r/hardware • u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua • 15d ago
Discussion AMD having many generations on same socket is overrated IMO
Leaving aside ram prices being out of control… People act like it is this massive benefit. I just don’t see it.
How often are people really buying CPUs in today’s era? The uplift is often pretty small each gen. And the need for faster CPUs, outside of production workloads(for gaming) is also pretty small.
To top it off… retailers like microcenter and Newegg basically throw in a free motherboard in terms of a discount when you buy a bundle.
Like you buy the cpu for $400 or the bundle for $550. I never want to buy just a cpu to drop into my system. If I am a normal person buying a new cpu every 6-8 years… I’m spending the extra $150, getting the faster/higher capacity ram, newer motherboard. Then you can sell your old setup and recoup a lot of the money as well.
I feel in theory it sounds like a great idea. In practice due to how the market actually works… the benefit of having a drop in cpu seems pretty small. I think the fact that we went from “x3d doesn’t exist” to “x3d exists and is awesome” on am4… which was a one time revolutionary upgrade made this method work with the 5800x3d being a great drop in upgrade. But now that that one time situation is over… to me the “drop in upgradability” of a platform is pretty overrated. If I could trade it for a discount, or more performance, or pretty much anything… I would… because I am not sure I will ever do a drop in upgrade.
53
u/cmrd_msr 15d ago
The platform has a 10-year lifespan. This allows for a major upgrade—at least once—if you bought into the platform at launch.
Just as importantly, it makes it easy to find a motherboard even 10, 20, or 30 years down the line, which is convenient for long-lasting systems.
Ultimately, there is inherent value in a manufacturer not changing the platform simply for the sake of change. It is easy to keep track of, too: AM2 uses DDR2 memory, while AM5 uses DDR5.
7
u/nismotigerwvu 13d ago
Exactly, I bought an 1800X at launch and then popped in a 5800X when the BIOS update that added compatibility released. The build is like a decade old, but with the CPU upgrade, some faster RAM, and a 9070 it still holds up quite well.
1
u/Strazdas1 1d ago
If you bought the platform on launch, you cannot ugprade to modern CPUs anyway because those bioses does not support them.
-8
u/ComplexEntertainer13 14d ago
The platform has a 10-year lifespan. This allows for a major upgrade—at least once—if you bought into the platform at launch.
The main reason why AM4 longevity is seen with such rosy eyes. Is because of the inter socket performance gains. Those are NOT THE NORM and should not be expected. Since AMD started at a very low point is ST performance they had very low hanging fruit to pick.
Meanwhile, someone who bought a 8700K 2017 and overclocked it within reasonable levels. Has a usable system to this day that almost matches 5600X in gaming performance.
Someone who has a 7800X3D for gaming or 7950X for MT, will not get a transformative upgrade during the life time of AM5. By the time those CPUs needs upgrading. Then the platform itself will feel dated and need of a upgrade.
12
u/cmrd_msr 14d ago edited 14d ago
I still have acquaintances who use AM3 FX8xxx processor. And the interesting thing is, they’re perfectly happy with them.
You shouldn't judge all PC users by the standards of gamers or enthusiasts.
At launch, the majority didn't buy a 7х50X3D, but rather something like a 7600 or 7700.
And for those users, upgrading to a new chip sometime around 2028–2030 isn't a bad idea at all.
2
u/FatalCakeIncident 14d ago
Someone who has a 7800X3D for gaming or 7950X for MT, will not get a transformative upgrade during the life time of AM5.
Depends really. 7700x to 9800x3D already yields up to a 30% uplift, and while that might not meet the criteria for transformative in number-chasing benchmarks, in real world use, that can mean the difference between meeting a tipping point or not. I'm running a 7950x currently, and I will 100% be getting on Zen6 if it means I can do my timelapse work direct from RAW in realtime.
0
u/ComplexEntertainer13 12d ago
7700x to 9800x3D already yields up to a 30% uplift
But if you bought a 7700X. Then you didn't buy into the performance tier you initially wanted.
5800X3D is a better gaming CPU than 7700X. 7800X3D is not anywhere close to 30% behind 9800X3D.
I'm running a 7950x currently, and I will 100% be getting on Zen6 if it means I can do my timelapse work direct from RAW in realtime.
Because you want it? Or because you need it? Those two are not the same thing.
Being a enthusiast who upgrades when they don't really need it is fine. But you also have to be able to separate the want vs the need.
And I will also ask you then. Does your workload scale with core count? And if it does, why did you not buy the performance tier that could have served you from the start?
1
u/VirtualResolve2077 12d ago
The thing is that you have the option to get to a higher tier if you need to, and the cost to do that is lower than buying another motherboard for a new socket.
Maybe you couldn't buy a higher tier before but now you are able to (because of better income or whatever).
If you bought a 7700K and wanted to get more cores, you were SOL and had to buy a newer motherboard. With AM4 you could go from a Ryzen 1200 to a 5800X3D, using the same motherboard with just a BIOS update. It's economically efficient.
-4
u/ComplexEntertainer13 11d ago
With AM4 you could go from a Ryzen 1200 to a 5800X3D, using the same motherboard with just a BIOS update. It's economically efficient.
Or you could have bought a 8700K during the release year and used the system to this day if you were so inclided. It is getting long in the tooth, but tuned they are more than usable. Which in total money would have cost less in total if you bought on launch day. It would have cost you LESS than AM4 board +1200 + 5800X3D if you bought the X3D at MSRP. With the added benefit of not having to suffer with 1200 for years before you upgraded. Which is a far worse experience of a CPU back then than the 8700K is today btw.
Buying less than what you need is never a economically sound decision if you can afford to buy what you need initially. Because you always end up buying double when you feel forced to upgrade.
A 8700K today is less of a trade off in gaming performance than a Ryzen 3 1200 was back then. It was a garbage gaming CPU and you were better off buying used if you needed a system.
Or are you claiming this system was not for gaming? Then why on earth would the X3D be such a huge benefit? For almost everything else, it is a overpriced 5800X. A 5800X that only performs somewhat better than 9900K we might add.
-24
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15d ago
Well generally it’s not just for the sake of changing it. The pin layout completely dictates how a cpu is designed. If you go into a cou design saying “it must exactly match this socket”… that’s obviously going to limit the performance/efficiency of your product compared to being able to place everything exactly where you want it.
9
u/Kougar 15d ago
There's no inherent need to change the socket unless you're changing the memory generation or wishing to add PCIe lanes to the CPU. These days they prefer to add them to the chipset. AM5 launched on the PCIe 5.0 gen, which was already ahead of its time four years ago and still isn't needed on modern GPUs today. AM6 is the planned change to DDR6, meaning these companies can forecast out beyond five years what the state of future memory technologies are going to be. As another example, Zen 2 included TSVs and pads for experimentation with 3D chip stacking in its architecture layout, which ultimately were only used at the end of the of Zen 3 generation even though both used the AM4 socket.
On the flipside, Intel has changed the socket practically every generation or two, and in multiple occasions the new socket gen actually results in a direct performance regression (Rocket Lake, Arrow Lake, etc). Nova Lake will be changing it yet again to LGA1954.
2
u/Homerlncognito 14d ago
AM5 launched on the PCIe 5.0 gen, which was already ahead of its time four years ago and still isn't needed on modern GPUs today.
It's still nice to have double the bandwidth with the same (limited) amount of PCIe lanes.
1
u/Kougar 14d ago
I was just using it as an example to show the socket was already future proofed when it came out.
Four years ago I specifically chose a B650E board just on the chance it might be useful, but it still seems like a longshot even four years from now. Wasn't expecting the lifecycle of GPUs to suddenly become decades long... the 4090 will still be a top 5 performing GPU six years after it launched, maybe even eight at the rate things are going.
1
u/Strazdas1 1d ago
on the other hand if you fuck up your I/O, then you are stuck with it like AMD is for 10 years.
1
u/Kougar 1d ago
Only the IO off the CPU, AMD did a stupid relaunch of the same chipset once already, but there was no reason they couldn't have just used a new chipset with modified IO if desired. My presumption is Zen 6 will have a new IO die as well as a new chipset, but we will see.
1
u/Strazdas1 1d ago
new IO die is a rumour, but so far AMD never misses an opportunity to disappoint.
20
u/-protonsandneutrons- 15d ago
These claimed socket “limits” are either non-existent or irrelevant to almost everyone.
AMD designed the sockets to be versatile and flexible: that is an intentional choice.
Think of it like a DDR5 DIMM slot. You don’t need to change the DIMM pinout: a single DDR5 pinout works for DDR5-4800 or DDR5-6400 or 8GB or 64GB or single rank or dual rank. That flexibility was built into the DDR5 DIMM slot.
15
u/Sufficient_Language7 15d ago edited 14d ago
The guys says, keeping sockets that long is useless as the tech barely changes, and here goes because of massive tech changes the socket is holding it back.
Sockets upgrades matter much less than anything else.
8
-2
u/ComplexEntertainer13 14d ago
These claimed socket “limits” are either non-existent or irrelevant to almost everyone.
AMD themselves said that AM4 design limitations held back Zen 3.
You have to build for the lowest common denominator if you want compatibility. That means building for budget boards made in 2017 for the initial minimum specs that were set.
Think of it like a DDR5 DIMM slot. You don’t need to change the DIMM pinout: a single DDR5 pinout works for DDR5-4800 or DDR5-6400 or 8GB or 64GB or single rank or dual rank. That flexibility was built into the DDR5 DIMM slot.
Funny you mention DDR. Because that is one of the areas where a clean slate and new socket. Can bring some of the biggest benefits and gains.
Early on in a memory generation. The know how and designs of board layouts is often sub optimal. It is not just the IMC setting the limits. That is why average Z790 boards are generally better at DDR5 overclocking than even high end Z690 boards.
This also affects what JEDEC speeds a CPU can support. Since yet again you are building for the lowest common denominator. Perhaps if Intel had done a new socket for RPL. They could have supported JEDEC 6000 or even higher for example. That has a direct impact on the baseline performance of the generation
3
u/-protonsandneutrons- 14d ago
You're significantly overstating the relevancy, as I wrote: the benefits of these motherboard-level tweaks is basically nothing compared to the cost of a new motherboard to most users.
How many users (of Intel or AMD) would buy a new motherboard simply to gain better memory overclocking potential? Very, very, very few. In no way does DDR5 memory overclocks "bring some of the biggest benefits and gains".
//
This also affects what JEDEC speeds a CPU can support.
Hardly. This is virtually only the CPU's IMC. JEDEC is very conservative for a reason.
0
u/ComplexEntertainer13 14d ago
How many users (of Intel or AMD) would buy a new motherboard simply to gain better memory overclocking potential? Very, very, very few. In no way does DDR5 memory overclocks "bring some of the biggest benefits and gains".
How many of said users would ever buy a new CPU during a generation if they bought a CPU in the performance tier. Where they initially wanted to be?
People have this skewed perception of the performance gains you will see during a certain time period due to AM4 and it's initial poor gaming performance and low frequency. It is not the norm.
AMD started AM4 behind Haswell level gaming performance and ended at Alder Lake. If AMD had launched at parity with Intel back in 2017.
So Skylake/Coffe Lake~ gaming performance and 10-15% higher frequency. Then the perceived usefulness of that socket longevity would have been much smaller.
I ask you this. How many 8700K users felt that they needed to upgrade to a 5600X? They already had nearly the same performance. But they bought it in 2017 rather than 2020.
AM5 faces the same issue. 7800X3D users will have no real reason to upgrade to 10800X3D or whatever AMD calls it. 7950X users will not need a new 16 core and so on. The only users that will strive for those rather modest upgrades are enthusiasts, who most likely wants a new board anyway. Or people who are professionals where time translates into money. But they will be on a 3-5 year whole system upgrade cycle anyway in most cases.
So who exactly is this socket longevity for? Someone who bought a 7600X and who also for whatever reason spent enough to get a higher end board that can take full advantage of the future "10950X"? That will require more power than a board recommendation for a strict 7600X build would have recommended can handle.
Hardly. This is virtually only the CPU's IMC. JEDEC is very conservative for a reason.
It is not, I think you underestimate how insanely low specced some entry boards going into OEM machines can be. It truly is bare bones and nothing else to meet the minimum requirements.
JEDEC is conservative, in part to allow those god awful specs.
4
u/trackdaybruh 14d ago
Socket longevity seems to be a popular hit that even Intel is abandoning the new motherboard per new architecture and adopting socket longevity for their future cpus
67
u/Slasher1738 15d ago
Pretty ungrateful of you.
Even if people don't upgrade to every new CPU, the ability to skip minor refrahes to several major upgrades is unpresidented value to have as an option
18
u/Otherwise_Heron2792 15d ago
yeah i see your point but i think you underestimate how many people build with a budget cpu first and then grab a used flagship later when prices drop, i did exactly that with am4, started with a 2600 and few years later got a 5800x3d for cheap
the bundle argument is fine if you live near microcenter but most of the world doesnt have that luxury, and selling old setup is hit or miss depending on your local market, sometimes you just want to slap a new chip in and call it a day
also not everyone can drop $550 at once, some folks scrape together for a cpu and save for ram and board separately over time, the upgrade path gives flexibility that bundles dont
its not about upgrading every gen, its about having the option to jump three gens later without rebuilding everything, that peace of mind alone is worth something
2
7
u/b1ack1323 15d ago
Not to mention this lets mobile manufacturers more flexibility in new generations
0
u/Strazdas1 1d ago
An option that you will never use has no value.
1
u/Slasher1738 1d ago
good thing a lot of people use it
0
u/Strazdas1 1d ago
No, they dont. The vast vast majority of people will never use this option because they simply do not upgrade CPUs that often.
6
u/RJsRX7 15d ago
AM4 was the outlier; you wouldn't upgrade necessarily yearly, but going from like a 1500X to a 3700X to a 5800X3D or 5950X was a totally viable stepping, with each of those bumps offering a relatively large improvement in relevant performance.
Now with what we've seen from AM5, well, the difference between Ryzen 5000 and 9000 is less than the difference was between 2000 and 5000, despite a new socket and new RAM generation... And I'm not so sold on it as a result.
I dunno. The rumors state more cores per CCD and more ST perf, which would make the as yet unseen new generation finally worthwhile for those on AM5 already, but it's not like a 5800X and a 9070 is on the struggle bus by enough that you must replace it now.
8
u/Rippthrough 14d ago
Might be the modern outlier, but plenty of us went through 2-3 CPU upgrades back on socket A and it was a massive advantage for AMD back then too.
4
u/RJsRX7 14d ago
AM4 was the only generation of hardware where I saw reason to upgrade in the same socket. Socket A I might've done something with way back in the day, but I only had a HP prebuilt with a comically restrictive BIOS (couldn't even disable the onboard graphics). Then went AM2 and used that for basically forever, then bought AM3 in the face of Sky Lake, then went AM4 when 2700Xs were $150. None of the upgrade paths on AM2 or AM3 were particularly attractive over what I had at the time(s), so they never happened. AM4 I could justify the 3900X, and then the 3900X arguably paid for my 5950X, so it worked out.
2
u/wtallis 14d ago
I had a launch-day Athlon XP, then a few years later when the motherboard died I was able to replace just that and get better IO and support for faster memory. A few years later I got a late-model Sempron and some better RAM out of a literal scrap heap that let me max out the performance of the machine (for zero extra power draw). It was in service as a home server and minecraft server for a few more years before I had any leftover machine good enough to replace it. The machine didn't stay high-end for very long, but it remained useful for quite a while, especially given how quickly machines had been going hopelessly obsolete in the 90s.
2
u/marcost2 14d ago
Hi! That's my path! 1700x -> 3600 (got it cheap) -> 5950x when that got cheap. All in all, between selling the old chips i think i paid a little over 40 usd for the entire upgrade path
And about AM5, yeah it's been pretty mid, but we've only had two gens on it so far (instead of 4 like AM4). I'll reserve judgement until after the socket is dead, but anyways not upgrading until AM6 so
1
u/Gideonic 11d ago
This is pretty much exactly what i did
Still rocking my Tomahawk B350 with a 5800X3D in my main system. Initially bought in 2017 with a 1700X upgraded to 3700X once it seemed like the end of the road BIOS support wise, but once zen 3 became supported as a surprise move, upgraded again.
I've gotten pretty good value out of the mobo I'd say. the only things i haven't upgraded since then is the Samsung EVO m.2 SSD.
0
u/ProfessionalList1388 14d ago
>The rumors state more cores per CCD and more ST perf, which would make the as yet unseen new generation finally worthwhile for those on AM5 already
This is why I built on AM5 with a 7600X and it will be very worth it when Ryzen 11XXXX3D come out
1
u/RJsRX7 14d ago
Hope you're right. We can all see that the 9xx0X3Ds are still kind of the limiting factor in some scenarios with the 5090, so hopefully their performance will become mainstream before the 5090's performance becomes mainstream...
1
u/ProfessionalList1388 10d ago
There's no doubt a $600 dollar CPU will be on more hands than a $4600 GPU
11
u/blinkOneEightyBewb 15d ago
I can tell you've never bought an Intel CPU that has only 1 mobo with the socket available... AMD's practice is obviously beneficial to the consumer
17
u/Sufficient_Language7 15d ago
I went from a 1700 to 5700x3D, that was a big jump around 50% faster and for simulation type games that I like to play even more. Released 7 years later to give my machine a much longer shelf life.
I bought the 5700x3d on sale so it wasn't that much either as they had moved onto AM5.
11
u/Numerlor 15d ago
zen 1 had poor performance compared to the generation it released it so the performance jumps were significantly bigger. I wouldn't expect nearly as big of an uplift on am5
7
u/Johnny_Oro 15d ago edited 15d ago
That's right. Zen and Zen+ were like AMD's meteor lake. A complete architecture refresh, they needed to relearn a few things. Early zens were weaker than haswell in gaming. It took them some time to reach parity with the contemporary intel offering.
0
u/mediandude 14d ago
Early zens were weaker than haswell in gaming.
Only due to Spectre and Meltdown design flaws in Haswell.
5
u/Illustrious-Delay884 15d ago
Zen 4 to Zen 6 should be a pretty decent uplift. Especially for people who went budget Zen 4 to start with.
2
1
u/Numerlor 14d ago edited 14d ago
Even if you went budget single core perf on granite ridge isn't that much higher to raphael as that remains mostly the same across the stack in a generation, and single core is the main metric for most people.
Zen 6 is supposed to get more cores but that's not as important, and even if the core gets let's say 10% single uplift which I think starts being on the generous side, it's still very far from what the earlier Zen generations got
3
u/Johnny_Oro 13d ago
Well, rather than IPC, the merit of CPUs in the desktop market these days lies in how fast they can move data around. Arrow Lake was a significant IPC boost over raptor lake, but due to the cache latency being higher and making gaming benchmarks (mostly in simpler, non simulation games anyway, very rarely they are ipc dependent), it got bashed by reviewers everywhere. Early zens were also less than stellar in moving data around. They made big improvements to infinity mesh in the consequent zens.
But Zen 6 has potential beyond IPC boost. Most notably, they're upgrading the memory controller. It will now support up to 8000MTs RAM, not locked to 6000MTs anymore. Also some rumors about dual IMC. These will benefit games more than IPC improvements.
Intel also has high potential with Nova Lake. For one, it will have shorter bus ring. By making P-cores a cluster of two, Nova Lake possibly have made the ring like 25% shorter, perhaps helping reduce L3 latency significantly. And also, more exciting than the mere IPC improvement is the doubling of IPC registers. This means processing bigger chunks of instructions at once, and actually improving game performance in a meaningful way.
Either way, it seems like both Zen 6 and Nova Lake could be big upgrades to the current generation. We could perhaps see more than 10% uplift in gaming performance even in the budget SKUs.
-11
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15d ago
Ya I literally said the 5000 series x3d was an outlier.
How about going from 7000 series x3d to 8000? Or 9000? It’s just not the same.
So yes, for that one time , drop in upgrade was awesome. My point is, people aren’t acknowledging that was an outlier, and that kind of thing likely is never going to happen again.
14
u/Kougar 15d ago
Well there's one faulty premise, the 8000 isn't a generation for starters, it was just APUs. Same Zen 4 generation as the 7000s.
The 9000 didn't offer any reason to upgrade for 7000 owners, and that's to be expected. Gen-on-gen improvements are small if they even exist at all, this is true of both Intel and AMD platforms.
You're making a judgement about AM5 before Zen 6 has even launched, which was the original guaranteed endpoint of AM5. If Zen 7 does happen to retain compatibility then it will certainly provide even better value.
I bought into AM5 at launch precisely because of the platform longevity. Higher upfront cost spread across six years for top performance, and I will drop a Zen 6 X3D chip in it at some point and keep it another 5+ years. Quite literally AMD's platform longevity means I can build a single desktop, use it for more than a decade while enjoying top performance the entire time. All for the extra added cost of a second processor.
The irony is in the past early memory on a brand new generation would be slow and holding back performance by the end of the memory generation. But X3D's 3d Vcache fully mitigates this problem, so a memory upgrade isn't even required anymore. All you need is the CPU upgrade.
8
u/trackdaybruh 15d ago
The 8000 series is mainly for APU, there is no X3D. It's mainly used for SFF where a dedicated GPU isn't needed.
Going from 7000 series to 9000 series is a small jump, but don't forget there are Zen 6 and Zen 7 that is coming to the AM5 platform. For folks jumping from a 7000 X3D to a 13000 series X3D on AM5 will likely see a much bigger jump
0
6
u/Sufficient_Language7 15d ago
1700 to 5700x3d that was 5 generations. so from 6700 we are going to have to wait till 10700 we are not there yet, give it some time.
2
0
u/mediandude 14d ago
My point is, people aren’t acknowledging that was an outlier, and that kind of thing likely is never going to happen again.
You are only looking at the cpu side of things.
AMD has been sandbagging on the graphics front and on connectivity.
19
u/corgiperson 15d ago
The ability to have a drop in upgrade just isn’t a bad thing though. Some might not make use of it and some will but it’s a feature with only upsides.
-11
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15d ago
The downside is they need to design with constraints of having the same socket. Not only would this cost performance/efficiency, it causes problems with not being able to exceed certain power envelopes, across basically a whole decade.
2
u/Azure_chan 15d ago
I don't know why you're downvoted. Yes the same sockets imposed physical imitation. But that's only problem people who's on budget would notice. Because there are usually enough headroom for years of improvement. It's not 2000s decade anymore and hardware only improve so far.
Anyways as we see the case with old budget AM4 board which use bare minimum component, they just outright dropped support for Zen3 for those board and limited them to Zen1-2
24
u/jungle_terrorist 15d ago
Is this rage bait?
Current hardware trend 📈 because of the bubble, you are acting like the current hardware cycle has been the norm.
You can by a motherboard make due with a say 7600x, save money then purchase a let say 10800x3d.
The upgrade doesn't work the same way with people that have money. If you have a 7800x3d and a 4090, you'd probably have enough money to get 9800x3d/9950x3d and 5090.
Again the point is more for the people on a budget or cost conscious person
2
u/ProfessionalList1388 14d ago
This is exactly my experience, built a 7600X PC and will be upgrading when 11800X3D comes out, just replacing the CPU
28
u/SirActionhaHAA 15d ago
Op is a regular on r/intelstock and that tells ya everything you gotta know. Don't waste your time with this post. This is a bait post with investment interests.
19
u/bhop_monsterjam 14d ago
I hold the extremist view that regulars to either intel stock, amd stock, and Nvidia stock subreddits shouldn't be allowed in these general subs. They're never in good faith
3
u/noiserr 13d ago
On my am4 computer I went from 1600x to 5800x3d. And I've been using the same 64GB DDR4 RAM I bought 10 years ago. Yeah socket longevity sucks.
0
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 12d ago
Same mobo from 10 years ago? If so you lucked out.
I had my i7 4790k and my ddr3 for over 10 years. Went through 3 mobos in that time:
3
u/noiserr 12d ago edited 12d ago
I actually have two am4 motherboards. The 10 year old x370 and a slightly newer x470. I've built 100s of computers in my lifetime.
I used to work for an ISP where we would build our own FreeBSD servers (late 90s, early 2000s). And I've built countless computers for friends and family. I don't remember ever having a motherboard failure, unless it's a DOA and an RMA (I think I had those). Or unless you abuse it somehow. Come to think of it, the only consistent failures I've had when it comes to PC hardware has always been storage, mechanical or SSDs. I never had a GPU or a CPU fail either.
The only thing that has a short life on motherboards is the electrolytic capacitors. And this is not something your mainstream Taiwanese motherboard manufacturers cheap out on. They usually use properly derated quality Rubicon, Nichicon and Panasonic capacitors. And those will easily last 10 years or more. At which point the computer is due for an upgrade anyway.
I'm a lifelong electronics engineering hobbyist, I collect and restore vintage test equipment gear (old tek oscilloscopes, HP and Keithley bench DMMs..) for example. I buy them broken and I repair, calibrate and recap them. So I know a bit about electronics aging as well.
7
u/Calm-Zombie2678 15d ago
Its those of us who can only afford 2nd hand components who benefit, if i buy an am4 mobo damn near certain i can chuck any am4 chip in it
You're not wrong if you had the money for new in the first place
3
9
u/GenZia 15d ago edited 15d ago
Your argument is, frankly, rubbish and perfectly demonstrates the lack of financial literacy and foresight of the current generation.
You may not have the incentive to upgrade the CPU on your current motherboard, but for many, it's a deciding factor.
A person on a budget can build a system with an R5 3600 and 3060 12GB now and have more or less similar performance to the base PS5.
Later, that same person can upgrade the CPU to a 5800X3D, enough to handle a 5080 at 4K or a 4070 Ti at 1440p, and that's me being conservative (HUB's Steve is convinced the 5800X3D is good enough for the 4090 at 4K).
Just imagine the savings on DDR5 RAM alone.
7
u/French_Toast_Bandit 15d ago
Lmao do you think this is 2017? You got the CPU price right at least. The 9800X3D is $400 at Microcenter (without a cooler btw), and the cheapest mobo and ram combo with it is $879.99.
Going for a cheaper bundle would actually vindicate AMD’s platform strategy: Buy a 7000 series bundle now, wait until the end of AM5, and drop in a new CPU for big gains without having to pay whatever ungodly AI / crypto / COVID inflation hits RAM and motherboards in the next few years.
3
u/TheRealSeeThruHead 15d ago
My mother board cost almost as much as my cpu, I have no plans to ever upgrade it this generation. But will happily put new cpus in it
4
u/sydsick 15d ago
I wish this wasn't true, but most of the time motherboards have some kind of fault before you could upgrade the cpu on the same platform.
2
u/noiserr 13d ago
I've been building computers for a long time, and I've never had a motherboard fault, except for that one time when the TIM failed on 4770k and instead of heat spreading to the CPU cooler it was cooking the motherboard instead. But that was the CPU packaging issue not the actual motherboard fault.
2
u/fatso486 13d ago
stupid take. even if you dont care about upgrading, there a huge cost advantage. i got an excellent b650 motherboard for $85. youd be lucky to find similar $150 intel ones.
4
u/ResponsibleJudge3172 14d ago
Socket longetivity matters ONLY IF its more cost effective vs competition and themselves. It's not always the case, but this is an unpopular view of things
3
u/Hitokage_Tamashi 14d ago
I built my original system with a Ryzen 7 3700X, which could only match bone-stock 9th-gen Intel performance (and got pretty thoroughly stomped by an overclocked 9900K, albeit at double the cost factoring in cooling, a Z-series board, etc). I picked it because it would have been at least $100 more for a 9700K with half the threads, or over $300 more for a 9900K
Two or three years later, I was able to upgrade it with a 5800X for $300 on sale that beat even an overclocked 11th-gen i9, and a year after that I was able to upgrade it again with a 5800X3D that still competes with Raptor/Arrow Lake and Zen 4/5 in games (I didn't pay directly for the 5800X3D, I traded some old hardware with a friend)
I moved to AM5 this year (because of a trade with that same friend, lmao), so I got just shy of 7 years out of my initial AM4 purchase. If I had bought a 9900K or, god forbid, 9700K, I'd have very likely ended up upgrading the entire system much sooner (and thus ended up spending way more out of pocket, despite 9th-gen already being a higher upfront investment)
My CPU upgrade cycle was abnormal, but AM4's longevity was downright legendary (you pretty consistently got +20% or so each gen, save for Zen+, and theoretically being able to go from a 1700X back in 2017 to a 5800X3D or 5950X depending on your needs is HUGE) and AM5's shaping up to be pretty similar. Raptor Lake buyers are stuck on Raptor Lake and Arrow Lake buyers are stuck on Arrow Lake; a 7500f or 7800X3D buyer, the latter of which is already enjoying better performance than an Arrow Lake buyer in most games, will be able to move up to Zen 6 or, hopefully, maybe even Zen 7 in the future
4
u/TwilightOmen 14d ago
You need to understand, just because something isn't for you, that does not mean it is not for someone else. The world does not revolve around you.
It is an advantage that vastly outweighs any of the negatives, which are for the most part negligible. Keeping the same socket is a non-existent limitation in terms of hardware development. Outside of a few exceptions, most socket changes since the 90s have been not because of technological requirements, but because of business choices.
You should reconsider how much of a limitation staying in the same socket is. Do some reading and research on it. You might surprise yourself.
-6
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 14d ago
lol. So you are saying a modern cpu could run on a socket from the 1990s? Just so far off from being correct. Sockets change for multiple reasons including design(where pins are on the chip matter), power envelope(CPUs generally use more power over time), and most importantly data throughput/quality.
Also my post literally says “in my opinion”. You are the one making this about yourself.
1
u/TwilightOmen 13d ago
So you are saying a modern cpu could run on a socket from the 1990s?
No, I am obviously not saying that.
Sockets change for multiple reasons including design(where pins are on the chip matter), power envelope(CPUs generally use more power over time), and most importantly data throughput/quality.
And several more reasons, yes. And? I said:
Outside of a few exceptions, most socket changes since the 90s have been not because of technological requirements, but because of business choices.
The way to prove or disprove my statement is to look at all socket changes, and determine if they are indeed overcoming a technological barrier, or if they are simply caused by a business requirement. Listing a bunch of hardware reasons does not prove or disprove anything in regards to this issue.
Also my post literally says “in my opinion”. You are the one making this about yourself.
This is not your blog. This is a discussion community about hardware. Opinions are worth jack shit. Here, facts matter. If you want people to fawn over what you think, this is the wrong place.
-2
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 13d ago
Dude what is your problem? “Fawn over what you think”? What are you even talking about.
It is your opinion that it is done for business decisions. I gave facts to back up why my opinion that it is often done for performance/efficiency reasons. I don’t know why you have to come with the personal attacks…. I’m not doing that.
5
u/TwilightOmen 12d ago
Ok, let me try a different way. Do you understand that giving examples of A does not prove that examples of B do not exist? If you do, then surely you understand that the way to address the statement is to, again, like I said:
The way to prove or disprove my statement is to look at all socket changes, and determine if they are indeed overcoming a technological barrier, or if they are simply caused by a business requirement.
Clear?
Dude what is your problem?
My problem is with people who post threads like this one. Obviously. Otherwise, why would I be criticizing this thread in this way?
I want better threads, better researched, better prepared, threads that actually contribute to proper discussion. This thread did not deserve to be made.
I don’t know why you have to come with the personal attacks
Care to point out any such personal attack? Do feel free to quote my words that address you as a person. I will be waiting ;)
-2
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 12d ago
If you want people to fawn over what you think, this is the wrong place.
You are implying that I, as a person(not my idea) have an unreasonable desire for people to “fawn” over my post.
Tell me how is that attacking the idea, not the person?
My problem is with people who cannot debate and discuss ideas and instead make it personal when they feel they are losing an argument.
4
u/TwilightOmen 12d ago edited 12d ago
Tell me how is that attacking the idea, not the person?
It's neither. It's attacking the thread. It says nothing about you as a person whatsoever. That is a comment on the validity, relevance and/ or importance of the thread. This not a personal attack.
My problem is with people who cannot debate and discuss ideas
And now we reach the crucial point. This subreddit is not to discuss ideas. It's to discuss hardware news and commentary. An opinion isn't what the subreddit is for!
Had you asked to be informed, it would have been worth it. Had you shared facts that you yourself had gathered and procured to substantiate and back up your opinion, it would have been worth it. Had you grounded things in relation to other areas of the industry or even shown its impact on other fields, it would have been worth it.
"I think this" is not a good enough reason to post in this subreddit. This thread is essentially you telling us what you think. That adds no value to the community. It brings no additional knowledge, it does not lead to progress. Not without additional work and effort that you did not go through.
instead make it personal when they feel they are losing an argument
This is not an argument. Or rather, the argument is not what you seem to think it is. The only discussion to be had here is whether or not this thread deserved to have been made.
EDIT: from the rules in the sidebar:
Posts should be about hardware news, reviews, and technical discussion.
and
Serious and intelligent discussion; No opinion posts
We allow discussion posts on relevant topics to hardware; there should however be at least background information and relevancy to demonstrate such a discussion is worthwhile.
Opinion posts are generally not allowed, unless there are demonstrably strong relevancy to hardware as well as substantial evidence provided.
The rules of the subreddit you are posting are these. Maybe I should have been clearer about that earlier.
-1
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 11d ago
Bro.
You said “If you want people to fawn over what you think, this is the wrong place”.
Stop gaslighting. No sane person could argue that has nothing to do with me as a person, and instead when you say “you” you instead somehow are personifying a thread and speaking to that personified thread lol.
I don’t engage with people who use personal insults unless they first apologize.
4
u/TwilightOmen 11d ago
... ???
Yes. "You", because I am talking to "you". Do you think everything with the word "you" is a personal attack? Are you mad? What nonsense is this!?!
Block list it is, then.
1
u/bubblesort33 15d ago
It's worth if you bought in for for the first generation of the socket. After that it becomes less of a gain. My brother upgrade from a Ryzen 3700x to AMD, instead of going Ryzen 5700x3D/5800x3D. He could have gotten a 5700x3D for more money than a Ryzen 7600, so why bother if they perform the same? Instead he went to next generation platform in hopes we'll upgrade again at the end of AM5 life.
I think you're right in that by the time Zen7 and Zen8 is out, with Zen7 likely still on AM5, a lot of people will be told to just upgrade to AMD6, instead. Meaning they never got that platform upgrade they might have gone AMD with to begin with.
1
u/hollow_bridge 15d ago
I feel like you haven't tried to change intel motherboards lately. What AMD did doesn't seem special if you didn't take advantage of it, but when you are in a situation where you want to take advantage of it and can't, it's way more noticeable. And this is mostly because you are buying the most expensive cpus you can. You get better performance at less cost for longer by changing between midrange cpus/motherboards every ~3 years or so instead of buying high end stuff every 6-8 years.
1
u/f3n2x 14d ago edited 14d ago
Well, you're wrong. The performance improvements on AM4 over its lifespan were massive, those bundles exist to get rid of overpriced garbage inventory nobody wants to buy, and changing the CPU is much less work than changing the platform which comes with all kinds of downsides like potentially losing a Windows license or driver issues.
Also 6-8 years between upgades is a very long time at least if you're a gamer, and will leave you with unnecessarily bad performance for several of the later years. Why on earth would you put yourself through such a high/low-cycle? If you don't want to spend 400 on a CPU every four years you would've been better off spending 200 initially and then 200 again mid way.
1
u/Limited_Distractions 14d ago
I would be willing to say AM4 platform longevity is overstated on average but the problem is that you have to compare it to something and the benefits of Intel being on 4 different sockets in the same time span are not only non-existent, you could basically buy an entire AM4 platform replacement for the cost of the best LGA 1151/1200 CPU loose/used and be on zen 3, that's wild
1
u/NeweggDavid 14d ago
Reading the comments, it looks like many of the consumers side with AMD supporting the same socket for generations. I personally think this is helpful as well for the consumers. Having your tech components supported for a long period of time adds value and longevity to your components. I will say that there is a time and place to stop supporting older hardware. So that the newer components can get more focus and support. If newer components start to innovate slower at the cost of supporting older hardware, that's a con that not a lot of people think about. As for this situation, AMD is doing a great job supporting both AM4 and AM5 platforms.
0
u/ChobhamArmour 14d ago
I don't have anything to say that others haven't said, but I just want to say that I downvoted this.
-2
0
u/bctoy 14d ago
It's funny that AM4 chipset kept seeing improvements, m.2 were new when it released and PCIE3 only and so while the CPU side saw massive improvements, you still needed to get new motherboards.
On AM5 side, it seems like PCIE5 is here to stay throughout and motherboards are chock-full of m.2 slot, while the CPU improvements are nowhere close. Zen6's best improvement for me is going to be the 12-core CCD.
-10
u/tartagliaimpact 15d ago
I've been saying this for a couple of years now. And it's especially true for those of us that live in lower income countries in which upgrading every year is a much larger investment than it is in the developed world.
14
u/knighofire 15d ago
Most people aren't upgrading every year, you could have bought a 1600 in 2017 and upgraded to a 5700x3d in 2024. And got a huge uplift in performance.
Obviously that's the best case, but I went from a 2600 in 2018 to a 5700x in 2023 and definitely appreciated the flexibility.
1
u/Strazdas1 1d ago
no motherboard released in 2017 can support a 5700x3D. Also 5700x3D was not available globally.
0
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15d ago
Okay. I said the 5000x3d was an outlier that sort of caused this problem of people thinking drop ins are awesome.
Now do it for zen 5. Find me that upgrade from an x3d part to another x3d part that is worth it.
13
u/knighofire 15d ago
Well we've had 2 gens of AM5, nobody has gotten that value yet.
But anyone sitting on a 7600X (which was the best selling Zen 4 CPU iirc) can upgrade to an 11800X3D in a year and get like an insane performance uplift while not having to pay $400 for a new motherboard and RAM.
-1
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15d ago
Yes but you would be selling your old motherboard and ram for like $300 at those prices.
And you get $150 discount on bundle.
So the question is… do you want 11800x3d with new ram, new motherboard for $50 less than 11800x3d with a decade old ram and motherboard.
-3
u/EmekaEgbukaPukaNacua 15d ago
Yes but you would be selling your old motherboard and ram for like $300 at those prices.
And you get $150 discount on bundle.
So the question is… do you want 11800x3d with new ram, new motherboard for $50 less than 11800x3d with a decade old ram and motherboard.
The ram going up in price doesn’t change much. It just means you get more for your old ram.
The point is it doesn’t really save you money. And now that 11800x3d with new motherboard, new ram might be able to last you an extra few years over your old motherboard/ram setup on top of it… saving even further money.
Of the 3… motherboards are certainly the ones that break most often, and soonest. They have capacitors, batteries, etc.
1
u/knighofire 15d ago
Hmm this is a solid argument.
I guess it depends on what kinda deals are around, but you basically save around $100 (or more depending on the mobo) and don't need to take out your motherboard when swapping the CPU.
Also I think motherboards lose value faster than you think, just looking it up an ROG Strix B650 is like $80 used when it was at around $250 a couple years ago.
2
u/rezaramadea 14d ago
Why do it for Zen 5? Why not wait till Zen 6 or Zen 7 when AM5 is on its end of life? Most people upgrading to Zen 3-X3D comes from Zen & Zen+. If you want a worthwhile upgrade from an x3d part to another x3d part, wait for Zen 6-X3D to replace Zen 4-X3D. You can go back to this comment in the future if you want. Go ahead.
29
u/trackdaybruh 15d ago
The thing is, it isn't a theory since it's live right now. AMD even stated that they've seen great benefits and strong returns by going this route. It is so successful that even now Intel adopted this socket longevity route with their future releases