Time to replace 6 year old system?

[mackerel]

Looks like I had my current X299 based system in one form or other for over 6 years and it is starting to show. For the last year or so I've had random occasions where it would freeze on post, after bios screen but before loading OS. It was pretty rare so hard to test if any change resolved it. I haven't seen it recently but can't say for sure if it is gone. Last night I had a new instability. System was running BOINC 24/7. Went to bed as normal, woke up to find system unresponsive. Had to do a force reboot, at which point the bios complained the previous boot failed. Not a good sign. Checking Windows logs, it looks like there was an "unexpected shutdown" event around 3:15am, and the system logs stopped around 3:30am. So whatever the problem was, it caused a reboot twice.

I'm discontinuing BOINC for now, and have turned off XMP although it was never proven the ram was the problem. Otherwise everything seems normal but my confidence in the system is at an all time low.

Debating if it is finally time to replace it. HEDT remains practically dead so I'll have to go consumer system. I'm debating two main options: 7800X3D or 14700K. I can make either work for my use cases. I'm out of date on ram though. What's the sweet spot speeds? I know DDR5 IMCs really don't seem to like 2DPC so I'll probably go 2x32GB, they should be 2R modules right? Unlikely to do any manual tuning, just want to plug it in and work. If I go AMD, should I aim for EXPO over XMP modules?

Otherwise, I guess it is just up to me to decide how much to spend and when.

 

[EarthDog]

Platform not withstanding; the price and speed tipping point seems to be around 6400-6800.

As far as AMD/EXPO, etc., it's more important to be on the QVL than to have a specific profile. I'd guess more EXPO kits work than XMP, but I also doubt it's by much. AMD has done a good job making things 'just work', but is still a bit more finicky overall.

Oh @Woomack, lol

 

[Woomack]

For gaming, 7800X3D is a much better option. I will only tell you it's ~80W CPU under typical load, 14700K is ~200W in the same scenarios.
For everything else, probably 14700K will be faster.

Probably all AMD motherboards support XMP and EXPO, and every EXPO memory kit has an XMP profile too.
If you want a 2x32GB kit, then look for 6000 CL30/32 (G.Skill and Kingston have everything on Hynix A). It will probably go up to 7200+ at reasonable timings. For AMD 6000-6400 1:1 or 7200-8000 1:2 is optimal, but with 2x32GB modules, it's more like 6200 1:1 or 7600 1:2 max.

It doesn't matter if you have a dual-rank or single-rank kit on AMD. At least I haven't seen any difference in various tests. On Intel, dual-rank kits seem to work faster than single-rank, but it also doesn't matter much. 2x24GB single-rank is probably the most popular recently (at least manufacturers are pushing them).

 

[mackerel]

I am leaning towards the 7800X3D and have a build parts list I'm looking over already. The only scenario I have where 8 cores might be restrictive I can work around by using two systems and would be a good thing to do regardless. I just need to set it up.

Good to know in practice XMP/EXPO are interchangeable.

I'm only looking at 2x32GB since it matches my existing ram quantity. I don't often push it, but it is not never. The "saving" dropping to 48GB isn't worth it, especially as 4 module running seems to be dire on DDR5 I'd want to avoid that at all costs. I'm seeing kits around 6000, possibly 6400 at low enough cost so maybe one of those would be ideal then. No plans to OC for normal use, but wont rule out some "fun" at some point.

Rank still mattered on Zen 2 which was the last time I had AMD desktop. My 3200 2R modules blew away 3600/4000 SR modules easily. Not just a small win, a big win. I've kept my 2R modules for that reason even if I sold on everything else. I'm just not sure how to test it with X3D as the cache would mask the ram performance for the benchmarks I'd normally use. It does make it less important but I don't think the effect goes away. There will be workloads exceeding the cache.

Edit: any suggestions on mobo? For example, I randomly found MSI MAG X670E TOMAHAWK WIFI as the first X670 board (E or not E) with Wifi, that isn't from Gigabyte or Asrock which I don't want to buy from.

 

[Woomack]

MSI is not the best in the last generation. Read some more about them if you want to buy any specific mobo, but I heard about some repeatable issues (mainly things like dropping LAN/WiFi connection). Gigabyte AM5 mobos seem pretty good. ASRock is 50/50, depends on which mobo. Some are good, but usually only top models. ASUS is generally a good option as they have the best RAM support out of the box. If you want ATX/mATX mobo, and at the same time, think of maybe overclocking X3D CPU, then get something with a separate bclk for CPU. It's available only in some X670E from all brands or top B650E from Gigabyte. From ASUS, good reviews have X670E-E and X670E-F. X670E-A doesn't have a separated bclk. X670E Gene can be found on sale recently (there was a 40% price cut at Amazon in the last weeks).

Gigabyte AMD mobos have a RAM voltage limit set at 1.43V - even XMP/EXPO at 1.45V won't boot unless you manually limit it to 1.43V. ASUS/ASRock doesn't have this issue. I had no MSI AM5 mobo, so I can't confirm anything.

Personally, I like the Gigabyte B650E Master. It's because of 4x M.2 PCIe 5.0 + PCIe 5.0 slot (I don't care it runs at x8 when all M.2 are occupied). It also runs with RAM at 8000 XMP. I only wish it had a higher max VDD/VDDQ as 1.43V limit RAM overclocking. Maybe a beta BIOS with higher voltages will leak, but Gigabyte decided to lock it so low as "it's unsafe for CPUs". Somehow, other brands have no real limits, and nothing is happening.
Maybe EarthDog will add something to the recommended list as he reviewed some more mobos.

I was counting on better RAM results on AM5. When you have 1 CCD CPU like 7800X3D or 7600, you will see ~60GB/s read, 90GB/s write, 60GB/s copy, and 55-65ns latency in AIDA64. What is weird, I was testing a 2x48GB Crucial 5600 CL46 kit at 6000 CL38, and it had about the same memory bandwidth as 6200 CL30 or 7600 CL36. Latency was worse, but after manual adjustments, it was 5-7ns worse, so nothing really bad considering much more relaxed timings compared to other kits. 2 CCD CPUs are scaling better.
Maybe I missed something in my tests, but it felt like Intel takes more advantage of dual-rank memory. On AMD it feels like a large cache covers it.

If you want it for mixed usage and gaming, then 7800X3D is great. If you want it for various tests, rendering, and other things that use multithreading, then maybe think about 7950X (not 3D, just a regular one). It doesn't cost so much more and doesn't have X3D series limitations.

Btw. my gaming PC right now is 7800X3D, ASUS B650E-I Gaming, 2x32GB Kingston 6000/CL32 (Hynix A DR), and RTX4070 FE. It's mainly because of good performance and low wattage/heat, so it's easy to keep it quiet.

 

[EarthDog]

My one board to rule them all........ Taichi Lite. You won't get any better bits on a less expensive board.

 

[mackerel]

I don't intend to OC this that hard outside of exceptional circumstances so ultimate limits aren't a major factor to me. While I went straight to the X chipset in this example, even B might suffice. Are there two ram slot mobos that might help with ram stability? I don't think I'd ever use 4 slots outside of testing if I ever get enough hardware to do so.

On mobo manufacturer, I will not buy Gigabyte OC boards again. Every time they disappoint. Asrock I don't have confidence in since I've observed power related instabilities on both Intel and AMD boards I've had from them. It's very subtle and probably wont be noticed by normal users. MSI I'm willing to give another chance. Asus are always there.

Back to the reason I'm even looking at a new system, I've been running tests on my 7920X/X299 system today. Everything seems fine. It isn't overheating. Sanity checks haven't turned up anything. I even noticed something new. I finally can get a report on CPU power usage! This has been broken since forever. Value reported was always like 1.xxx W. Now it is showing what looks like the real value. I did update the bios recently, and have to wonder, if that could be a contributing factor. Not bad for a 6 year old mobo to still get updates. I didn't find any computation errors on the work that was going on when the system crashed. They resumed and completed error free.

As much as I want a new system, it is no small change and maybe I should wait a bit longer to see if this crash might be one of those random one-off computer things that will never get explained, or if it will be something that happens more often. I was hoping to do a major system update next gen, whatever would be the new name for 15th gen, or Zen 5.

 

[EarthDog]

Asrock I don't have confidence in since I've observed power related instabilities on both Intel and AMD boards I've had from them. It's very subtle and probably wont be noticed by normal users.

B650e taichi lite?

It can handle a 7950x, it can handle a 7800x3d.

 

[mackerel]

It can handle a 7950x, it can handle a 7800x3d.

It might not be that simple. I don't think it is the peak power capacity, but how it delivers the power. The specific examples I can remember include an Asrock Z370 + 8086k. In that case I had instabilities unless I limit the CPU power to TDP. Moved the CPU to Asrock Z390 ITX board and it was fine at any power. The other case was an Asrock B450 ITX board. It seemed to work fine when I initially built it with a 2600, but didn't like a 3700X. I tried lowering power limit which didn't help. What did help was applying positive voltage offset. Move 3700X to another mobo. Fine. So not all Asrock boards are necessarily affected, but when 2 of the last 3 boards I owned from them had some kind of power related problem, they're not high on my list when alternatives are available. I have not encountered this with any other manufacturer. Before you ask if these could be defective, why didn't I try to return them? In the case of the Z370 I originally ran a 8350k in that which was fine, and the 8086k was much later. Even then, it took quite some time before the problem was understood. Infrequent crashes are the worst thing to diagnose.

 

[EarthDog]

Not sure what to tell you about generations old issues. But they are just that. These arent remotely the same boards. None I've tested required setting an offset for stability when testing with a 7950x.. they surely won't with a lesser chip. The b650e taichi lite is the same high end power delivery as the x670e taichi. It's one of the most robust around, period (24 phase vcore... 105A SPS fets), not to mention for the price. Peak/how it gets there... no problems I've detected in stress tests.

I guess I'm just saying not to dismiss them over something that's completely unrelated to what you're buying now. If we all poo pooed a brand when something bad happened at some point, we'd have nobody around to buy from, lol.

 

[Woomack]

I had no problems with ASRock B650E PG ITX and 7950X under full load, and it's far from Taichi's power design. I have other issues with ASRock, like some weird settings in BIOS. Nothing that matters for most users.
AMD CPUs are not so demanding. Especially when you have X3D chips. As I said, 7800X3D is 80W under load (hwinfo64 full SOC power reading). Because of the auto adjustment based on temps and some other things, 7800X3D actually heats up less in AVX full load than in games/mixed load tests. You can keep it at optimal temps and performance (like all cores boost to 5GHz+) using not so big coolers like DeepCool AN600.

Regarding AMD, 2 and 4 memory slot motherboards seem to overclock RAM the same (or keep stability if you run higher kits at XMP/EXPO). At least all higher ASUS and Gigabyte support 6400 1:1 and 8000 1:2. X670E GENE seems like one of the best motherboards ... and it's about as good as some significantly cheaper B650E. If you don't care about overclocking, then ASUS B650E-E is great (or cheaper B650E-F which is not much different, but fewer M.2 sockets and PCIe slots). The B650E-E is not much different than the X670E-E (which is also not much different than the Hero), but as I said, you won't play with that second bclk for the CPU in case of X3D chips (that you don't care about, but they're getting boring without it pretty fast ).
The only significant difference between all B650E and X670E motherboards seems additional controllers and features. As I said, I like the M.2 PCIe 5.0 and some other things on AMD. It doesn't matter much for most users, but Gigabyte and ASUS have much better designed motherboards regarding PCIe 5.0 slots/sockets and PCIe lanes in general. I mean, who cares if there is an X670E or lower chipset when on the PCB are only PCIe 4.0 slots and sockets. It can be supported by B650, not even B650E. This is how MSI and most ASRock (excluding higher series like Taichi) look right now. Of course, it depends on what you need.

 

[mackerel]

Not sure what to tell you about generations old issues.

That swings back to the other company I will not buy a mobo from: Gigabyte. I had a bad experience with their Z97, yes, I know, really ancient now. But it was a long time ago right? Maybe they got better. Well, I did not have a great overall experience with their Z490 board. Basically I think they are incompetent at bios releases. I don't want to deal with that. Again, if there are other options why would I choose them?

Asrock is less of a hard avoid for me, and I do like their bios. Why did those problems exist in the past? Is it a result of something in their company culture? Has that changed? Was I just unlucky? I'm a small fish so I can't have personal experience of all boards of all generations. Once bitten twice shy applies from the limited exposure I had. In a parallel way, I would not buy another Seagate hard disk. Toshiba seem to do best for me recently, overtaking WD in both perf and value.

So of the big mobo players that leaves Asus, which I generally like but they can be more expensive like-for-like. MSI I'm unsure about. They were ok at best in Z170 era and I haven't tried them in a while, hence I don't mind giving them a try this time around.

Of course, it depends on what you need.

Thanks for the info. It probably doesn't help I don't know exactly what I want since this build wasn't planned. I'm still not 100% on going through with it since my system seems fine still.

 

[EarthDog]

Again, if there are other options why would I choose them?

Because the problems you're describing don't exist/don't exist anymore. You aren't buying a board at launch where teething issues are more likely to occur. Most boards have been out for several months with several bios released. At this point, you aren't dealing with teething issues on Gigabyte bios' any more than you would with any major board partner these days. Both platforms are mature and spinning down their life cycles.

Once bitten twice shy applies from the limited exposure I had

That's why you ask those who had them in hand to tell you... to see if those fears from literally years/generations ago exist (or don't). Obviously, you do you, but I just wanted to share that their issues aren't there. Power delivery across a wide range of ASRock boards is fine, and you're well into mature bios' for ALL partners (and AMD/Intel) at this point.

Please understand, I don't care what you buy or the reasons why you don't (I don't follow your thinking, however, lol), but just wanted to put facts in the table. What you choose to do, or not do with it, is up to you.

For me, I wouldn't buy most Asus boards because the value proposition compared to Asrock, giga, and MSI, at the same price isn't there. But if you aren't driven by value, that doesn't matter much, lol.

 

[Woomack]

For me, I wouldn't buy most Asus boards because the value proposition compared to Asrock, giga, and MSI, at the same price isn't there. But if you aren't driven by value, that doesn't matter much, lol.

The exception can be some B650E motherboards. They still cost some more than other brands, but also offer more (audio, M.2, and some more). Strix B650E-I ITX is actually cheaper and better than GB/ASRock/MSI, but I guess we are searching for a good ATX mobo

 

[EarthDog]

The exception can be some B650E motherboards. They still cost some more than other brands, but also offer more (audio, M.2, and some more). Strix B650E-I ITX is actually cheaper and better than GB/ASRock/MSI, but I guess we are searching for a good ATX mobo

Absolutely. Asus' ROG Strix B760-I also offers a lot of value in that space (not sure about Z790 ITX). But h2h with ATX/mATX 'bang for your buck' boards are few and far between with Asus, in AMD or Intel form.

 

[mackerel]

That's why you ask those who had them in hand to tell you... to see if those fears from literally years/generations ago exist (or don't).

In the two examples I gave, the Asrock mobos appeared to work fine with the 1st CPU I had in them. Problems only started when I changed CPUs. There is a lot of potential variation out there that one person saying something works can never guarantee it will apply all the time.

I will give that in general it seems like mobo quality has gone up over the years, as has their pricing. Many boards have stronger power stages than say 5+ years ago.

For me, I wouldn't buy most Asus boards because the value proposition compared to Asrock, giga, and MSI, at the same price isn't there. But if you aren't driven by value, that doesn't matter much, lol.

I did note that Asus tends to be on the pricier side, but it isn't to a deal breaking level. Other factors weigh more heavily for me. For now I'd consider Asus and MSI viable options, and as long as they have options they will be much higher on my shortlist than Asrock, and I will still actively avoid Gigabyte.

Got to be a bit weary of halo product influence too. Because a high end offering of a company works well, doesn't follow their low end ones do too, but it is a mainstream marketing strategy.

 

[EarthDog]

There is a lot of potential variation out there that one person saying something works can never guarantee it will apply all the time.

Da. That's a two-way street, too.

Got to be a bit weary of halo product influence too.

Indeed. That's great advice for randoms who may come by and not know better...


Well, when you settle on needs and budget, let us know and we'll snipe some boards for ya. The Tomahawk and Edge are solid boards, as is the E-F Gaming from Asus (B650).

 

[mackerel]

Since my system doesn't seem to be playing up, I'll consider what happened the other night to be a one-off and hold off on buying something new for now.

As a side benefit, I did some more tinkering and worked out the broken power readout is still there. It seems to happen if XMP is on, but not if XMP is off. So maybe nothing to do with the bios update after all. I only noticed by chance since I don't normally have XMP off.

 

[freeagent]

Even a 6 or 8 core AM4 part would blow that old thing out of the water. I was impressed with Zen 2 let alone Zen 3. Now that Zen 4 is here and doing alright, I do not feel properly motivated to upgrade yet. I do have a Strix B660-i that I can use for an Intel build.. but damn 200w just to play a game is intense.

 

[Woomack]

I did note that Asus tends to be on the pricier side, but it isn't to a deal breaking level. Other factors weigh more heavily for me. For now I'd consider Asus and MSI viable options, and as long as they have options they will be much higher on my shortlist than Asrock, and I will still actively avoid Gigabyte.

As much as MSI was my first pick for the Z400/500 mobo series (lower prices and better RAM support than other brands), then they failed the enthusiast 600 series and later was only worse. I mean Z690 Unify/Unify-X was "not bad", but the same results could be achieved on regular mobos from other brands that cost 50% less. The same with X570 Unify. Early product issues and later they just dropped it before it was fully fixed.
The reason why I don't recommend MSI is because their BIOS team since the last 2 generations only releases what is necessary. They don't improve anything above the minimum (read, so it won't crash). I have no AM5 mobo, but I saw some comments that things like RAM presets were removed, and before most were not working anyway. Additionally, there are multiple comments about network connection issues on 3-4 different models. In the last AMD generation, there were repeatable audio issues in all higher X570 mobos. Again, if you decide on any MSI, then first browse the web for possible repeatable issues.

Most brands care mainly about their top motherboards. Everything cheaper is skipped in BIOS tweaking and additional improvements. The same is for every brand. For ASUS it's like Strix is the lowest good series. For ASRock, only top models like Taichi as their BIOS team have a limited workforce. Gigabyte releases a lot of models and updates are for most of them (the same base, just difference in additional controllers). Usually when something is improved then affects 5-6 models ... if they fail something, then the same. They often release rev 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, ... instead of fixing something with the 1.0. Right now we have rev 1.0-1.3 of most mid-series mobos as they changed LAN and WiFi controllers. I'm still satisfied with their new series, RAM support, and some other things. I wouldn't say the same about their previous generations.
The cheapest mobos that feel high-end and actually work not much worse (or even better) are ASUS Strix. They also have good BIOS and additional options, voltages, and everything else that you can play with, and won't limit manual settings.