Gigabyte's TRX50 AERO D for AMD's Ryzen Threadripper 7000 series Features USB4

[TheLostSwede]

Gigabyte has revealed its first TRX50 motherboard today for AMD's Ryzen Threadripper 7000 Pro and Threadripper 7000 CPUs and to call this board feature packed, would almost be an understatement. The product page is still scant on details, but there's enough there to give us a good idea of what's on offer. The board is a full size ATX board which appears to be somewhere between a high-end consumer board and a workstation board. The heatsink layout isn't as refined as some of Gigabyte's current consumer board, which spoils the overall looks somewhat. With no less than three PCIe 5.0 NVMe M.2 slots and one PCIe 4.0, one has to wonder if the heatsinks covering the SSDs will be enough, considering how hot PCIe 5.0 drives can get.

The board has a further two PCIe 5.0 x16 slots and one PCIe 4.0 x16, so there won't be any need to worry about lack of PCIe lanes per slot here. Somewhat disappointingly, the board only has four DDR5 memory slots, although quad channel support is offered, as well as support for registered DIMMs. The 12 layer PCB also houses a 16+8+4 power phase design, which might be needed based on the expected core count on some of the Threadripper 7000 series CPUs. This is also one of the first boards with onboard USB4 support, with one of the ports offering DisplayPort output, although a DP to DP connection from the graphics card to a DP input on the motherboard is still required. The board also sports a 10 Gbps and a 2.5 Gbps Ethernet port, WiFi 7, a front header for a 20 Gbps USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 port and apparently two audio chips, although the list of specs and the board feature image seem to disagree on what's on offer here. The board is likely to be available at the same time as AMD's new Threadripper CPUs.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[kapone32]

This board seems like a waste of PCie lane allocation. 3 slots? Does not these CPUs come with 128 lanes?

 

[Chaitanya]

Only 3 x16 slots and lack of USB 2.0 ports on rear panel.

 

[liquefytherich]

This board seems like a waste of PCie lane allocation. 3 slots? Does not these CPUs come with 128 lanes?

non-pro chips only have 48 PCIe 5.0 lanes from the CPU.

 

[kapone32]

non-pro chips only have 48 PCIe 5.0 lanes from the CPU.

I am realizing that I confused this with the Pro series that has 128 lanes but understand what they have done. If it supports Lane splitting on all lanes it could be great for storage but the heat from an adapter card filled with 5.0 drives would probably go to water cooling .

 

[Tek-Check]

I am realizing that I confused this with the Pro series that has 128 lanes but understand what they have done. If it supports Lane splitting on all lanes it could be great for storage but the heat from an adapter card filled with 5.0 drives would probably go to water cooling .

You can always remove provided heatsink and install your own cooling solution. I mean, really..., is this what you are complaning about?

 

[kapone32]

You can always remove provided heatsink and install your own cooling solution. I mean, really..., is this what you are complaning about?

I am talking about using an adapter card with 4 5.0 drives in a single slot package. They don't even come with fans from Asus now as far as I see.

 

[Tek-Check]

I am talking about using an adapter card with 4 5.0 drives in a single slot package. They don't even come with fans from Asus now as far as I see.

Yes. Asus does not provide good heatsink. That's why I said you could customize it on your own and mount two thin fans. Parts for attaching fans can be easily measured, designed and 3D-printed.

 

[kapone32]

Yes. Asus does not provide good heatsink. That's why I said you could customize it on your own and mount two thin fans. Parts for attaching fans can be easily measured, designed and 3D-printed.

If you have a 3D printer (but I don't) and I bet the heat from 2 drives (much less 4) would overcome even those. Have you seen the size of the heatsinks on some of these drives? Even watercooled I would be reticent to add it to a CPU loop as that would be a tremendous heat signature to cool. There is also the fact that whether the controller is in the CPU or Chipset that having more NAND does makes the controller work harder and therefore produce more heat. Of course I mean the NVME driver in Windows.

 

[SRB151]

non-pro chips only have 48 PCIe 5.0 lanes from the CPU.

I'm not sure how this works out.....the non pro have 92 lanes total with 4 reserved for the chipset connection. My current MB only has 48 lanes from the CPU yet it has 4 16x slots and 1 1x slot (2 16x, 2-8x, from cpu, 1x from chipset) It's a Gigabyte Designare TRX40. I'd rather have my current slot arrangement for some options rather than 3 16x slots at pcie 5 that i could only saturate with 3 16x mass storage m.2 cards.

 

[Haile Selassie]

Only 3 x16 slots and lack of USB 2.0 ports on rear panel.

Also lacks PS/2 ports for mouse and keyboard.

Would not buy 2/10

/s

 

[ypsylon]

Looks like typical Gigabyte mess. I'm guessing it's more fashion-statement bottom of the stack, motherboard than actually quality product. In this instance there is simply no way I'll invest my money in Gigabyte boards. TRX40 was the worst crap ever released.

However I like one particular detail about it. There is plenty of space between first slot and RAM. So you can use 3090 with liquid cooled VRAM backplate without any issues.

On the other side...4 RAM slots can be pain if you want RAM size, considering how expensive are DDR5 ECC sticks (@only JEDEC 4800). 128G cost literally all the vital body parts/stick. 4x128 ~6500$

 

[HBSound]

To keep this simple, Just based on PCI accessibility. The Threadripper Pro PCI Express Configurations (Total/Usable/PCIe 5.0): 148 / 144 / 128PCI lanes, and the non-Threadripper allows 92 / 88 (Total / Usable) PCI lanes. So, just off PCI lanes, the Threadripper Pro in a board such as this is just about pointless Since the TRX50 only allows 80 PCI lanes.

Is this correct?

 

[Tek-Check]

To keep this simple, Just based on PCI accessibility. The Threadripper Pro PCI Express Configurations (Total/Usable/PCIe 5.0): 148 / 144 / 128PCI lanes, and the non-Threadripper allows 92 / 88 (Total / Usable) PCI lanes. So, just off PCI lanes, the Threadripper Pro in a board such as this is just about pointless Since the TRX50 only allows 80 PCI lanes.

Is this correct?

Correct. It's not pointless for those who need Pro level of additional features without needing more IO. Users have a choice.

 

[HBSound]

Correct. It's not pointless for those who need Pro level of additional features wihtout needing more IO. Users have a choice.
View attachment 368616

From my point of view, I fell as if placing the Pro level processor on an TRX50 board is pointless.
When planning out a system of this nature its scary, you do not want to purpuse to little or not what is needed. In this world of PC building you can overspend, and never use all the features you pay for.

Have a great day

 

[Tek-Check]

From my point of view, I fell as if placing the Pro level processor on an TRX50 board is pointless.

PRO CPUs bring additional (enterprise-level security) features that even a small media studio might need more than additional IO and lanes. Therefore, AMD gave buyers flexibility to pair PRO CPUs either with less IO or with more IO, to fit with their needs.

Surely, having a choice between TRX50 and WRX90 is better than not having any choice.