Why no one has the right to be angry at AMD with regards to AM4

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

And on top of all that, from what Steve from GN found out, there is at most 2 guys in any given company that are legit BIOS programmers. Sometimes only one.

I would be surprised if they don't have separate test and validation team's from the guy writing bios.

 

[Vya Domus]

there is at most 2 guys in any given company that are legit BIOS programmers. Sometimes only one.

They are just exaggerating the workload this stuff entails. When 3000 series arrived a year ago their "1 guy" did just fine so it's not about the available workforce. They are simply trying to be cheap and avoid spending extra resources for something that AMD did not mandate officially. Everyone is just "PR-ing" their way through this mess, solutions exist, they almost always do.

These things aren't tested by hand, they're automated, that's what is really costing them money and therefore that's what they try to avoid.

 

[Countryside]

Since when did we ran out of BIOS programmers, one guy running between oems this sounds like a bad joke.

And like i said before Asus managed on my x370 board with 128 Mbit flash to support Ryzen 1,2,3 + twelve pointless 28nm cpus and theres seven Athlon 200 series cpus. Quite impressive list.

 

[HD64G]

AMD can allow board vendors to use AGESA code for Zen3 for all the previous board designs compatible to it. And those vendors can publish beta UEFIs to allow any customer willing to update his board with that to support the upcoming Zen2 APUs and Zen3 CPUs. Problem solved. For now, all vendors support Zen, Zen+ CPUs and APUs and Zen2 in one UEFI only. With 2 UEFIs they can cover all needs. And no customer having a previous gen board will have big anxiety if they delay to publish that UEFI 1-2 months after the CPU-APU goes on sale.

 

[Bill_Bright]

And those vendors can publish beta UEFIs to allow any customer willing to update his board with that to support the upcoming Zen2 APUs and Zen3 CPUs. Problem solved.

Problem solved? With a Beta? Ummm, no!

Users should NEVER have to be Guinea pigs for vendors. If a CPU has been released for general consumer purchase, there should be a "general availability", stable release version of the BIOS/UEFI for that CPU.

Beta copies are still in testing. If consumers what to be beta testers, then fine. But never as their only option once the CPU has gone into full, final release, production.

Edit comment: fixed typo.

 

[londiste]

You don't have to make CPUless BIOS updates a requirement, that makes no sense. Why would that even be a thing ? You simply send an email to ASUS/MSI/Asrock/etc and ask them to send you the latest revison with X CPUs/series removed and Y CPU/series added, it's by far the best solution with the least amount of headache (no wide spread RMA issues)

Once? Depending on how support goes on the motherboard maybe you sell it to someone with an older CPU and they have to do it again.

Ignoring the part of putting a reliable BIOS together (in one try? ), the main question is who pays for shipping and handling? The closest motherboard vendor center is pretty far away from me and reasonably insured package would be 15-20€ each way. They'd likely want to add some handling free. At that rate I'd be better off using some local retailer for BIOS update service or more likely - just go for a new board.

Pretty sure I personally would be able to find a CPU that fits but finding out which one it is, going through friends to find one who has the correct generation CPU and dealing with the switcheroo is a pain. Been there, done that. Twice, already. But most people do not move in hardware enthusiast circles.

 

[Vya Domus]

Once? Depending on how support goes on the motherboard maybe you sell it to someone with an older CPU and they have to do it again.

Pretty sure I personally would be able to find a CPU that fits but finding out which one it is, going through friends to find one who has the correct generation CPU and dealing with the switcheroo is a pain. Been there, done that. Twice, already. But most people do not move in hardware enthusiast circles.

Shipping and selling what ? What are you talking about ? This is simply about a manufacturer sending you a BIOS with the support you need, that's it, you do your own thing. These CPUs would continue to be officially unsupported so there is no obligation for anyone to do anything.

Things have been added/removed outside of official support god knows how many times, there is literally nothing new about what I suggested.

Ignoring the part of putting a reliable BIOS together

There is nothing special about putting together such a BIOS, just like how they added and tested 3000 series on B450.

 

[HD64G]

Problem solved? With a Beta? Ummm, no!

Users should NEVER have to be Guinea pigs for vendors. If a CPU has been released for general consumer purchase, there should be a "general availability", stable release version of the BIOS/UEFI for that CPU.

Beta copies are still in testing. If consumers what to be beta testers, then fine. But never as their only option once the CPU has gone into full, final release, production.

Edit comment: fixed typo.

I just meant that the board vendors can even add a BETA title on the UEFI description to make customers more cautious that it might ruin their PC if done without previous planning and thinking. And this should be done imho, if AMD cannot support officially those CPUs for previous chipsets and allow vendors to use the AGESA and make themselves UEFIs that do so. I prefer that solution than preventing old chipsets from working with upcoming CPUs that are fully compatible on power, pins and all other aspects to fit in all AM4 boards.

 

[londiste]

Shipping and selling what ? What are you talking about ? This is simply about a manufacturer sending you a BIOS with the support you need, that's it, you do your own thing. These CPUs would continue to be officially unsupported so there is no obligation for anyone to do anything.

Things have been added/removed outside of official support god knows how many times, there is literally nothing new about what I suggested.

Oh, I thought you meant getting boards to manufacturers. Just the BIOS and an unsupported one at that? Nope. That is definitely not even a solution at all.

 

[Vya Domus]

That is definitely not a solution at all.

It most certainly is, you give the people who absolutely want these things the option to do it unofficially and for everyone else nothing changes.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I just meant that the board vendors can even add a BETA title on the UEFI description to make customers more cautious that it might ruin their PC if done without previous planning and thinking.

The fact it "might" ruin a PC is not a "problem solved" scenario. And sorry, but it is a fantasy idealistic world to suggest "previous planning and thinking" would prevent this firmware, that, by definition, is still in testing, from bricking the board. If the code is still in beta, that means the company knows it has not been thoroughly tested yet.

I understand what you are saying but by no stretch of the imagination is putting "BETA" in the title solving anything. All that does is (maybe) release the maker from any legal liability should the update fail catastrophically.

The facts are pretty simple here. The processor and the chipset/firmware development sides of the house need to be working as a team and only RTM (release to manufactures) the processor or chipsets to the motherboard makers when the processors and chipsets are thoroughly tested and 100% ready. And the motherboard makers must not release the product for "general availability" until the board is verified fully compatible with the processors - as listed on their published compatibility lists (QVLs).

If users attempt to use a processor not listed, they need to be aware they are 100% on their own and board makers should not be suggesting problems are solved with beta software. And this user awareness should not be hidden in 10 pages of legalese uses are expected to scroll through and read before downloading either!

 

[HD64G]

The fact it "might" ruin a PC is not a "problem solved" scenario. And sorry, but it is a fantasy idealistic world to suggest "previous planning and thinking" would prevent this firmware, that, by definition, is still in testing, from bricking the board. If the code is still in beta, that means the company knows it has not been thoroughly tested yet.

I understand what you are saying but by no stretch of the imagination is putting "BETA" in the title solving anything. All that does is (maybe) release the maker from any legal liability should the update fail catastrophically.

The facts are pretty simple here. The processor and the chipset/firmware development sides of the house need to be working as a team and only RTM (release to manufactures) the processor or chipsets to the motherboard makers when the processors and chipsets are thoroughly tested and 100% ready. And the motherboard makers must not release the product for "general availability" until the board is verified fully compatible with the processors - as listed on their published compatibility lists (QVLs).

If users attempt to use a processor not listed, they need to be aware they are 100% on their own and board makers should not be suggesting problems are solved with beta software. And this user awareness should not be hidden in 10 pages of legalese uses are expected to scroll through and read before downloading either!

Since we all PC enthusiasts know for sure that upcoming cpus are fully compatible with all AM4 sockets, the label BETA could just act as a "being cautious" warning to users that could update their UEFI and lose compatibility with the CPU in their system as the UEFI could be compatible only with Zen2&3 products. Just an idea as I know many PC users cannot fully comprehend what an update with an incompatible UEFI can do to their PC. If the BETA label is so bad, let's agree that a big red banner with what products that BIOS will work will be more than required to protect users from big mistakes.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Since we all PC enthusiasts know for sure that upcoming cpus are fully compatible with all AM4 sockets

No! That's an entirely bogus, unfounded, and frankly a tunnel-visioned assumption.

I've been a "PC enthusiast" ever since the IBM PC came out, and into "desktop micro" computers long before that - but as an electronics technician - not as a gamer, or programmer, or graphics designer, or [fill in the blank], any of whom can be a "PC enthusiast". A PC enthusiast maybe someone who just loves using PC computers but has no desire to learn everything to there is to know about AMD processors.

And I would never, as in NEVER EVER assuming "upcoming" CPUs are "fully compatible" with "all" AM4 sockets. If that were true, why have QVLs?

You must not assume "all" PC enthusiasts are (1) the same, and (2) just like you. For that is not true at all. We are all unique! There are as many different types of PC enthusiasts as there are people who like PCs. There is NOTHING to suggest a gamer knows all the ins and outs of AMD CPU compatibility any more than there is anything to suggest someone who enjoys coding webpages does. There are many enthusiasts who would not think of building their own PC. Or maybe they prefer Intel and don't follow AMD. Or are lifelong Mac fans.

The fact is, a person may be very specialized and highly regarded in their area of interest/expertise, not know or care anything about AMD or AM4 compatibility, and still be considered a PC enthusiasts.

Do not assume, just because someone regularly visits TPU that they care or "know for sure" anything about AMD or AM4 compatibility, or that they are not an enthusiasts.

the label BETA could just act as a "being cautious" warning to users

And that is fine. I don't have a problem with a product being labeled as a "Beta" product. In fact, if something is NOT ready for final production and general release to consumers, it should be labeled as beta or something similar. That is not the point. The point is, by definition, a product that is still in "beta" is still in "testing". And therefore, not a "problem solved" - yet.

 

[Vya Domus]

The fact is, a person may be very specialized and highly regarded in their area of interest/expertise, not know or care anything about AMD or AM4 compatibility, and still be considered a PC enthusiasts.

If their area of expertise does not include things like AMD or AM4 compatibility or at least the know-how of how you would find out about that, then they're not PC enthusiasts, it's that simple. Your logic sounds really dumb, how can you possibly be a PC enthusiasts if you have zero knowledge and interest about them ? This genuinely makes no sense.

Is this some feely touchy thing like "it's enough to believe you're part of a group to be in that group " ? Come on. If you don't know anything about PCs one thing we can be sure of is that you're not a PC enthusiast.

 

[Bill_Bright]

If their area of expertise does not include things like AMD or AM4 compatibility or at least the know-how of how you would find out about that, then they're not PC enthusiasts,

Oh bullfeathers! Does a car enthusiast need to know the minute details of how a transmission works?

More importantly, if a car enthusiast has no desire to know the intricacies of a transmission, does that mean they can't be a car enthusiasts?

And having the know-how to find out about about something is not the same thing at all. Just because I might know how to Google something does not mean I am an enthusiast.

If you don't know anything about PCs

Whoa! Who said anything about not knowing anything about PCs? I sure never said anything of the sort!!! This is another "tunnel-visioned" look at PCs. You are suggesting a person has to know EVERYTHING about PCs to be considered an enthusiast. That's just nonsense. I know for a fact, YOU don't know everything. Therefore, you're no enthusiast!!!

Personal computers, like IT in general, involves many industries within industries. NO WAY can anybody have expertise (or care to have expertise) in all of them.

Now we are getting way off track here.

 

[Vya Domus]

Who said anything about not knowing anything about PCs?

You did say this, which more or less implies the same thing, that you can have people who have never delved into the intricacies of how these things work and who could still be considered enthusiasts.

There are many enthusiasts who would not think of building their own PC.

What are the chances that someone who doesn't even think about building a PC knows a lot about them. Again, you're logic is bewildering.

You are suggesting a person has to know EVERYTHING about PCs to be considered an enthusiast.

They have to know a decent amount to be considered that, like knowing enough in order to build a PC or knowing how to look up which CPUs are compatible with which boards. You know this is true, but as always you try to defend your bizarre ideas.

 

[Turmania]

Amd did Intel. But Intel does not go around giving false advertisements and that is the issue here. I think Steve,from gamers nexus explained it pretty well.

 

[HD64G]

BOOM!!!

Now AMD is again the most customer-friendly PC enterprise we know.

 

[brucechow]

And here I was, happy with my 3600 on a B450 board. Now the god damn upgrade demon is back!

 

[Vya Domus]

BOOM!!!

Now AMD is again the most customer-friendly PC enterprise we know.

So they basically did what I suggested in that there are going to be unofficial BIOS revisions with most CPUs removed. londiste, what do you say, was it a solution or was it not ?

 

[Bill_Bright]

You did say this,

No I didn't! Show us where. You can't.

Why would you make up such an obvious falsehood when everyone can go back and read and see that I never said that? That's just not cool, dude.

To repeat, I NEVER EVER said a person needs to know "everything" to be an enthusiast, or that they "not know anything" any still be an enthusiast. To say I did is just a lie.

Since you have now stooped to making up falsehoods about what others have said or not said, I'm done here.

 

[Space Lynx]

BOOM!!!

Now AMD is again the most customer-friendly PC enterprise we know.

lol wow. too bad I just refunded my b450 tomahawk max. what a hassle. make up your effin mind AMD. I will just pay Intel tax at this point, I got the b450 max on sale too. so yeah... screw AMD, just state it up front why the back and forth. super annoying.

 

[Vya Domus]

No I didn't! Show us were. You can't.

I quoted what I was talking about in my comment, maybe you missed it.

 

[TheLostSwede]

lol wow. too bad I just refunded my b450 tomahawk max. what a hassle. make up your effin mind AMD. I will just pay Intel tax at this point, I got the b450 max on sale too. so yeah... screw AMD, just state it up front why the back and forth. super annoying.

Did you watch the video? It's not as straight forward as you'd think.
It's now up to the board makers, so you may or may not get support...

 

[londiste]

So they basically did what I suggested in that there are going to be unofficial BIOS revisions with most CPUs removed. londiste, what do you say, was it a solution or was it not ?

It is still the same bad solution. Not unofficial, beta. Will be interesting to see how these are going to be supported. One-way, verification of 400-series motherboard and that you have Zen3 CPU plus availability that may not coincide with availability of Zen3 CPUs.

Sounds like made be enthusiasts and for enthusiasts and no normal person would want that.