will charge, for example, $249 a big OEM. If they sell 7600X at $199, they will have to offer it at $149 to big OEMs. So every company probably try to find a balance and still maintain a profit when selling to big OEMs.

Then there is Nvidia's example where even bad prices are not a factor for some people. In Nvidia's case bad prices are justified and an excuse is the only thing needed to greenlight a buy.

 

[GreiverBlade]

nice ... 34$ cheaper than my MAG B550 Tomahawk! (or 35$ more expensive after the discount i had on it ... ) /S (obviously)

naaaah, will pass, tbf a X50 should be 125 average, a X20 should be sub 100 and imho 199 and above is fine for a X70 up to obscene price level ofc ... for the "Ultra Mega Max Content Creator Genius designer no limits OC'er and other peoples that don't mind the price tag" edition (not that i endorse that kind nonetheless ) the cheapest X670E is 290ish chf/$ which is, somewhat, fine ... after all i paid 209chf for a Z170 mobo 6, almost 7, years ago

 

[freeagent]

Cool, more E-Waste.

No one wants bottom end boards that are cheap. Seems to me AMD really shit the bed with the launch of AM5.

Hopefully they can put their ego to rest and get back on track.

 

[olymind1]

nice ... 34$ cheaper than my MAG B550 Tomahawk! (or 35$ more expensive after the discount i had on it ... ) /S (obviously)

naaaah, will pass, tbf a X50 should be 125 average, a X20 should be sub 100 and imho 199 and above is fine for a X70 up to obscene price level ofc ... for the "Ultra Mega Max Content Creator Genius designer no limits OC'er and other peoples that don't mind the price tag" edition (not that i endorse that kind nonetheless ) the cheapest X670E is 290ish chf/$ which is, somewhat, fine ... after all i paid 209chf for a Z170 mobo 6, almost 7, years ago

Agree. For example i bought my MSI B450 Tomahawk under 100€, used it with a 2600, a 3600X and now with a 5600. It can fully maximize a 8 cores CPU's potentional. It can handle 12 16 cores CPU, but i will never buy that kind of CPU because i don't need it, and they're too expensive (for me), nor i would utilize it. The MB is pretty much basic and simple, with minimal features. Most people would (i among them) welcome B650 MBs designed for cheaper 65-95W CPUs max.

So from fairly a budget buyers perspective, what is the point of these overpriced motherboards full of oversized VRMs, full features i don't want for almost twice as much money. It's like they're for 16+ core cpus only with everything crazy in mind.

Not the mention DDR5 price are still expensive. We can buy a 32Gb 2x16GB 3200MHz CL16 kit for under 100€. Or we can buy a 32GB 2x16GB 6400MHz CL32 kit for under 200€. Again doubled priced for how much extra performance exactly...?

Simply not worth it.

 

[ARF]

$125 is still expensive for entry budget builds. They have to lower it to the traditional $70-90 price bracket..

So from fairly a budget buyers perspective, what is the point of these overpriced motherboards full of oversized VRMs, full features i don't want for almost twice as much money. It's like they're for 16+ core cpus only with everything crazy in mind.

The option is to cut the support for any CPUs above the 105-watt threshold. Win-win.

 

[ymdhis]

For $125 and PCIE4+PCIE3 only, I can get a B550 board with cheaper RAM and cheaper CPUs (which aren't too much slower either).

This is very bad pricing.

 

[john_]

Cool, more E-Waste.

No one wants bottom end boards that are cheap. Seems to me AMD really shit the bed with the launch of AM5.

Hopefully they can put their ego to rest and get back on track.

E -waste are boards that will be unable to accept future CPUs, not boards that will be able to be upgraded with CPUs that are still 2-3-4 years away.

 

[freeagent]

I just can’t picture spending 500 or so on a CPU, another couple hundred on decent ram, to drop it on a hundred dollar board.

 

[ARF]

I just can’t picture spending 500 or so on a CPU, another couple hundred on decent ram, to drop it on a hundred dollar board.

In my first build I put a 315$ CPU in a 50$ board. It actually worked, for my surprise. It should work...

 

[Assimilator]

I just can’t picture spending 500 or so on a CPU, another couple hundred on decent ram, to drop it on a hundred dollar board.

It's simple calculus: why would anyone pay for an entry-level AM5 CPU and motherboard with limited connectivity and IO options, when they could pay the same amount or quite possibly less for a mid-range AM4 CPU and motherboard with more features and better performance? Yet AMD just doesn't seem to get this, which boggles the mind.

 

[freeagent]

It's simple calculus: why would anyone pay for an entry-level AM5 CPU and motherboard with limited connectivity and IO options, when they could pay the same amount or quite possibly less for a mid-range AM4 CPU and motherboard with more features and better performance? Yet AMD just doesn't seem to get this, which boggles the mind.

Right?

Yeah I am good for now.. I don't mind sitting on my AM4 units for another year or so. I have my X3D for games and quiet, and if I need a beast I can drop in my 5900X for other things. Although.. I am thinking of dropping my X3D into my kids system and dropping his 5600X into my system

 

[PenguinBelly]

While this could be a nice option for a system that would have to remain upgradable with new CPUs in the long term, without costing too much, AMD really took disastrous choices this time. They held back low wattage and X3D models, they haven't predicted the slow adoption of DDR5, they delayed a cheap chipset for the market after getting the first indications from motherboard makers of the pricing for the new AM5 motherboards. A620, non X and X3D CPU models should have been announced from day one.

Do you know they had them in stock?

 

[Blaeza]

Reading some of the comments in here and I can't help but think some of y'all just love to complain for the sake of complaining.

When it comes to AMD not being cheap and cheerful, there will always be complaints. Which I agree with! Why I got AMD to start with, because they offered better value. Or did at least.

 

[Quicks]

It's always refreshing to see the first comments be posted by people who comprehend economics, inflation and technology.

Oh, sorry, wrong thread.

Neither does the stupidity of blind loyalists. But hey if you want to spend money on crap go ahead I vote with my pocket and AMD is losing the fight...

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I remember paying 50 for a decent a320.

On that subject, since these a620s seem to be mostly matx, the best b550 matx board was the b550 mortar, which was $162, or $155 for the non wifi variety.

That was THE BEST. VRM capable of handling 16 core OCs. Plenty of connectivity, ece.

B650 average boards shouldn't cost more then that. A series should be below $100. Even with inflation.

 

[Max(IT)]

How could we survive without a €150 A620 chipset ? This is getting ridiculous…

Neither does the stupidity of blind loyalists. But hey if you want to spend money on crap go ahead I vote with my pocket and AMD is losing the fight...

I realized over the time that AMD supporters are even worse than Apple’s

 

[Luke357]

Unless they are on a super tight budget, most Intel users won't purchase an Asrock board. Asrock boards are more in line with poors and/or AMD users.

I've built quite a few machines and 90% of them are using ASRock boards and atleast 80% of them are Intel machines. Out of all the (consumer) boards I've used ASRock boards tend to be the most stable while also having (imo) the best BIOS interface of the big 4 board manufacturers.

 

[john_]

Do you know they had them in stock?

They should have them in stock. At least the X3D parts, to drive adoption. If you have indications that the platform will be expensive, don't hold back the product that will be justifying the extra price of that platform.

and motherboard with limited connectivity and IO options, when they could pay the same amount or quite possibly less for a mid-range AM4 CPU and motherboard

The vast majority of consumers don't have a clue about connectivity, don't care about connectivity, if they ever need to do an upgrade that their cheap microATX board does not support, they will probably never realize that they could had avoided that dead end by choosing another model, especially by investing in an older platform. Are things better in the Intel platform? I have no idea. Really.

We are in an era of "more than what the consumer needs". So, companies are starting to limit what they are offering to consumers. We can see it in GPUs, where new series of GPUs offer more performance, but not better performance/dollar. In CPUs Intel will remain stack at 8 P cores for years and probably AMD will choose to do the same when Zen 4C cores are ready (I wonder how people will reack going from 16P cores down to 12 or even 8 on the AMD platform), in motherboards we see less I/O options compared to the past and higher prices compared to the past (I mean much higher even taking consideration of inflation), with manufacturers trying to justify this with their support on new standards like PCIe 5.0. I was screaming at the X570 boards NOT being able to split those 16 lanes from the CPU to 2 PCIe X16 slots(x8+x8), something that could be done in $60 boards 12 years ago. Now someone needs to look at $250-$300 and up to get that feature. In storage prices where mostly stable for years, with PCIe 4.0 being an excuse for manufacturers to skyrocket prices.
I mean, in about every hardware part we see a kind of stagnation, probably a necessity for manufacturers because even old hardware today is more than enough for most of us. Only pros trying to save as much time as they can and gamers trying to beat their friend's machine need that extra power new hardware bring.

I realized over the time that AMD supporters are even worse than Apple’s

Good for you. Keep supporting monopolies with your wallet AND your posts. I am sure this will lead us to a great future with plenty of cheap options for everybody.

There, I am an example of an AMD supporter being worst than an Apple one. And what the hell do I want? That ridiculous dream of a 50%-50% market in GPUs and CPUs (with a little luck we could be hoping for a 33%-33%-33% in the GPU market in a few years) and people buying the best option, not the shiniest logo.

 

[PenguinBelly]

I don't know how everyone assume these boards will be crap before they are even released. Maybe not everyone but some..

 

[GreiverBlade]

I don't know how everyone assume these boards will be crap before they are even released. Maybe not everyone but some..

no crap board, just crap pricing ...

 

[PenguinBelly]

I do not see price information anywhere in the article or in a post in this thread.

 

[GreiverBlade]

I do not see price information anywhere in the article or in a post in this thread.

title ...
"AMD Entry-level A620 Chipset Nears Launch, Promises Motherboards Starting at $125"

and the article itself.

ofc these AX20 boards will have a target "people who would buy them" but at that price and above ... it's a nono, even with inflation and the crap worldwide situation we're headed to.

as i mentioned

nice ... 34$ cheaper than my MAG B550 Tomahawk! (or 35$ more expensive after the discount i had on it ... ) /S (obviously)

naaaah, will pass, tbf a X50 should be 125 average, a X20 should be sub 100 and imho 199 and above is fine for a X70 up to obscene price level ofc ... for the "Ultra Mega Max Content Creator Genius designer no limits OC'er and other peoples that don't mind the price tag" edition (not that i endorse that kind nonetheless ) the cheapest X670E is 290ish chf/$ which is, somewhat, fine ... after all i paid 209chf for a Z170 mobo 6, almost 7, years ago

these board will cost too damn near the previous BX50 generation (paid 90$ for my current mobo, discounted from the 159$ price tag she had initially )

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Good for you. Keep supporting monopolies with your wallet AND your posts. I am sure this will lead us to a great future with plenty of cheap options for everybody.

Literally your average AMD user when you dont buy an AMD CPU+GPU along with 10 shares of AMD stock

There, I am an example of an AMD supporter being worst than an Apple one. And what the hell do I want? That ridiculous dream of a 50%-50% market in GPUs and CPUs (with a little luck we could be hoping for a 33%-33%-33% in the GPU market in a few years)

If AMD wants to sell like that they need to be competitive. They have a long history of being the runner up, being late to the competition, and severe driver issues. Some of that history is warranted, some isnt, but its a stigma that AMD has not helped to fix in recent years.

and people buying the best option, not the shiniest logo.

What is the best? The most powerful? Because the last time AMD had the most powerful option was......2013 with the 290x. That was a DECADE AGO.

The most stable? Bruh that is not a road you want to travel on with AMD.

Best support? Ditto. Remember what happened to evergreen GPU users, or when GCN was let go VS kepler.

Best bang for dollar? Well AMD used to have that, but now gouges for all but the high end, just like nvidia (remember, the 6700xt was 20% faster and 20% more expensive then the 5700xt, the RX 5500xt was the first example of Gimpgate, ece.) Being a premium brand is more important then supplying the market with good perf/$ for AMD, lisa has stated as such.

RT? Well that's obvious. Other non gaming features? Again, favor for nvidia or now intel.

Sorry, but AMD has been playing second fiddle for too long, and if they do not have a performance advantage over nvidia they're not going to achieve market parity. The halo effect is real. Looks at CPUs, even though ryzen 1000/2000/3000 couldnt match intel's gaming performance you saw metric tons of gaming PCs with ryzen in them simply because they had the bigger numbers on some graphs,a nd once AMD stole the gaming crown intel's sales flatlined.

This would happen in GPUs, but AMD has never had the smash home run over nvidia that they managed on intel, mostly because nvidia has never fallen asleep for half a decade.

Serious question, in what way is AMD the "best" option? The 7900xtx is a better buy then the 4080, but other then that it was always a compromise, better raster with lower power use but terrible RT performance.