Is it worth to wait for X870E?

[danc]

And as I've stated before, that column is wrong (or at best, deliberately misleading). It is 12 usable lanes of PCIe 4.0 and 8 usable lanes of PCIe 3.0 for X870E and X670E; Puget summed these to get to 20. But given there are no manufacturers who are going to ship their boards without SATA ports, and PCIe 3.0 lanes themselves are too slow for pretty much anything except SATA, those 8 PCIe 3.0 lanes can pretty much be considered spoken for.

Correct me if i am wrong, even for the "12" usable PCIe 4.0 lanes, in reality all of them will be bottleneck by the 4 PCIe 4.0 lanes going back to the CPU.

So if you somehow start hammering your I/O devices off those 12 PCIe 4.0 lanes, you get major congestion and thus performance losses, in other words, you will never get the full fat 12 PCIe 4.0 performance

 

[TheLostSwede]

Unless you really want to use an external USB4 JBOD, or any other USB4-only device, you might want to check out X670E or even B650E motherboards that provide four or more M.2 slots.

B650E/B650 would share lanes with the GPU to offer more than three M.2 slots though.

Correct me if i am wrong, even for the "12" usable PCIe 4.0 lanes, in reality all of them will be bottleneck by the 4 PCIe 4.0 lanes going back to the CPU.

So far, I have yet to see a scenario where this is a true bottleneck. I haven't seen any testing prove it, even though in theory, it should be a bottleneck.

So if you somehow start hammering your I/O devices off those 12 PCIe 4.0 lanes, you get major congestion and thus performance losses, in other words, you will never get the full fat 12 PCIe 4.0 performance

Well, two are connected to one chipset and one to the other chipset, so it would really depend on the workload. Again, not seen any proof of this being an issue, on AMD or Intel platforms, but I'm sure there are some scenarios where it could be.

 

[Sarajiel]

Correct me if i am wrong, even for the "12" usable PCIe 4.0 lanes, in reality all of them will be bottleneck by the 4 PCIe 4.0 lanes going back to the CPU.

So if you somehow start hammering your I/O devices off those 12 PCIe 4.0 lanes, you get major congestion and thus performance losses, in other words, you will never get the full fat 12 PCIe 4.0 performance

You are correct.
The chipset I/O is basically only for "slow", or burst devices that aren't running at sustained full load. That's pretty much the reason why the B650(E) boards are more than enough for most folks.

TPU did some tests with Gen4 M.2s, and they lose about 15% performance even if they are the only active device.

B650E/B650 would share lanes with the GPU to offer more than three M.2 slots though.

That applies to all AM5 chipsets.
As I mentioned in the paragraphs below, you have to bifurcate. In the end, it comes down to the lesser evil, or buying a Threadripper.

 

[TheLostSwede]

That applies to all AM5 chipsets.
As I mentioned in the paragraphs below, you have to bifurcate. In the end, it comes down to the lesser evil, or buying a Threadripper.

No, it does not.
X670, X670E and X870E has two chipsets and can have four or even five M.2 drives without need to share any bandwidth with the x16 slot, depending on the board layout.

 

[Sarajiel]

No, it does not.

My mistake, for my poor wording. I was referring to CPU-connected lanes.

X670, X670E and X870E has two chipsets and can have four or even five M.2 drives without need to share any bandwidth with the x16 slot, depending on the board layout.

You should take a look at ASRock boards... There are quite a few that connect 2x M.2s to B650(E). As you can see in their block diagrams.

 

[chrcoluk]

And as I've stated before, that column is wrong (or at best, deliberately misleading). It is 12 usable lanes of PCIe 4.0 and 8 usable lanes of PCIe 3.0 for X870E and X670E; Puget summed these to get to 20. But given there are no manufacturers who are going to ship their boards without SATA ports, and PCIe 3.0 lanes themselves are too slow for pretty much anything except SATA, those 8 PCIe 3.0 lanes can pretty much be considered spoken for.

3.0 lanes are not useless.

Sound cards, display, NIC's, storage (yes including NVME, not just SATA), capture cards, addon cards anything fed of the chipset that doesnt use 4.0 levels of bandwidth, end of the day lanes are lanes. I agree it should show what the 3.0/4.0 break down is but the total lane count on the chipset as well as the onboard USB/SATA is what I was discussing. As far as I am concerned its all cleared up now on the discussion.

 

[Dyno]

Don't need USB4, WIFI 7, I'm looking forward to Gen 5 for GPU and M.2. The only difference between what they have in the market compared to 870 is if you want more m.2. drives and an extra Gen5 slot. I doubt i'll be purchasing before they come out with 870, but if there is a bargain or sale on an 870 Motherboard that has Gen 5 for GPU and 2x Gen5 m.2. i would most likely buy it if it comes in a bundle. Still waiting to see how 9800X3D preforms and how the 15th generation intel is for sure.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Don't need... and ...

That's great there may be some who do need them. Or perhaps, they just want them and there's nothing wrong with that. Sometimes, if just feels good to treat ourselves with something new want - even if we don't really "need" it.

 

[mkppo]

Any word on any 1DPC X870, like the X870 Tachyon? I really hope it isn't vaporware like the B650E Tachyon was. I don't want to go to Japan to get it..

 

[jxdking]

Any word on any 1DPC X870, like the X870 Tachyon? I really hope it isn't vaporware like the B650E Tachyon was. I don't want to go to Japan to get it..

I don't see any 1DPC with x870(e), while B850 line is not annouced yet by any company.
If asrock release B850-HDV/m.2 and 1DPC, I will jump on that one.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Honestly, I eagerly wait for X870E motherboards, but after reading many comments about X870E vs X670E, I am just thinking of getting X670E instead.
The biggest considerations are the second-hand (like new) high-end X670E is now more affordable (for instance, Asus C Extreme X670E, like new, selling for EUR 450), and I need many SSD storages to store the large datasets locally.
Do you have any better suggestions?

Asrock looks to launch some new boards soon but it looks as though the detail pages are not linked up properly yet. I got tired of waiting so I got a B650 one of few boards that does both x16(cpu)/x4(cpu)/x4(chipset) for PCIe slot expansion and allows room for double slot GPU in the 2nd x16(electrically x4) slot position. I won't be playing games so I don't need the full GPU bandwidth. It leaves me with the top x16 for bifurcated storage and the bottom x4 for something useful like raid card or 10Gbps LAN or more USB3.

 

[NxZsolt]

No, not really. Those boards use old Intel Thunderbolt chips on PCIe 3.0 and call it USB4, but those controllers are limited to 32 Gbps vs. 40 Gbps for the ASM4242 USB4 PCIe 4.0 host controller.
Don't get suckered in by those boards.

What about the new X870 and X870E boards? They use the same Thunderbolt chips?

 

[TheLostSwede]

What about the new X870 and X870E boards? They use the same Thunderbolt chips?

No, they use the ASM4242 USB4 host controller. None of them should have an Intel Thunderbolt chip. USB4 and Thunderbolt are not the same. Despite what Intel says, USB4 is superior in most instances. Thunderbolt 5 is likely to favour Intel and Thunderbolt again, depending on how the chips interface with the system.

 

[NxZsolt]

No, they use the ASM4242 USB4 host controller. None of them should have an Intel Thunderbolt chip. USB4 and Thunderbolt are not the same. Despite what Intel says, USB4 is superior in most instances. Thunderbolt 5 is likely to favour Intel and Thunderbolt again, depending on how the chips interface with the system.

Then it means I cant use Thunderbolt devices with them?

 

[TheLostSwede]

Then it means I cant use Thunderbolt devices with them?

No. USB4 should be seen as a superset of Thunderbolt 3/4, as it offers 40 vs 32 Gbps speeds and it's backwards compatible with all USB 3.x standards, whereas Thunderbolt is limited to 10 Gbps USB 3.x. The ASM4242 even received Thunderbolt 4 certification recently. However, this doesn't automagically mean all products with the ASM4242 will be Thunderbolt certified, but they should all work with Thunderbolt devices.

ASMedia ASM4242 USB4 Host Controller Chip Achieves Thunderbolt 4 Certification

ASMedia announced that its USB4 host controller chip, ASM4242, has received Thunderbolt 4 certification, following its USB-IF certification earlier this year. This marks a significant milestone for the ASM4242, toward providing a comprehensive high-speed transmission solution and an outstanding...

www.techpowerup.com

 

[Orodruin]

I switched from Asus ROG B650E-E motherboard to X670E Hero.

The main reason for switching was to have more data paths. On my previous motherboard I was using 4 nvme slots and the GPU slot was X8.

I am currently using 5 NVMEs. 4 of them are connected on the motherboard and one is connected via PCIE card. And the GPU is running as X16. The dual chipset of X670E/X870E provides exactly that.
And also has forward USB 4.0 (Thunderbolt) support.

Other than that the difference between X670E and X870E is Wifi 7 and higher RAM speed.
There is no other difference.

 

[Wolverine2349]

Heck no unless you want USB 4 ports.

Its a downgrade in other ways.

Lots of X670E boards have 2 dedicated X4 Gen 5 M.2 NVME slots to CPUI without touching top slot 16 GPU lanes.

X870E, only 1 M.2 as the mobo vendors siphoned 4 PCIe lanes form CPU so now GPU lanes ion top slot cut in half if more than 1 NVME M.2 direct to CPU.

Stupid decision when they should have used chipset instead. But AMD kind of forced it on them and it was a cheaper route.

USB 4 is useless. Who needs insane fast external storage. I mean my goodness are we back to the days of the Apple 2C and original IBM PC and floppy disks with no internal HJDDs.

Much rather have direct to CPU multiple super fast NVME drives as an option that stupid USB 4 C ports.

 

[freeagent]

Who needs insane fast external storage.

I am out of lanes.. insane fast external storage would be good for moar NVME

 

[Wolverine2349]

I am out of lanes.. insane fast external storage would be good for moar NVME

How so. NVME is internal not external?

For more overall storage, AMD should have made X870E have more chipset lanes and should not have allowed mobo makers to siphon 4 PCIe lanes from CPU for their USB 4.

 

[AusWolf]

How so. NVME is internal not external?

NVME - USB enclosures do exist (and are pretty great, imo).

 

[GotNoRice]

USB 4 is useless. Who needs insane fast external storage.

USB4 is actually pretty amazing. Mainly due to the inclusion of Thunderbolt. That gives you 40Gbps of connectivity for literally anything. It's not just about storage.

I bought a Dell Thunderbolt 3 Laptop Dock for only $15, and plugged into a USB4 port on my X870E motherboard. It works at the full 40Gbps, gives me multiple display outputs, an extra Gigabit Ethernet port, multiple extra USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 ports, and even has a passthrough Thunderbolt USB-C port so I don't even lose out on that when using the dock. It can really help make up for a board that has less than an ideal number of USB ports or that only has one Gigabit Ethernet port. 2.5G/5G/10G Ethernet USB/Thunderbolt adapters are now just as fast as their PCIe counterparts in many/most cases.

It feels like the first real meaningful innovation to USB since USB 3.0 came out in 2008. Of course thunderbolt also existed prior to USB4, but it was always optional and was never particularly common on the desktop. USB4 should help make it standard across most/all devices now.

 

[Frick]

That gives you 40Gbps of connectivity for literally anything.

That is the cool thing. But I get the aversion towards it. We have these big chunky boxes with ATX motherboards ... and the new normal is to not use that but instead use external hardware? It makes sense (Universal Serial Bus) but I do find modern desktops computers annoying*.

*no optical drives, no HDD cages, it's literally just big empty boxes the same size they've always been but with less function and more fan mounting spots, it's the reason I use a decade old case

 

[Launcestonian]

The thing is with X870(E) boards is better memory tracers & thus more potential for higher RAM oc with stability. Even with early bios dev that is still a thing with these newer boards that 2+ yr old X670(E) boards don't have. The bios maturity will only embed this performance feature further.
Personally, I'm waiting on what B850 brings to the table early next year...

 

[GotNoRice]

The thing is with X870(E) boards is better memory tracers & thus more potential for higher RAM oc with stability.

This is something that was speculated on pre-release based on AMD marketing but has not proven to have much merit based on any actual reviews that I've seen. You still can't go above 6200-6400 on most boards without breaking 1:1, and you have to go all the way to ~8000 to make up for the performance penalty that results from that. But many/most boards won't even post at 8000. 6000 CL30 is still the sweet spot. Really nothing has changed from X670/X670E.

On a side note, X870 really should not be lumped together with X870E. While X670 was very similar to X670E, X870 is really just B650E with USB4, just like X870E is just X670E with USB4. There really is no 800-series equivalent to X670. Moving from X670 to X870 would be a downgrade in most cases (downgrading from X670 to renamed B650E).

 

[Bill_Bright]

USB 4 is useless. Who needs insane fast external storage.

So because you don't see the need for you, it is useless?

How many times throughout the history of computing have we heard, "X amount is more than you will ever need". I think the first time I heard it was with my very first PC and opted to upgrade to a whopping 64KB (yes, kilo) of RAM from the standard 32K and was told then 64K was more than I will ever need. Same when I bought my first 40MB (yes mega) hard drive, upgrading from the HUGE 20MB.

Then again with 4GB of RAM. And again with 100GB drives. And again and again and again.

One big advantage to faster USB is the ability to daisy chain devices and still maintain great transfer speeds - without occupying all your ports.