Anyone know the difference in for a ryzen 5900x running on a a320m (PCIE3) motherboard as opposed to a x570 (PCIE) ???

[DragonPlus7]

Anyone know the difference for a ryzen 5900x running on a A320m (PCIE3) motherboard as opposed to a x570 (PCIE4) ??? Anyone hav a video or bench. Whats the frame rates and load times ?

[Crawl]

I'm not sure why you made another thread asking the same question but as I said in the other thread, just changing out a motherboard is not going to make any real difference in your frame rate or load times.

[Julien, cut it out.]

Pairing a 5900X with the cheapest AM4 chipset is a stupid idea.

The main difference is the featureset of the chipsets[www.gamersnexus.net].

The main problem is the quality of the VRMs and the amount of power delivery(phases) to the CPU.
105W TDP is out of reach. You need to default to ECO Mode (65W TDP, 87W PPT). Leaving processing power on the table.

https://www.igorslab.de/en/how-much-watts-can-an-a320-motherboard-really-handle-in-practice-and-which-cpu-should-be-used-maximally-practical-test-and-vrm-analysis/2/

and max. achievable RAM frequency differ.

Check on B450/B550 motherboards.

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

Please don`t run 5900X on A320M motherboard unless you want to claim insurance from burning down your house.

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

Originally posted by Snakub Plissken:

Originally posted by Rumpelcrutchskin:

Please don`t run 5900X on A320M motherboard unless you want to claim insurance from burning down your house.

You got any more information about that besides cryptic claims?

A320M motherboards are cheapest garbage with no VRM shielding and no proper power delivery. Slapping high end CPU like 5900X into this is just asking for trouble.

[DragonPlus7]

Originally posted by Rumpelcrutchskin:

Originally posted by Snakub Plissken:

You got any more information about that besides cryptic claims?

A320M motherboards are cheapest garbage with no VRM shielding and no proper power delivery. Slapping high end CPU like 5900X into this is just asking for trouble.

why did Asrock put it in the bios update then ?? So what you saying is it will explode??!

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

Originally posted by DragonPlus7:

Originally posted by Rumpelcrutchskin:

A320M motherboards are cheapest garbage with no VRM shielding and no proper power delivery. Slapping high end CPU like 5900X into this is just asking for trouble.

why did Asrock put it in the bios update then ?? So what you saying is it will explode??!

It might actually, it will never run on its full potential with this motherboard for sure.
I would not put anything above 65W into this motherboard.

[just.kamk /idle]

Originally posted by Julien, cut it out.:

-snip-

I hate to say it, but this post covers f'ing everything i would have thought of,

Absolutely great answer, to such a weird question.

[🦜Cloud Boy🦜]

It depends on the quality of your a320m board. A320 motherboards are often made with cheap components and poor VRMs, aimed for low tier Ryzen CPUs.

Ryzen 5900x is a top tier high-performance CPU which needs lots of power to run. If the VRM can't deliver the required power to the CPU, you will lose boost clock.

[invision2212]

A320m boards are better suited for office computers

[_I_]

not so much cheap, but poor vrm config, not capable of running 200+w to the cpu cores

if it has no vrm heatsinks (around the cpu socket), then it will throttle as soon as the cpu has any load

b and x boards often have better vrm config with larger heatsinks that can handle power hungry cpus without vrm throttling


and the pci-e lanes
4.0 lanes are better for 4.0 devices, as it takes fewer lanes for more bandwidth than 3.0
will but if no devices are 4.0 then it will make no difference vs a 3.0 board

[Bad 💀 Motha]

A320 Boards won't have the proper VRMs to support such a CPU. Even if the BIOS happens to support it.

5900X/5950X should only be paired with an X570 or B550 board.

[DragonPlus7]

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

A320 Boards won't have the proper VRMs to support such a CPU. Even if the BIOS happens to support it.

5900X/5950X should only be paired with an X570 or B550 board.

Somebody explain why theres no difference in performance and temps seem OKay ???? please check link below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdBey_5fp7Q

[Crawl]

Originally posted by DragonPlus7:

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

A320 Boards won't have the proper VRMs to support such a CPU. Even if the BIOS happens to support it.

5900X/5950X should only be paired with an X570 or B550 board.

Somebody explain why theres no difference in performance and temps seem OKay ???? please check link below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdBey_5fp7Q

As I said in the first reply, there will be no difference in frame rates or load times. People typically buy higher end boards for the feature set. If you don't want or need those features a cheap board will function just as well.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

He doesn't understand, someone help me out. You can't put a 5900X on an A320 board. It's like putting a 1000 hp engine and parts on car frame meant for maybe a V6 as the max supported.

An A320 Motherboard is going to have a highly outdated set of features and have very poor VRMs

[Carlsberg]

From Toms Hardware page;

A single core out of a 16-core processor boosting to 5 GHz looks good and all. However, the more affordable 300 series motherboards have modest power delivery subsystems that may not extract the full performance of a high-end chip, such as the Ryzen 9 5950X. For example, multi-core performance could vary by 20% to 30% on a budget A320 motherboard compared to a higher-end motherboard.

This configuration is possible only because Asus gives its A320 motherboards full Ryzen 5000 series support with a new BIOS and the latest AGESA code, version 1.2.0.3C. We reported on this two months ago, noting that Gigabyte and Asus, in particular, have begun delivering new BIOS updates to A320 boards to support AMD's latest Ryzen 5000 series processors.