ASRock Launches New AMD WRX90 & TRX50 Motherboards to Maximize Productivity for Creators and Machine Learning

[Tek-Check]

1. There's no integrated graphics capabilities, so why would there be display outputs?
2. For Thunderbolt, it's an Intel spec and if anything, there should've been USB4 support, but maybe ASRock felt the boards were expensive enough as they are and have enough PCIe slots that a USB4 add-in card is the way to go.

It's weird with Asrock. They have some brilliant boards, such as Creator line across sockets. I have one of the best ITX boards on Z390 platform from them. When they put in effort, ambition and use imagination, they make most amazing boards competing with top boards from Asus. However, they are also capable of dodgy products. I/O on TRX50 in one of them. It's silly cheap on a very expensive board and this needs to be called out clear and loud.

If we compare new HEDT/WS boards with TXR40 and WRX80 from Zen 3 platform, it is clear that no major modernisation of boards took place, apart from necessary PCIe 5.0, memory and power stages upgrade. In fact, some important regressions took place. Zen 3 WS board had 14 layer PCB, dual Thunderbolt with two DP IN ports and WiFi 6E.

It does not really matter there is no iGPU. On such high-end board, there is no excuse not to provide DP IN ports, so that users can bring in video from GPU and use fast PCIe transfer for large media files in ecosystem that is already prevalent with diverse Thunderbolt solutions installed on storage and audio-video devices.

It does not really matter that Thunderbolt is Intel's solution. They did not care about it on Zen 3 boards, so why would they care now? Sure, they could have installed new ASM4242 chip, but I am not sure if it's ready for commercial use. I do not agree with USB4-AIC idea. The board is expensive enough on its own and it needs to meet higher I/O standard instead of putting even more pressure on users' wallets. Cheapening on I/O is understandable of low-end desktop boards, but this... Asrock, get a grip!

What you mean is: ASRock cheaped out. Just like every motherboard manufacturer has cheaped out on USB4/TB4 on AM5.

The paradox is that board vendors rushed with PCIe 5.0 support across GPU and NVMe slots, and almost nobody in the world uses those capabilities, while gatekeeping TB4 to top and halo designs only. Absurd.

What is so special about USB4 that the industry has been unable to cope with its large-scale introduction for so many years?

Good question. USB4 native controllers are simply late. It's a total mess of partial solutions that have not even reached the market. Blame it on Covid, R&D costs, delay of DP 2.1, etc.

Also, only Intel are working on more advanced connectivity solution from USB4 v2 spec with 80 Gbps ports. AsMedia and ViaLabs have 40 Gbps solution, but ViaLabs is DP 1.4 and USB only, so no PCIe traffic, and AsMedia 4242 does have PCIe 4.0 x4, but it does not have DP 2.1 support (it's USB4 v1). I have not heard from Realtek and JMicron developing USB4 in any form or shape. It's a Wild West...

Apparently, Intel did not pass onto USB-IF "all necessary" information about Thunderbolt 3, and so USB4 engineers needed to retro design and implement several solutions. While I am open to believe that Intel enjoys playing games sometimes, I am also surprised that it has been taking so much time to release one single USB4 Gen 3x2 host controller with all features. It's still not there and no one has announced any R&D work on USB4 Gen 4 (80 Gbps solution), to the best of my knowledge.

USB4, when implemented fully, is special because it allows us to use several protocols and power solution over one single port. That's it. Its beauty is simplicity.

 

[unwind-protect]

Could be worse, could be better. I personally have no use for the MCIO or SlimSAS ports, but there's enough lanes allocated to more useful places that it won't kill me. The price on the other hand...

I didn't check specifically, but the slimsas port probably splits out to U.2 NVMe ports. That's very useful if you want to get a professional SSD with NVMe on the cheap.

 

[Tek-Check]

Here's the block diagram btw.

So, TRX50 and WRX90 chipsets are basically B650 Promo21 chip from AM5, right?
Another regression from Zen3 to Zen4 high-end platforms is that chipset link speed has been halved! Oh dear... ‍

There's more to it, but I can't go into any more details without stirring up shit for various USB-IF members, which is not someting I' inclined to do.

This.

 

[zlobby]

It's a shame that they only copied the screamer fans from the server segment...

 

[Assimilator]

The paradox is that board vendors rushed with PCIe 5.0 support across GPU and NVMe slots, and almost nobody in the world uses those capabilities, while gatekeeping TB4 to top and halo designs only. Absurd.

Someone else who actually understands. Let me illustrate to others why USB4/TB4 is so important.

My work issued me a Dell laptop with TB4, so naturally I bought a Dell WD22TB4 dock for it. I have 3 monitors and the dock has 3 display outputs, so all good right? Nope, because as long as display is being output from the laptop, the Intel iGPU is in play... and its driver causes dwm.exe to leak memory like nobody's business (a longstanding known issue with Intel's fantastic graphics driver quality). The laptop does have a built-in RTX A2000... but its outputs route through the Intel iGPU, so the bad Intel driver remains in play, and the memory remains leaking.

So I decided to try something drastic. I purchased a TB4-to-PCIe adapter (TH3P4 Lite) off AliExpress, slapped in an RTX A2000 I snagged off Ebay and plugged in my 3 monitors, then plugged the TH3P4 into the dock. After a bit of messing around in the laptop's BIOS (disabling Intel TXT) and Windows (disabling the built-in RTX A2000), BAM I have full output of all my monitors being driven by the offboard RTX A2000 - which means the Intel iGPU has no hand in outputting anything, so no more memory leaks. And all of this with a single TB4 cable from laptop to dock.

Now, did I buy an eGPU dock and an external GPU just to solve a problem I can get around by killing dwm.exe from Task Manager a couple times a day? Yes, I did. But that's not the point, the point is that all of this (mostly) Just Works, and that would've been completely impossible to even think of half a decade ago. This is the kind of connectivity that professionals like myself don't just expect, but demand from our systems, because why the hell shouldn't we? And that kind of connectivity is what Thunderbolt provides, and what USB4 should provide, and that's why the lack of TB4/USB4 on so-called "high-end" motherboards, in both the standard consumer and now HEDT space, is so freaking bizarre.

Get with the program, AMD and Asrock.

 

[Tek-Check]

The laptop does have a built-in RTX A2000... but its outputs route through the Intel iGPU, so the bad Intel driver remains in play, and the memory remains leaking.

Did you email this to several tech journalists to investigate further? It does look like that most of tech press and techtubers are not interested in such deep dives, but there are a hadnful that might take up the challenge.

It's unacceptable that memory leaks, of course, and that laptop does not have mux chip to output images from GPU and iGPU separately. How is it possible that all video outputs route through iGPU!? So stupid...

BAM I have full output of all my monitors being driven by the offboard RTX A2000

Excellent job! That was a lot of work that you should have never carried out has Intel and laptop vendors provided a proper video output solution.

This is the kind of connectivity that professionals like myself don't just expect, but demand from our systems, because why the hell shouldn't we? And that kind of connectivity is what Thunderbolt provides, and what USB4 should provide, and that's why the lack of TB4/USB4 on so-called "high-end" motherboards, in both the standard consumer and now HEDT space, is so freaking bizarre.

Exactly. There is no excuse whatsoever for HEDT/WS boards, even upper mid-range and high-end desktop, not to provide TB4/USB4 connectivity in 2023. It's not a premium feature.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

So, I can't be wrong if I say that AMD and partners failed miserably with the chipset we call "South Bridge" in all segments with this generation? It is true that there are many lines and controllers in the I/O chiplet (North Bridge) of the CPUs, but this is not a sufficient excuse.

 

[Tek-Check]

So, I can't be wrong if I say that AMD and partners failed miserably with the chipset we call "South Bridge" in all segments with this generation? It is true that there are many lines and controllers in the I/O chiplet (North Bridge) of the CPUs, but this is not a sufficient excuse.

On the face value, they definitively failed with the chipset link speed Gen4 x4, which is regression by 50% from Gen4 x8. That said, the chipset on new HEDT/WS platform is arguably becoming less important component than ever before. As the CPU takes over majority of I/O tasks, which is a plausible trade-off from latency, saturation and economic point of view, there is little reason to beef up the chipset.

Essentially, the chipset was downgraded from X570 to B650, at the same time increasing the capability of CPU's connectivity more than the loss in the chipset. It's a good compensation. The CPU gained 20 usable PCIe lanes while the chipset lost 8. As a a whole, the new platform is substantially faster and more connected. It's up to motherboard vendors to expose this potential with imagination and engineering craftsmanship. AMD gave them a great platform to work with. Now, as someone said above, you have to be an idiot to place 4 and 5 fans on the motherboard, as well as ignorant to skip TB4/USB4 interface and DP IN ports. Asrock had brilliant Creator boards on Zen 3 platforms. I am confused as to why they made such a sharp turn now, instead of evolving and perfecting the past successful platform.

So, I would not pay too much attention to crippled chipset, as there is enough of peripherals on it for everything this platform needs from USB, SATA, (W)LAN and a few other bits. All other faster interfaces could be easily installed on CPU's PCIe lanes.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Perhaps your so-called profit by transferring more and more chiplet controllers to the central processor is actually one of the reasons for the increase in both financial and energy costs. This did not, as we know, reduce the price of the motherboards, due to the simplification of the south bridge. On the contrary, motherboards are also significantly more expensive, most noticeably in the price-sensitive budget segment of the market. Tragically stripped of components and interfaces, motherboards with A620 are priced on par with B550 and even higher than B450, which have a richer configuration.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Perhaps your so-called profit by transferring more and more chiplet controllers to the central processor is actually one of the reasons for the increase in both financial and energy costs. This did not, as we know, reduce the price of the motherboards, due to the simplification of the south bridge. On the contrary, motherboards are also significantly more expensive, most noticeably in the price-sensitive budget segment of the market. Tragically stripped of components and interfaces, motherboards with A620 are priced on par with B550 and even higher than B450, which have a richer configuration.

I hope you understand why though? Yes, a $10-20 part is gone, but in its place, we have more motherboard layers and more advanced PCB materials to reduce noise due to higher PCIe and peripheral interface speeds. Then there are all the retimers and redrivers that are need to keep signal integrity over all but the shortest distances. Add to this multiple peripheral ICs for things like USB 3.2 something, ever increasing power phase counts and what not and that cost of the chipset was long eaten up. Add inflation and increased cost for everything from staff to shipping and it's not all that strange.

Part of the problem is actually the now really old and pretty bad ATX motherboard standard. If we moved the CPU to the middle of the PCB, things might get a bit better, at least in terms of lane routing.

So, TRX50 and WRX90 chipsets are basically B650 Promo21 chip from AM5, right?
Another regression from Zen3 to Zen4 high-end platforms is that chipset link speed has been halved! Oh dear... ‍

That does indeed appear to be the case. It's apparently called the Pro 695 though.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1715019657818841519

 

[Tek-Check]

Perhaps your so-called profit by transferring more and more chiplet controllers to the central processor is actually one of the reasons for the increase in both financial and energy costs.

There is no evidence for this. There are no additional controllers on the CPU, apart from more PCIe PHY groups. USB4 is not integrated, 10 GbE LAN is not integrated and there is no iGPU either. One difference in I/O die is richer provision of PCIe lanes which happens on all Zen4 platforms. Yields on N5 process are over 90%, so you need to look at different, macroeconomic and global sources for increased financial costs, as explained by @TheLostSuede above. Have you not noticed that your bread and milk are significantly more expensive than two years ago? Start from simple things that have increased the cost of daily life since the pandemic and you will understand everything.

The trend looks quite opposite. At the end of the day, Threadrippers are simply adapted EPYC CPUs. EPYC processors sell like hot cakes. The same could easily happen with new Threadripper in relevant markets, such as media studios, scientific teams, auto industry design, game developers, enthusiasts, etc. There is an apetite for high-end compute around the world in specific sectors. If the entry platform is perceived as too expensive, people will not buy it and prices will have to go down, like Zen 4 desktop last year. It's really simple. I would not be surprised if the US government tries to restrict the access to some SKUs to Chinese exploding institutional compute sector.

This did not, as we know, reduce the price of the motherboards, due to the simplification of the south bridge. On the contrary, motherboards are also significantly more expensive, most noticeably in the price-sensitive budget segment of the market.

@TheLostSuede explained this point well.

Tragically stripped of components and interfaces, motherboards with A620 are priced on par with B550 and even higher than B450, which have a richer configuration.

Not correct. A620 chipset is more advanced and richer in configuration than both other older chipsets. It's on motherboard vendors to decide which features to expose. AMD does not dictate exposure of all features. There is no reason for pathos such as "tragically stripped...". Nonsense. AMD initially said that there would be boards for $125, and indeed, we have seen boards that even hit $99 and can comfortably run 7800X3D. See testing by tech tubers.

 

[mosawo]

MCIO and SlimSAS are good ideas.

There is definitely not enough space on the motherboard. Even if it's E-ATX size, it's a scramble for space.

• CPU socket is large.
• Since the TDP is so high, the cooling mechanism is large.
• Only 7 PCIe sockets can be installed at most.
• Even a normal graphics card requires 3 sockets
• M.2SSD also takes up space. Especially if there is more than one.

From the above, even if the CPU has a large number of lanes, it is extremely difficult to reflect them on the motherboard. One of the countermeasures is MCIO and SlimSAS. It is possible to "offload" the SSD to the outside of the motherboard.

By the way, both ASRock, Gigabyte, and probably ASUS have a large number of unused lanes on their TRX50 motherboards. ASRock has 12 lanes unused and Gigabyte has 18 lanes unused. They are in a situation where they cannot use it even if they want to, I think so.

 

[Tek-Check]

By the way, both ASRock, Gigabyte, and probably ASUS have a large number of unused lanes on their TRX50 motherboards. ASRock has 12 lanes unused and Gigabyte has 18 lanes unused. They are in a situation where they cannot use it even if they want to, I think so.

Asrock has less unused lanes:
- all Gen 5 lanes are used
- from Gen 4, I cannot account only one x8 link on CPU
(there are PCIe slots x8 + x4, x2 or x4 for 10GbE LAN, x4 for SlimSAS)
- chipset is almost entirely full - x4 M.2, x4 SATA, WiFi and LAN, all USBs

Asrock has made a decent use of almost all data lanes.

 

[ADB1979]

Part of the problem is actually the now really old and pretty bad ATX motherboard standard. If we moved the CPU to the middle of the PCB, things might get a bit better, at least in terms of lane routing.

I have come up with ideas/designs for a replacement to the ATX form factor and associated standards. The problems are however many, and in multiple fields. Case design and motherboard design are the primary ones, but some of my ideas/designs would or could effect various other components, such as add-in cards, nVME, motherboard I/O panel, front I/O potentially, and depending on the final design standards also potentially effecting water-cooling and PSU's, but that would simply be down to placement and tube/cable lengths, so nothing major. Unlike with ATX, it would be a good idea IMHO to create smaller/larger standards from the outset rather than years later.

Quite some time ago now GamersNexus asked their readers/viewers to help them select a manufacturer for a GamersNexus designed case. I tried contacting them repeatedly from two different e-mail addresses (I created one for just this purpose), and I e-mailed several of their staff and never got a response, they obviously were not actually interested.! That sparked my designing of cases, and as you would expect, the immediate problem was the numerous shortcomings of the ATX standard and various associated standards. Apple of course does not have this issue at all, and can create whatever they like.

Ultimately for this to actually get off the ground there would need to be involved, at least one of either AMD or Intel, at least one motherboard manufacturer, at least one case manufacturer, at least one of nVidia or AMD, at least one OEM to bulk buy and put this out to the mass market, AND for all of these parts manufacturers to mass manufacture and sell their products to individuals, custom builders etc as apart from the OEM, the primary market in the beginning will be gamers, power users, and professionals, of which power users and professionals is exactly where this discussion started, and the primary points here have been around USB4/TB4, which is not relevant here, the lackluster I/O, the problems with front I/O, AsRock using multiple 40mm fans to cool the VRM's/MOSFETS, and of course the board layout, and the problems with the archaic ATX standard.

If a moderator wants me to, I can create a whole new thread for this topic, or just leave this here. Depending on the feedback I may just do that myself anyway, although I wont be able to do it until Monday.

 

[kapone32]

I have come up with ideas/designs for a replacement to the ATX form factor and associated standards. The problems are however many, and in multiple fields. Case design and motherboard design are the primary ones, but some of my ideas/designs would or could effect various other components, such as add-in cards, nVME, motherboard I/O panel, front I/O potentially, and depending on the final design standards also potentially effecting water-cooling and PSU's, but that would simply be down to placement and tube/cable lengths, so nothing major. Unlike with ATX, it would be a good idea IMHO to create smaller/larger standards from the outset rather than years later.

Quite some time ago now GamersNexus asked their readers/viewers to help them select a manufacturer for a GamersNexus designed case. I tried contacting them repeatedly from two different e-mail addresses (I created one for just this purpose), and I e-mailed several of their staff and never got a response, they obviously were not actually interested.! That sparked my designing of cases, and as you would expect, the immediate problem was the numerous shortcomings of the ATX standard and various associated standards. Apple of course does not have this issue at all, and can create whatever they like.

Ultimately for this to actually get off the ground there would need to be involved, at least one of either AMD or Intel, at least one motherboard manufacturer, at least one case manufacturer, at least one OEM to bulk buy and put this out to the mass market, AND for all of these parts manufacturers to mass manufacture and sell their products to individuals, custom builders etc as apart from the OEM, the primary market in the beginning will be gamers, power users, and professionals, of which power users and professionals is exactly where this discussion started, and the primary points here have been around USB4/TB4, which is not relevant here, the lackluster I/O, the problems with front I/O, AsRock using multiple 40mm fans to cool the VRM's/MOSFETS, and of course the board layout, and the problems with the archaic ATX standard.

If a moderator wants me to, I can create a whole new thread for this topic, or just leave this here. Depending on the feedback I may just do that myself anyway, although I wont be able to do it until Monday.

ATX exists because there are still users who grew up on it and love it. However you are no longer constrained to ATX in MBs or Cases. There are other form factors that are gaining in popularity and just because some people are into Mini ITX and some of the wildest case designs are in cases that support Micro ATX as a max form factor and now we are seeing more Mini ITX only cases.

 

[ADB1979]

MCIO and SlimSAS are good ideas.

There is definitely not enough space on the motherboard. Even if it's E-ATX size, it's a scramble for space.

• CPU socket is large.
• Since the TDP is so high, the cooling mechanism is large.
• Only 7 PCIe sockets can be installed at most.
• Even a normal graphics card requires 3 sockets
• M.2SSD also takes up space. Especially if there is more than one.

From the above, even if the CPU has a large number of lanes, it is extremely difficult to reflect them on the motherboard. One of the countermeasures is MCIO and SlimSAS. It is possible to "offload" the SSD to the outside of the motherboard.

By the way, both ASRock, Gigabyte, and probably ASUS have a large number of unused lanes on their TRX50 motherboards. ASRock has 12 lanes unused and Gigabyte has 18 lanes unused. They are in a situation where they cannot use it even if they want to, I think so.

I have designs at the ATX size (aimed at gamers) that would allow a 300W GPU to be adequately cooled without sounding like a jet engine, cooling of a 280W CPU and still having space for additional PCIe slots.

This problem as you rightly say cannot realistically be done right now in the Workstation market without increasing the motherboard size, and STILL has shortcomings such as massive GPU's covering slots and making them unusable. These problems will continue as the CPU sockets continue to grow in size and add yet more memory channels. Forget thinking outside of the box, time to tear that box up and create a new one (almost) from scratch, it is rapidly becoming not fit for purpose, especially in the Workstation sphere, the Server sphere is very different and has seen the ATX standard being scrapped entirely in many products in recent years, the only real constraint there is the 19" rackmount standard.

ATX exists because there are still users who grew up on it and love it. However you are no longer constrained to ATX in MBs or Cases. There are other form factors that are gaining in popularity and just because some people are into Mini ITX and some of the wildest case designs are in cases that support Micro ATX as a max form factor and now we are seeing more Mini ITX only cases.

That is true, but none of that addresses the people who have a Threadripper, a couple of add-in cards plus a couple of GPU's, and still need a heap of internal and external I/O.

The overlap between "gaming" systems and "pro" systems ends at the constraints of the physical size of modern high performance GPU's and the ATX standard. FYI: My original designs/ideas started with Gaming and relatively small changes, it is very clear to me that the ATX (or mATX, DTX, ITX etc) all have significant restraints with just the GPU and ATX standard. I did however move onto Workstations and their constraints and that is where I essentially ripped up the ATX standard and looked for solutions to everything that has come up in this thread (except for why there is a serious lack of USB4/TB4, I cant help there).

 

[TheLostSwede]

ATX exists because there are still users who grew up on it and love it. However you are no longer constrained to ATX in MBs or Cases. There are other form factors that are gaining in popularity and just because some people are into Mini ITX and some of the wildest case designs are in cases that support Micro ATX as a max form factor and now we are seeing more Mini ITX only cases.

None of those solve the underlying issues though.

 

[unwind-protect]

The existence of the Cooler Master Stacker 810 proves that ATX is perfect (well, E-EATX to be precise).

We need more cases that are friendly to hotswap frames.

 

[kapone32]

I have designs at the ATX size (aimed at gamers) that would allow a 300W GPU to be adequately cooled without sounding like a jet engine, cooling of a 280W CPU and still having space for additional PCIe slots.

This problem as you rightly say cannot realistically be done right now in the Workstation market without increasing the motherboard size, and STILL has shortcomings such as massive GPU's covering slots and making them unusable. These problems will continue as the CPU sockets continue to grow in size and add yet more memory channels. Forget thinking outside of the box, time to tear that box up and create a new one (almost) from scratch, it is rapidly becoming not fit for purpose, especially in the Workstation sphere, the Server sphere is very different and has seen the ATX standard being scrapped entirely in many products in recent years, the only real constraint there is the 19" rackmount standard.


That is true, but none of that addresses the people who have a Threadripper, a couple of add-in cards plus a couple of GPU's, and still need a heap of internal and external I/O.

The overlap between "gaming" systems and "pro" systems ends at the constraints of the physical size of modern high performance GPU's and the ATX standard. FYI: My original designs/ideas started with Gaming and relatively small changes, it is very clear to me that the ATX (or mATX, DTX, ITX etc) all have significant restraints with just the GPU and ATX standard. I did however move onto Workstations and their constraints and that is where I essentially ripped up the ATX standard and looked for solutions to everything that has come up in this thread (except for why there is a serious lack of USB4/TB4, I cant help there).

None of those solve the underlying issues though.

I understand what you are both saying but at the end of the day there wont be enough sales of these unless the CPUs are accessible to the masses at reasonable prices.

 

[TheLostSwede]

I understand what you are both saying but at the end of the day there wont be enough sales of these unless the CPUs are accessible to the masses at reasonable prices.

What we need is an industry wide shift to a new form factor that is suitable for modern systems, much like the transition from AT to ATX motherboards.