Anyone tried an AMD Epyc 4124P (4c/8t) on a B650 motherboard yet?

[Macro Device]

Now that the nature of Epyc CPUs has already been revealed...

Its use case will mostly be copying external USB-drives or transferring datasets over the internet between my clients and me in an energy efficient manner.

This leaves us to the conclusion: you don't need to bother. These tasks don't require a fast PC. Even by 2010 standards. You can buy an i3-12100+H610 system (provided the mobo offers enough ports and is of decent enough quality) for much less money and still be able to copypaste your data 24/7/365 for a decade. Energy efficiency difference is negligible, not sure if Zen 4 is better in this.

In case you ONLY want AM5 for religious reasons just buy the cheapest CPU, you won't notice any profit if you slot a higher tier unit. I also don't see why ECC is of any relevance here.

 

[Ruru]

As I understand it, EPYC 4004 series are just re-branded and otherwise identical to the regular consumer-grade Raphael CPUs. They should work on the same motherboards as their Ryzen 7000-branded counterparts.

So it's just like consumer socket Opterons and Xeons, a desktop chip with workstation CPU name.

I also don't see why ECC is of any relevance here.

Doesn't every AMD consumer CPU support ECC already anyway?

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Sure why not? I mean when I look at the comparison to an Intel 4 core desktop part like my 14100F, The Epyc 4124P is quite a bit faster.

These are modern inexpensive parts and can be useful in modern situations. I don't see any reason Not to consider an Epyc 4124P for basic household computing. Has me interested!

 

[DaemonForce]

These tasks don't require a fast PC. Even by 2010 standards. You can buy an i3-12100+H610 system (provided the mobo offers enough ports and is of decent enough quality) for much less money and still be able to copypaste your data 24/7/365 for a decade. Energy efficiency difference is negligible, not sure if Zen 4 is better in this.

I was about to say, if moving data around is the only issue, get any dual core from ~2010 and newer, load it up with as much cheap storage as you want and set it as an automatic remoting server with nothing more than a power cable and ethernet connection. I do this with a literal 1c/1t eMachines with 2GB ram and ~20TB HDD. External/USB connections should be kept minimal for stability and mostly transferring files over the network. External access can be delegated with the usual VPS treatment. All of this can be done super easily to any AM5 or AM4 system. Any retired AM3+ box is basically built for it now and I push it a step further from AM2 because of course I will. If it's just moving files around, you're overthinking the solution. If you're moving assloads of data around to the tune of 2GB/s+ then it might be worth investing $50 into some SFP cards and DAC, which I also did.

 

[Ruru]

I was about to say, if moving data around is the only issue, get any dual core from ~2010 and newer, load it up with as much cheap storage as you want and set it as an automatic remoting server with nothing more than a power cable and ethernet connection. I do this with a literal 1c/1t eMachines with 2GB ram and ~20TB HDD. External/USB connections should be kept minimal for stability and mostly transferring files over the network. External access can be delegated with the usual VPS treatment. All of this can be done super easily to any AM5 or AM4 system. Any retired AM3+ box is basically built for it now and I push it a step further from AM2 because of course I will. If it's just moving files around, you're overthinking the solution. If you're moving assloads of data around to the tune of 2GB/s+ then it might be worth investing $50 into some SFP cards and DAC, which I also did.

I would go with a Sandybridge though as they're hella cheap these days and way more efficient than AM3 hardware.

 

[Macro Device]

Doesn't every AMD consumer CPU support ECC already anyway?

No idea and not the point. ECC doesn't make sense in basic computing.

 

[A Computer Guy]

I doubt that AMD originally planned the Epyc 4004 series, because they silently released the Ryzen 7000 Pro series (7645 Pro, 7745 Pro and 7945 Pro) about a year before the Epyc 4004 launch. Those were OEM-only 65W parts that now have been disappeared on AMD's official site. Not even Intel tries to use their ARK website that hard for marketing purposes. And as mentioned earlier in the thread, there are Epyc 4004 boxed versions listed, although they are not widely available yet, at least not in my place. I could get the little ones (tray or box) and the big ones (tray), but the in-between parts are still unobtanium.
Maybe AMD noticed that the only parts that really sell well are the 16-cores, the 8-core X3D, and the 7500F which is a global SKU, but unavailable in the USA, CA, UK and AUS for some reason? Epyc 4004 looks like a good long-term dumping ground for excessive amounts of Zen4 CPUs.

With AM5 EPYC on the scene I don't think it makes much sense for AMD to continue the PRO line. From what I can see it does everything the PRO line does and enables retail opportunity for custom builders. One thing I haven't figured out yet is if these new AM5 EPYC chips can be vendor locked or if there is a way in the AM5 ecosystem to override the use of a vendor locked chip which would be very useful when getting 2nd hand from ebay. I tried to get a unlocked 5x50G chip but it was a fail despite the seller stating it was an unlocked chip. If the seller isn't carefully testing and re-binning their chips 2nd hand purchase is a bit of a gamble and you have to test soon after purchase so you can process a return in time if it ends up not working. I've read stories (take with grain of salt) that Lenovo flipped vendor locking on by default (in context for Ryzen AM4 systems) which means if sellers are using vendor parts for validation, and have that on by default, they could inadvertently lock the very chips they intended to sell unlocked. What a mess and increase pressure for CPU e-waste.

ECC on consumer products seems to be mostly a marketing gimmick to stick it to Intel.

This is one of the reasons I was interested in the AM4 PRO and AM5 EPYC as it has to be validated to meet workstation/server requirements without question. Still not sure if that means they physically test each chip in that validation process or not. ECC does seems to work (AM4 consumer) but sometimes I question if it works consistently or varies between consumer CPU's. I just don't know enough about the manufacturing process to know if that's a valid concern.

 

[Ruru]

No idea and not the point. ECC doesn't make sense in basic computing.

IIRC even AM2 AMD CPUs support it as I've had ECC DDR2 back in the day and it was enabled.

And yeah, I agree with that. Only for workstations and servers.

 

[A Computer Guy]

So it's just like consumer socket Opterons and Xeons, a desktop chip with workstation CPU name.


Doesn't every AMD consumer CPU support ECC already anyway?

My understanding (for AM4 anyway) is non-PRO CPU's ECC is not validated. The logic is there but no validation so it might work or it might not work YMMV. In non-PRO APU's it's not available at all or fused off so it can't be used at all. In my experience with several AM4 desktop CPU's 2600, 2700, 3800, 3950x, 5950x, and 5800x it works and I managed to test it with RAM overclocking to the point Windows reported error correction occurred.

4650G/4750G PRO it's works and I was able to use Memtest86 with error injection to validate it was working. Error injection used to work with non-PRO Zen+ CPU's too but at some point a UEFI update stopped that from working at all, at least with the small sample of Asrock boards that I have.

 

[Ruru]

My understanding (for AM4 anyway) is non-PRO CPU's ECC is not validated. The logic is there but no validation so it might work or it might not work YMMV. In non-PRO APU's it's not available at all or fused off so it can't be used at all. In my experience with several AM4 desktop CPU's 2600, 2700, 3800, 3950x, 5950x, and 5800x it works and I managed to test it with RAM overclocking to the point Windows reported error correction occurred.

4650G/4750G PRO it's works and I was able to use Memtest86 with error injection to validate it was working.

So practically it's not supported but it basically works?

 

[A Computer Guy]

So practically it's not supported but it basically works?

That's my understanding. This time around though with AM5 they actually list ECC support for the CPU so I guess it means they are validated.

 

[Sarajiel]

One thing I haven't figured out yet is if these new AM5 EPYC chips can be vendor locked or if there is a way in the AM5 ecosystem to override the use of a vendor locked chip which would be very useful when getting 2nd hand from ebay.

As far as I know, those vendor lock fuses are a one-time thing for security purposes and work technically similar to the hidden overclocking fuses.

Well, nowadays, the European eBays and Amazon marketplaces are basically overrun by the same shady sellers/scammers you would find on AliExpress. Even when I buy hardware for non-business purposes, I avoid these retailers. It's just not worth the hassle of dealing with packages stuck at customs, or waiting for 6+ weeks. It's literally easier to cross the border into another EU country and buy over there if needed.

ECC doesn't make sense in basic computing.

That completely depends on your use-case, your demands for reliability, or the need to achieve specific certifications required for your business. Otherwise, people wouldn't stick ECC into the cheapo office machines like they do with "Pro" APUs.

 

[unwind-protect]

No idea and not the point. ECC doesn't make sense in basic computing.

How basic? Gaming? Web surfing? Processing photos? Making music?

IMHO even a computer that stores (and maybe edits) valuable photos benefits from ECC. Bad RAM can scramble your harddrive contents real good and the way that most people do backup with single external drives they overwrite their good backup with the corrupted main drive contents before they notice.

So it's just like consumer socket Opterons and Xeons, a desktop chip with workstation CPU name.

Well, the socket 939 Opterons were overclocking much better on average. We had great fun.

 

[Ruru]

Well, the socket 939 Opterons were overclocking much better on average. We had great fun.

True, they OC'd better (or with lower voltage) than their San Diego A64 counterparts.

The X2 Opterons were fine too.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

True, they OC'd better (or with lower voltage) than their San Diego A64 counterparts.

The X2 Opterons were fine too.

There is not s939 dual socket. 940pin (not Am2) is 130nm and 90nm is dual socket. Only a select few good boards to OC such as K8N-DRE.

Taken 2010' Quad core
Edit, off memory actual v-core was 1.65v, not 2.75v haha. The good old days.

 

[EmmanuelMar]

Epyc is really a server chip, although I don't see any interest in it on an am5 or am4 motherboard. Well, it still doesn't go beyond dual channel for ram memory. The reason is that almost all amd 4/amd 5 CPUs offer the same cores and They are compatible with ECC memory. In addition, the Ryzen CPUs have their own sales and new chips in the short term that lower the current prices, for example, a Ryzen 7950x cost up to 700 dollars, today the 9950x, 7950x chip is available for 450 dollars.
On server rental websites, Ryzen 3950x are working cheaper.
What does not make sense in a computer setup today is not knowing how many cores you need and let's be clear, a 4 cores 8 threads is too small. Today a minimum of 6 cores / 12 threads and 16 GB you will not have to update anything if you choose socket am5 and a nmve and pci 5.0 x 16.IF you are interested in having that ddr5 memory ecc, keep in mind that you pay more than the ddr standard/normal and it is not faster.

A server/workstation chip/CPU does not use dual channels of DDR memory like this Epic or Ryzen for am4 or am5 motherboards, it uses 8 channels or 12 channels because it has more banks of DDR memory.

You see its specifications, it is a dual channel for ddr, it would be interesting if it were 4 channel ddr 5.

AMD EPYC 4124P procesador 3,8 GHz 16 MB L3​

In 2009, a xeon w3690 already had 3 channels ddr2 , I don't see why an Epyc mini server (2024) couldn't use 3/4 ddr channels on motherboards am4/am5 that have 4 banks of ddr4/5.Epyc am4/am5 same chips Ryzen.

 

[Sarajiel]

Epyc is really ...

Why are you even bothering to reply to this thread, if you don't read what I posted previously?

If you just want to generically ramble about server-chips make a new topic.

 

[EmmanuelMar]

Why are you even bothering to reply to this thread, if you don't read what I posted previously?

If you just want to generically ramble about server-chips make a new topic.

""Just to make it clear, the system I'm planning is supposed to be mostly quiet, energy efficient and not overly expensive, performance is secondary for the intended use case. Since it's a business expense, I'm not buying anything used.""""

 

[jxdking]

Just to make it clear, the system I'm planning is supposed to be mostly quiet, energy efficient and not overly expensive, performance is secondary for the intended use case. Since it's a business expense, I'm not buying anything used.

Get Ryzen 8000 instead.
Chiplet design does no good for power efficiency. That is why AMD uses monolithic chips for their APUs for laptop line.

 

[azrael]

IIRC even AM2 AMD CPUs support it as I've had ECC DDR2 back in the day and it was enabled.

And yeah, I agree with that. Only for workstations and servers.

Athlon 64 already supported ECC memory. Probably because already back then that was the consumer version of their server processors (Opteron). I've always lauded AMD for *not* fusing off ECC support, unlike Intel. Colour me disappointed when some of their APUs surprisingly *didn't* support ECC.

BTW, you won't believe how quickly you warm to ECC memory on consumer devices once you've had your first taste of data corruption.