AMD's 3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper CPUs May Require New Motherboards

[Tsing]

The latest Threadripper rumor is not a good one for those who enjoy backward compatibility. In a post at overclock.net, DRAM Calculator author Yuri Bubily (1usmus) claims that third-gen Ryzen Threadripper CPUs will not work on X399 boards.

It may also be the reason why AMD delayed the processors and removed them from previous roadmaps. "HEDT disappeared from all calendars and the release of these processors was forced to postpone."

Since the new processor has a new memory controller and he in a single copy (instead of two as before) had to seriously change the pins. Also, the new PCI Gen 4 standard and new power pins made a special contribution. TRX40 and TRX80 are a new generation and a new architecture. Nothing to do with the past generation.

 

[jardows]

Can't see how this is totally a bad thing. We are talking about high-end productivity systems, and while being able to drop a new chip in essentially a 3-generation old platform is a nice idea, refreshing with a completely new system, or at least a new motherboard can be a good thing. As long as they have a good reason to require a new motherboard, I'd rather AMD make Threadripper 3 all it can be, and not have to shoehorn it into older platforms.

 

[David_Schroth]

There goes my upgrade path...

 

[Dan_D]

I'd rather AMD make Threadripper 3 all it can be, and not have to shoehorn it into older platforms.

Normally when you say something like that about standard AMD CPU's people want to get out the pitch forks and torches because the love their 5 year old motherboards.

 

[Mjz_5]

Only once in my life I just bought a cpu to upgrade a system. So this is not too much of an issue. I’ve just bought a 3900x so I’m good for a very long time.

 

[Zarathustra]

Normally when you say something like that about standard AMD CPU's people want to get out the pitch forks and torches because the love their 5 year old motherboards.

Yeah and I don't get it.

It's not as if most motherboards break the bank (of course there are exceptions).

I'd rather AMD focus on making each generation the best it can be rather than making compromises in the name of backwards compatibility.

I see some value in two releases of chips working in the same motherboards, but after that, cut the ties and move on...

Here's what they should have done:

zen and Zen+ on the same platform with backwards comaptibility.

Then break compatibility.

Then Zen2 and Zen2+ on same platform with backawards compatibility through Zen2 only.

etc.

 

[DrezKill]

The way things generally are these days, systems end up lasting so long that by the time you need a new CPU you basically need a whole new platform anyways. It's nice that AM4 was supported for so long, but if AMD moves to something different for whatever comes after Zen 2 then I see no problem with that. I wasn't crying when I couldn't throw my Haswell-E into my old X58 board. If Threadripper 3 requires a new chipset and socket than fine. 2 or 3 generations of CPUs per motherboard chipset seems okay to me.

 

[Zarathustra]

The way things generally are these days, systems end up lasting so long that by the time you need a new CPU you basically need a whole new platform anyways.

This.

Despite talking about upgrading forever, I am still using my 2011 hexacore 3930k on its original motherboard.

I'd imagine those who actually buy a system and need to replace the CPU already one generation in, are limited to kids who underspent on a low end model first time around and rather quickly realize their mistake.

 

[Dan_D]

Yeah and I don't get it.

It's not as if most motherboards break the bank (of course there are exceptions).

I'd rather AMD focus on making each generation the best it can be rather than making compromises in the name of backwards compatibility.

I see some value in two releases of chips working in the same motherboards, but after that, cut the ties and move on...

Here's what they should have done:

zen and Zen+ on the same platform with backwards comaptibility.

Then break compatibility.

Then Zen2 and Zen2+ on same platform with backawards compatibility through Zen2 only.

etc.

Agreed. Intel doesn't always change platforms for the right reasons and I get crucifying them over it. But AMD sticks to a given platform to its detriment allot of the time.

 

[jardows]

Agreed. Intel doesn't always change platforms for the right reasons and I get crucifying them over it. But AMD sticks to a given platform to its detriment allot of the time.

When I built my current main system, I purchased an ASUS Z68 motherboard, and paired it with a Sandy Bridge Pentium G850. A few years later, I dropped in a Xeon E3 1245 v2 (Ivy Bridge). Being able to get two generations out of the same motherboard was nice.

A few years ago, I wanted a cheap system to use as a home server, so I purchased an AM3 tri-core Athlon 2. The motherboard was a 760G system. Later, when there was a great price at Microcenter, I picked up an 8320e CPU and dropped into that motherboard. That was nice as well.

Two generations out of my Intel platform, and three out of the AMD platform. It was nice, but now it has been about 5 years since my last CPU upgrades on those systems, if I wanted to try to get much more, I'd be losing so much on the platform side, or crippling the CPU capabilities.

I am more in favor of newer motherboards allowing for older processors, as that enables me to buy more cheaply initially and upgrade later. However, if that comes at a cost of reduced functionality, with the slower pace of system upgrades nowadays, it is much less of a benefit.