So accurate

most prebuilt duing that including asus, dell, etc

Any and all prebuilts, along with cheap RAM and cheap PSU

@@badass6300 insane the margins they must get selling $1000 components for $1700

​@@badass6300 Cheap SINGLE channel ram, with poor speeds 😂

Asrock,

@@mrfaern if thats the case then Asus is better off to not exist.

The budget ASRock boards only exist as an exercise in getting familiar with the RMA process.

@@creativityfails1 that's funny

​@@creativityfails1 😆👌

i still have my hopes up for other A620 boards. at least to Buildzoid levels of success...

I would watch a video on the suspicious Asus and MSI boards

Funny how bios fixes only take 3 days when a journalist reports a problem, but regular people wait weeks or month for fixes on reported problems.

That's the reason the news media is known as "the fourth power"

Well said, when making incremental upgrades on budget different ideas come to mind.

Sponsored by asrock....

​@@Markisha64 Nope sponsored by Gigabyte. And being sponsored doens't mean they won't say honestly what they think. Did you watch the video ?

Yeah. At least Newegg did something right.

While they do deserve a fair deal of praise on informing consumers it's probably more a safety measure rather than a display of good faith on their end... Avoiding getting blasted by the horde of angry customers and all that. On the bright side at least some retailers are more cautious than the likes of AMD, Nvidia and their partners

From the get go when Newegg started selling these 620 boards they indicated 120W and 65W so I don't see how he thought they could handle 170W if he bought from Newegg!

Even though it is a good thing, it clearly stems from them not wanting to have to deal with returns.

​@@felipeavlopesAs long as they are informing this type of information it doesnt really matter if they did it to avoid backlash from fans. At the end of the day it provides a better shopping experience and better transparency for consumers. We benefit either way.

What QC? Sorry, I just had to.

@@PQED quality control

@@patlotpotlot6154 i was being facetious (joking). Don't worry about it. :)

I think thats something that most brands have problems with, new tech! Always something new to tweak.. you can see Asus having issues of their own!

Asrock improve thanks to the Engineer and people Freedback in the forum. Steve did good job, but all improve is beacause customers.

it does seem like they were working on it already, 3 days seems tight for such things..

​@@yukisnoww Yep, his feedback most likely got it pushed up the priority list...they know he will have a review

It would have been a fairly straight forward fix, change the power limit and raise the temp the VRM can hit, or it could have just been the latter. They've released another revision since then.

@@Hardwareunboxed i see, but the timeline for straightforward fix can be anywhere from couple minutes to a month 🤣

Not when they know a video is coming ;)

What do you mean these days? Its way worse back in the day lol

Its why i’m still AM4. I’ll let everyone else beta test a while longer before I jump in.

@@mikem2253 and in that time prices goes down, I see this as a win

@@HSG4meR Will the prices go down, or will the profits go up. That's the real question.

​@@mikem2253 I feel you! I used to buy to newest CPU/MB every 2 years, but it has bit me in the ass so many times in the last several years! I'm sticking with I have for the next 4 years at least and then I buy whatever chip is a generatio old at that time...I'm tired of beta testing $1000 CPU/MB for these companies!

Normal it have . Online you can see it My b450m msi have a 95watt tdp beult. Bit still i can use a 5800 serie on it And those cpu are 105watt tdp. Bios have it but the performance is just not thare. Funny thing is that automatic overklok on the x serie is not support.

It would make sense, if CPUs actually only pulled as much power as their "TDPs" say they do.

You can usually tell, just by looking at it: - No heatsink on the VRMs: up to 65W with tower coolers and 95W with a topdown cooler - With heatsink on the VRMs: up to 95W with tower coolers and 125W with a big topdown cooler For anything beyond 125W, count the chokes: as a rule of thumb, each choke can easily handle 15W if cooled in a topdown manner or 10W if cooled by an AIO or a tower cooler. So basically for 170W, you should ideally have at least 12 chokes in total.

ITX boards are usually a good bit more expensive and of a good quality because ITX is a niche people will pay a premium for.

That 7800X3D is just an absolute efficiency monster!

TDP = Thermal Design Power If it's 65W TDP you need a cooler that can handle 65-70W TDP in order to run the CPU within temperature specifications. It is in no way a 1:1 ratio regarding power usage.

At my work we regularly have to disappoint customers who want a PC built with 6600Mhz ram, simply because we can't get stable performance over 6200 or 6400Mhz. Sometimes even capping at 6000Mhz before failed Memtests. It's a gamble and no kit is the same. We send these kits back to the manufacturer with our complaint and we do get new sets, but even then it's a game of luck if it actually runs at the advertised speeds.

Intel is always terrible with RAM speeds in my experience. It's always just randomly how fast your cpu can handle while AMD so far could always run the RAM at the XMP speeds.

@@tilapiadave3234 Both have problems, dont mention Asus history in the crosshair formula in Iintel and amd

Same here.

Only for the Ryzen 5 7600 and any future entry-level AM5 CPUs though. Even if it's cheap, there's no point in wasting your CPU's potential.

It's likely ASRock was just lazy and didn't bother with in-depth testing and optimizing. Once Steve notified them about it they promptly made changes improving performance and clarifying compatibility. That's great! Steve basically improved the product, I think he can be be proud of that.

ASUS sneakily pumping up the juice (voltage) to try get advantages in benchmarks, lol.

i know the asus motherboard allow to bypass voltalge limit on 3d cache maybe that s the problem

gamers nexus bought one for testing so expect it from them to release a video

It's not a trend. This stuff gets more and more complicated each generation. On top of that, ASRock is just 70 Engineers - it's not ASUS or Gigabyte - forget about couple of issues here and there, with time they fix it all. It's just they have to eat and sleep sometimes. I have always been impressed by level of technological wizardry ASRock has been able to pull out of their behinds over they years, and despite Platform Integration Documentation - basically a reference board with everything exposed with full documentation - creeping up to 2000 pages from measly 130 in Sandy Bridge era - they still drop insane products with same tenacity as giants. For the slimming of validation, I work myself in it, and I can only say you are wrong. In 2016 product my team works on line had about 330 tests, with 25 people running them in shifts to chase the release dates and bug escape analysis performed at least once per week. Now it's just 7 people, with over 46000 tests, and just few of them requiring manual intervention, everything else is automated. We still get customer reported bugs, but 99% of them are bizarre corner cases or eldritch combinations of hardware and users making up things and stating that 'by their judgement it should work, but why it doesn't?'. Of course things will slide under the radar unnoticed, for something we didn't think to test or due to specific combination of equipment used for testing purposes.

@@Vatharian To make my previous comment clearer: I'm not criticizing the testers. I'm criticizing corporate management for cutting back on testing staff. You even mention this with having previously 330 tests and 25 staff and now you have 7 staff and more tests to run. I'd like to smack certain management upside the head for their lack of sense in cutting back testing staff so much.

Google started this with Android and everybody followed.

Sadly though, it was a paid program, and we were the ones paying.

@@Hardwareunboxed It's as if they didn't learn from their previous mistakes and thought no one would notice. Continue keeping them honest.

In my anecdotal experience the only game that truly cares about having access to more than 16 gigs is Star Citizen. Now, I realize that that might not “count” as a game yet, and if so, my answer would then change to “none”.

​@@124thDragoonThen you haven't met my good old friend... 7 Days to Die. It sucks DRAM like no other 😅😂

@@xalderin3838 the last time I played that game was ~6 years ago. It was fine at the time. Weird.

@@124thDragoon Ahh, so you haven't played any recent updates. I have 32gb of Ran, and it sucks about 25+ relatively easily, when I play.

@@xalderin3838 Jesus Christ

Most people will be quite satisfied with basic A620 features and performance of 65W CPUs. There is a room in a market for them (much bigger than for boards we here actually want to buy :)). But board makers should limit them for 65W CPUs and advertise as such limited boards. Asrock did same thing even in 775 days, I recall few boards with holes in place of VRMs just from using CPUs on support list (not even most powerful) so it's nothing new in fact that they lie. Fact that now they all lie is new.

I put my hamster in a sock and slammed it against the furniture

We're back in their good books this year ;)

Thats nice, all Asrock have to do is put out good products and do away with the marketing BS and they'd get good reviews from HUB anyway

@@Hardwareunboxed I can tell by first minute thats not gonna be long lasting 😅

It already have a heatsink so adding would be hard.

@@annoyingguyoninternet1631 It's hard to see how this'd be worth the trouble anyway, since you can get proper 170W support for an extra $20-30. The temps are just fine for the CPUs you should realistically use in a board like this.

@@ozzyp97 absolutely this and A series traditionally drop prices down to $50 overtime

Asrock is entry level, if it was "midrange" it would already be ASUS otherwise they'd be eating into their own sales. Asrock are excellent and often pretty much just a solid ASUS board with a few less features.

@@Tripnotik25 ah yes, the 550 dollar entry level asrock x670 taichi... asrock hasn't been part of Asus since 2002.

As even Steve stated, the b650 from ASRock was a great board, whereas this baseline wasn't. In my experience a midrange ASRock (on sale at $120) gave me a better experience than a top end gigabyte (originally bought at $340).

@@givemeajackson I stand corrected then. They apparently are still owned by the same company but asrock no longer just parent company but a straight competitor. They still kind of own the low end segment.

@@Tripnotik25 no they're not, asrock is owned by pegatron. and asus is the main brand of Asustek. pegatron split off from asustek in 2010, they're completely independent companies.

Not for long with the 3070...

@@DebasedAnon Depends on the Resolution. 1080p 8GB VRAM would be enough. 1440p you need to lower down the textures to high or medium depending on the game.

@@DeadPhoenix86DP Even in 1080p you need to lower it in newer games... Only reason 8GB was enough was because they were still developing with PS4 in mind, now they're switching to focusing on PS5 and they wont limit VRAM usage anywhere near as much and you can already see that with Hogwarts and how its literally unplayable even at 1080p ultra on a 3070...

@@DebasedAnon Never seen any game go above 8GB on 1080p Resolution. 1440p yes but 1080p no. And the PS5 is using 10GB at best for games, while the rest is reserved for the OS.

nah 8 gb is still good. those games are just unoptimized. and people are blowing it pjt of proportion.. u can still do good with 8gbs..

No, but it is absurd to claim that it does in fact do that, when it actually doesn't.

@@memitim171 sure, I agree. At least now it is correct

Why don't you watch the video first lmao

Yes

@@JagsP95 I watched the video and was honestly surprised that it was a test that focused more on the motherboard and its shortcoming (who would brings this to market in this state??) with all CPUs above 120 watt. I did expect a 7800X3D focused test on a super cheap board and a conclusion that would say something about it.

This is news to me. What is your source for this please?

@@Squashed8Ballit’s a popular thread in the Amd subreddit. Gamers nexus offered the person to purchase it from the person who’s board and cpu died

@@Squashed8Ball On videocardz you have article about it

@@adamadamx5464 the German did a video he does speak English

That's how rumors start, we know of 1 (ONE) case and now it's already "asus boards burning 7800x3d cpu's".

No! I'm waiting for gigabyte a620 boards

It's called motherboard review.

@@Smallman647 then dont name the title 7800x3d +a620 is it worth it? Makes it sound like the video is about testing the x3d chip on a620??

​@@Deathscythe91 how much more needed to be said about the 7800X3D? The review is mainly about the this A620 board so the content reflects that. The 7800X3D works fine in this board and he showed that thoroughly.

I know of one case and even if there was a second one it doesn't mean anything in relation to the number of chips sold, time will tell. Also, it's unclear what the problem was, the CPU or the motherboard.

My AB350 PRO4 from Asrock is serving me well. Upgraded the cpu from R5 1600 to 5800x3D and it's still working perfectly.

Yep Asrock is trash.

That's not true although they do seem to be rather inconsistent but Steve himselv said their B650 is the best in that class.

Surprisingly Asus entry level ones are worst on b650

@@skyryudo311 Not suprising to me, tbh. Asus always seems to be lacking with AMD hardware.