PSA: Old-stock AMD AM4 boards might not boot with Ryzen APUs

Update 2/14/2018, 9:45 AM: AMD has posted a support page with steps users can take to resolve this specific issue should they build an unbootable system with a Ryzen APU and an older motherboard. The company suggests updating motherboard firmware using a compatible CPU, requesting assistance from a retailer with a compatible CPU, requesting an RMA exchange for a compatible motherboard, or using an AMD-provided boot kit to update the firmware. The original article continues below.

As builders shop AMD's Ryzen desktop processors with Radeon Vega graphics onboard, they can rest somewhat assured that a Ryzen 3 2200G or Ryzen 5 2400G will physically fit into and light up the various ports and slots of Socket AM4 motherboards on the market today. Especially eager gerbils without an older Ryzen CPU or Bristol Ridge APU on hand may want to give e-tailers time to refresh their motherboard inventories, however, as mobos with older firmwares installed might not boot up with a Ryzen APU in their sockets.

We can't speak to the capabilities or behavior of every manufacturer's Socket AM4 boards, but we tried dropping a Ryzen APU into a budget-friendly Gigabyte AB350-Gaming 3 that we've left un-updated for some time to see whether an older firmware version would at least POST and enter the BIOS. Sadly, that proved not to be the case. The board hung at some early stage of POSTing and never reached its settings screen. We ultimately had to bootstrap the board into Ryzen APU compatibility using another one of the first-generation Ryzen CPUs in the TR labs.

Fancier motherboards from Gigabyte, ASRock, MSI, and Asus might be able to get around this issue thanks to their ability to update firmware without a CPU or memory installed. If your ASRock or Asus board touts BIOS Flashback support, your Gigabyte board offers the company's Q-Flash Plus capability, or your MSI board includes the BIOS Flashback+ feature, you can likely download your board's latest firmware and install it without the help of an older Ryzen chip. That said, we doubt many value-minded builders are considering the very-highest-end Socket AM4 boards to go with their slice of affordable gaming power.

For its part, AMD will be implementing a labeling program for boards that are ready to go with Ryzen APUs. Look for the "AMD Ryzen Desktop 2000 Ready" logo from the box insert above on any motherboard you might be considering for worry-free Raven Ridge compatibility. Unless your mobo of choice features that label, it might be wise to tread carefully until the latest runs of AM4 boards reach retail shelves.

Comments closed
    • user1
    • 2 years ago

    Can you work around this POST problem by putting a video card in and connecting that to your monitor rather than the integrated graphics output ?

    • Fonbu
    • 2 years ago

    I wonder if waiting just a few weeks or a month will allow the motherboard manufacturer’s to catch up and release new model motherboards that support the new APU out of the box without pre-flashing the bios? Also do most of the online computer part retailers offer an extra fee to pre-update the motherboards bios before they ship it to you?

    On a related note a few of them mITX boards do not even have display output ports, its just the market segmentation I guess.

    • LocalCitizen
    • 2 years ago

    the cheapest am4 boards with cpu-less bios upgrade feature i found on newegg are
    – GIGABYTE AORUS GA-AX370-Gaming K7 ($200 – out of stock)
    – ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero AM4 ($209)
    – MSI X370 GAMING M7 ACK ($209)

    probably not the typical boards to pair with ryzen G

    • maxxcool
    • 2 years ago

    How Intel of them …

    • Jeff Kampman
    • 2 years ago

    FYI for folks just arriving at this piece: [url=https://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/2Gen-Ryzen-AM4-System-Bootup.aspx<]AMD has posted a support page[/url<] with steps users can take to resolve this specific issue should they build an unbootable system with a Ryzen APU and an older motherboard. The company suggests updating motherboard firmware using a compatible CPU, requesting assistance from a retailer with a compatible CPU, requesting an RMA exchange for a compatible motherboard, or using an AMD-provided boot kit to update the firmware. I've updated the article accordingly.

      • Yan
      • 2 years ago

      What’s this “boot kit”? Something physical, it seems.

        • just brew it!
        • 2 years ago

        If I had to guess, they probably loan you a bottom-of-the-line Socket AM4 Bristol Ridge APU. May require a CC number they can charge if you fail to return it in a timely manner. Or if they’ve got a ton of ’em just sitting in a warehouse somewhere, they may just give it to you no strings attached.

        Would be very interested to hear what happens from anyone who asks for and receives this “boot kit”.

          • JustAnEngineer
          • 2 years ago

          Do you suppose they’ve been saving any Bristol Ridge CPUs more crippled than the lowly dual-core [url=https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113454<]A6-9500[/url<]? "Dang, only one out of four cores passed QA testing on this Bristol Ridge die. Should we make a speed bin for this or just trash it?" "What's it good for?" "Well, you could at least get a motherboard to boot with it."

            • spiketheaardvark
            • 2 years ago

            Make you wonder how many a6-9500 they’ve got stashed in warehouse. I’m sure someone thought, “well we’re sure as heck not going to sell all of them”

          • Yan
          • 2 years ago

          [url=https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/02/amd-sending-out-free-processors-to-solve-firmware-flashing-catch-22/<]Confirmed[/url<]: they send an A6-9500.

            • Chrispy_
            • 2 years ago

            As rubbish, slow, and pathetic as that solution is, it’s still infinity time better than the Intel option.

            Intel’s solution is; [i<]"Screw you, puny consumer; you failed to read page 4125 of the small print. This incompatibility is your own stupid fault so you must RMA everything at your own expense and waste 2-3 weeks of your time in the process! Thanks for choosing Intel, suckas!!!"[/i<]

    • Chrispy_
    • 2 years ago

    I’ve had this problem with Intel chips for decades now.

    As a company with access to huge inventories of hardware, this isn’t a problem – but as a single consumer with only one board and one chip (that are incompatible) it’s a royal pain in the arse.

      • anotherengineer
      • 2 years ago

      Indeed.

      But judging from the mobo’s that can update the BIOS without a CPU, I would put the down thumbs on them. If the technology exists to do it, every motherboard should have it.

        • Chrispy_
        • 2 years ago

        I agree that it would be nice if every board had this feature, but it likely adds cost and Ryzen APUs are budget products where ever cent counts.

    • ptsant
    • 2 years ago

    This is of course very annoying, but if you get stuck with an MB that won’t boot it is generally possible to either get one of the fancier MBs that can flash themselves or order a new BIOS chip for $10.

    Most reasonable stores should be able to verify that your ordered MB has the Ryzen 2000 sticker.

    • Bumper
    • 2 years ago

    This crossed my mind as I placed my order for a mb. Came to techreport. Miraculously there was an answer. Cancelled order. I ❤ techreport.

      • Bumper
      • 2 years ago

      Btw I ended up getting that expensive ram from the review. Gskill. In a way it doesn’t make sense…but in a way it doesn’t have to.

        • morphine
        • 2 years ago

        ❤ 😉

    • Srsly_Bro
    • 2 years ago

    Starting to look like Intel’s “New board for each new CPU” strategy isn’t looking too bad???

    • Bauxite
    • 2 years ago

    Once again, cheap usb eeprom flasher, something any serious computer nerd should own by now. Buy once, cry once.

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 2 years ago

      Ha, you think motherboard makers still use socketed firmware chips on inexpensive boards.

        • chuckula
        • 2 years ago

        They don’t?

        Next you’ll be telling me I can’t easily desolder and resolder a SoC upgrade for my iPhone!

        • just brew it!
        • 2 years ago

        One of the things I really liked about Asus was that until fairly recently they were still using socketed BIOS chips.

        Even for a soldered-in chip, you may be able to flash it in-circuit with a suitable IC test clip.

        • Bauxite
        • 2 years ago

        Wow, the groupthink is strong here.

        Apparently none of you nerds have ever heard of a SOIC clip? No soldering required.

        Actually, hand in your nerd cards, that is a class A violation.

          • willmore
          • 2 years ago

          Or just use the little pin header that many boards with soldered on EEPROMs have. The manufacturer has to be able to flash the chip and it’s a PITA and a major JIT problem to have the EEPROMs come pre-programmed. Much easier to program them as part of board electrical test.

      • ozzuneoj
      • 2 years ago

      I can agree if you’re into “retro” stuff (which I am), but lots of recent boards don’t have socketed BIOS chips anymore. Try to find one on the Gigabyte board in the OP…

    • ronch
    • 2 years ago

    What does that ‘2000’ mean? 2000-series Ryzen support? Kinda reminds me of the old Y2K thingamabob.

    • Waco
    • 2 years ago

    How obnoxious.

      • ronch
      • 2 years ago

      How so?

        • Waco
        • 2 years ago

        Older AMD boards were very good about being bootable with newer “unsupported” chips.

      • Spunjji
      • 2 years ago

      I think you mean inconvenient. Obnoxious is releasing a new chipset every time you re-release the same Skylake architecture with a few new tweaks.

        • Chrispy_
        • 2 years ago

        Even the new Intel chipsets are barely more than a re-brand.

        Intel just like to take the mickey so you can thank your deity(s) of choice that AMD are kicking them up the backside again.

        Would anyone like to play [url=https://ark.intel.com/compare/125903,98089,90591<]spot-the-difference[/url<] between Z170, Z270, Z370?

    • shank15217
    • 2 years ago

    What boards support HDMI 2.0b because without 4K support whats the point?

      • ET3D
      • 2 years ago

      People on Reddit report that Raven Ridge outputs 4K@60Hz on current motherboards.

    • ronch
    • 2 years ago

    This sort of thing is nothing new if you’ve been working with computers for a while now. Everything simply progresses rapidly in the world of computing so a lot of things are left un-updated and all that. And while it’s good advice to wait for the current AM4 stocks to be replaced with newer stock, someone will have to buy THOSE older stocks and might run into this problem, especially given how non-enthusiasts wouldn’t even know about this issue and will buy the first board that works with their CPU of choice that suits their budget. And you can bet a lot of older stocks will be discounted to get rid of them. Discounted boards + cheaper processors = a bargain hunter’s dream. And in this scenario, you can bet a lot of kids will be complaining after they flick the switch on.

      • JustAnEngineer
      • 2 years ago

      I suggested in [url=https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=120649<]Welch's thread[/url<] that if he intended to build very many new Ryzen 2200G systems before motherboard inventories were updated to newer BIOS versions, it might be worthwhile to have a cheap Bristol Ridge APU on hand just to be able to boot to flash the BIOS to accept Raven Ridge.

        • Welch
        • 2 years ago

        Since it is a different board than was tested here, I’m going to give it a go. It was a very good suggestion though and I’d persue that if I were doing a couple dozen. I’ve got 4 to build this week and I think another 3 in the upcoming month. They shipped out earlier this morning and I should know soon. Again, I’m curious if the board will boot if a dedicated GPU is inserted. Not sure how much has fundamentally changed between Ryzen and Ryzen APUs on the CPU side of things other than lithography.

        I’ll make sure to post my findings, although I’m not feeling optimistic after this post.

    • hansmuff
    • 2 years ago

    Thank you for posting this. I’m searching all over the place for a mini ITX board that is guaranteed to either boot with a 2400G, or be able to flash without a CPU.

    • chuckula
    • 2 years ago

    Once the older boards move out of stock this problem will gradually fade, but it’s annoying.

    Unlike other chip launches in the past, the vast majority of motherboards that get RyZen APUs aren’t being “upgraded” from anything else, so there will be a decent population of people who don’t have an old processor lying around to use for the firmware update.

      • ronch
      • 2 years ago

      To exacerbate this issue, video card prices deter people from buying (obviously) so these APUs might prove to be more compelling for the time being for folks who are willing to endure lower framerates while waiting for GPU prices to settle down. But then there’s also the RAM prices we need to consider.

      Overall I think this is a bad time to buy a new rig.

    • CampinCarl
    • 2 years ago

    I mean have there ever been cases where this hasn’t been true? I can’t think of a single example in recent times of a new CPU that shared a socket/chipset with an older one where you did not have to update the BIOS to a compatible version in order to support the new CPUs.

      • RAGEPRO
      • 2 years ago

      Sure, there have. Lots of Core 2 boards would take and boot the later 45nm chips even if they couldn’t identify them. Same thing with Athlon (Socket A/462) and S370 boards, as well as the older Super 7 stuff. I think it’s less likely these days because of how integrated the CPUs are.

        • Klimax
        • 2 years ago

        Slot 1 MB could run with Katmai even without knowledge of them. (And how about those S370-S1 converters?)

        • Kougar
        • 2 years ago

        And yet, there were Z87 and Z97 era boards (and all the rest) that wouldn’t POST with Devils Canyon chips, despite the Haswell refresh being just higher clocks and a change of TIM. It’s very common, and should be expected.

        • CampinCarl
        • 2 years ago

        Interesting! I never had that kind of luck, so I just assumed it was true across the board.

      • IGTrading
      • 2 years ago

      Exactly! There have been some rare lucky cases (like Socket A) where new CPUs that were unknown for the BIOS were running at 1000 MHz until you updated the BIOS.

      But this is not really a piece of “news” trying to say something just a tad negative on AMD, right ?!

      At least this is how I see it : If AMD and all motherboard manufacturers say you need a new BIOS “before” installing the new APUs, then if you’re an idiot and you try to do it without the update, that’s your business.

      I find it useful as a reminder to novice users, but not as a “news” story.

      Sure, with my short “career” as a Hardware News Editor I’m not the expert in news. But after 21 years in IT hardware and 1300 news articles, I kinda know what’s news and what’s not …. just my humble opinion.

      Let the downvoting begin! 🙂

        • Jeff Kampman
        • 2 years ago

        How is a builder who runs out to the local Micro Center or Fry’s right this second supposed to know that a) this labeling program exists without opening a processor box and b) what firmware version the motherboards on store shelves have without knowledge of that labeling program?

        Several people in this thread have already said this warning was useful so it’s clearly not as obvious a fact as it needs to be for you to tar me with it.

          • chuckula
          • 2 years ago

          Jeff Jeff Jeff. You forgot the most important rule: TechReport isn’t here to report about technology. It’s here to make AMD look good no matter what and to make anybody who isn’t AMD look bad no matter what.

          Once you come to this realization, this post from IGTrading — and every other post he’s ever made and that tends to get copy-n-pasted verbatim to a bunch of other tech websites — is perfectly reasonable.

          In conclusion, please delete this article in the name of AMD IS AWESOME!

          • IGTrading
          • 2 years ago

          The mainboard comes with a manual that clearly does not say or claim it is compatible with Ryzen 2200G or 2400G.

          When the amateur user/builder buys the mainboard and attempts to build his new system, he should at least check the manual and the online specification which clearly state you need X.X BIOS version to achieve compatibility with the new Ryzen VEGA processors.

          I mean if you don’t at least do some reading before spending money and attempt to build a computer, there’s no warning in the world that can save you from messing up 🙂

          I don’t want to quote myself, but I think I did say that this is a good warning, maybe as a blog post, but it is certainly not news in my opinion.

          And don’t worry about what I post in the comments. I have my opinions, but I’m not an idiot, even when I disagree with you 🙂

          I have been reading TechReport for way more than a decade and I will continue reading it. Keep up the good work and don’t mind me to much!

            • K-L-Waster
            • 2 years ago

            [quote<]The mainboard comes with a manual that clearly does not say or claim it is compatible with Ryzen 2200G or 2400G.[/quote<] Really? If it's an older board, it won't say anything at all about them one way or the other. [quote<]I mean if you don't at least do some reading before spending money and attempt to build a computer, there's no warning in the world that can save you from messing up :)[/quote<] You mean reading something like, say, this article? Oh no, that can't be it, because this article shouldn't exist. [quote<]I don't want to quote myself, but I think I did say that this is a good warning, maybe as a blog post, but it is certainly not news in my opinion.[/quote<] Like maybe putting "PSA" in the title? (You *do* know that "PSA" is short for "Public Service Announcement," right?) [quote<] but I'm not an idiot[/quote<] Still waiting for evidence to support that contention.

            • just brew it!
            • 2 years ago

            [quote<]The mainboard comes with a manual that clearly does not say or claim it is compatible with Ryzen 2200G or 2400G.[/quote<] How is this even relevant? Motherboard manuals rarely (if ever) specify a list of CPU models they are compatible with.

            • Meadows
            • 2 years ago

            Well, compatibility lists do exist on the manufacturer’s website as a PDF below the motherboard in question, but I don’t know if the physical manual includes a copy of it. At any rate, if you had to rely on the physical manual to find out these things, odds are it would already be too late by then.

            • just brew it!
            • 2 years ago

            Right. They put the list on the web site because it changes as new processors and BIOSes are released. It would be silly to put it in the printed manual.

          • willmore
          • 2 years ago

          The staff should tell them that. They should be knowledgable of this.

        • CaptainObvious
        • 2 years ago

        Even though you said it’s just a “reminder”, not “news”, you clicked on the link…
        (the “PSA” on the title should have warned us that it’s something we have been through before)

        I will upvote you just for the effort of typing those words showing your enlightning knowledge in IT hardware.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 2 years ago

        well, you asked for it.

        • Meadows
        • 2 years ago

        You sure sound like someone with an opinion, but you’re not very good at being humble.

        • Bauxite
        • 2 years ago

        You got groupthinked

          • K-L-Waster
          • 2 years ago

          Or maybe there’s another reason you guys are outliers.

    • just brew it!
    • 2 years ago

    This is disappointing, though I suppose not entirely surprising. I could understand the IGP not coming up, but it would be nice if it would at least allow you to do a “blind flash” from a suitably prepared USB stick.

    • Kretschmer
    • 2 years ago

    Go Intel and you’ll never have to stay up late wondering if your older board will work with the latest processors. 😉

      • psuedonymous
      • 2 years ago

      Intel have stuck to the same two-gens-per-socket cycle for the better part of the last decade, and have the same issue with the second CPU gen for that socket needing a BIOS update on the first gen PCH to be supported. I expect the exact same issue with the 300 series PCH when Ice Lake CPUs start being released.

        • chuckula
        • 2 years ago

        Oh, we don’t think you’ll need to worry about Ice Lake running on older motherboards!
        — Intel’s platform team

          • Srsly_Bro
          • 2 years ago

          I just made that joke. Looks like you beat me to it. Nice job, Chuck.

      • ludi
      • 2 years ago

      You won’t need to worry because you KNOW it won’t.

      I had to buy a near-bottom-of-the-barrel Skylake CPU when I built my Kaby Lake HTPC because the board wouldn’t even POST until the BIOS update was loaded. After that, it worked fine, and I ended up eBaying the CPU later on. Probably netted a loss of $20 but just figured it into the total cost of the build.

    • Yan
    • 2 years ago

    Ouch. Not good.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 2 years ago

    Barf. :p

    • Voldenuit
    • 2 years ago

    [quote<]Fancier motherboards from Gigabyte, ASRock, MSI, and Asus might be able to get around this issue thanks to their ability to update firmware without a CPU or memory installed. [/quote<] To be honest, I thought that every modern motherboard would have this feature in this day and age. What's next, hit F6 to load SATA drivers from a floppy?

      • just brew it!
      • 2 years ago

      It requires having an additional embedded processor on the motherboard to read the firmware image and control the flashing process. This adds cost (albeit only a couple of bucks, if I had to guess). I am not surprised they would opt to omit this feature on lower priced boards, as mainstream motherboards are essentially a commodity where vendors compete mostly on price.

        • ronch
        • 2 years ago

        And of course, product segmentation. Like why is it so hard all these years to enable SMT on Core i3 CPUs?

          • derFunkenstein
          • 2 years ago

          What? Core i3 CPUs always had SMT.

            • ronch
            • 2 years ago

            Oops sorry, yeah you’re right! I should’ve referred to non-HT product lines such as the Pentium and i5.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            Kinda like AMD does with Ryzen 3 and Ryzen 5, arbitrarily turning off features to hit a price point? :eyeroll:

            • ronch
            • 2 years ago

            What features are turned off with lesser Ryzen models, apart from cores and cache? AFAIK Ryzen 3 has SMT disabled, but I’m not sure Ryzen 5 has some core features disabled. Then again I am not watching Ryzen 5 closely.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            Ryzen 5 has some cores disabled. Not just core features.

            If you had chosen the lack of AES and AVX support in the latest Pentiums I’d see your point. You picked HyperThreading, which is a feature both manufacturers enable and disable at will.

            • ronch
            • 2 years ago

            Well, to be fair Ryzen 3 is the first AMD CPU in a long time with which AMD has disabled core features. For the longest time, specifically with their FX series, all core features were enabled. I also wasn’t talking about disabling cores; that’s been part and parcel of product segmentation for a very long time, since multicore chips came along, just like clock speed binning.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            hard to turn off something when you don’t have it, yes.

            • MOSFET
            • 2 years ago

            FX was so slow there was nothing to segment.

            • Mr Bill
            • 2 years ago

            Actually disabled, or defected? Remember the old days when you could cut that link on an AMD chip package and enable it for overclocking or SMT (I forget which it was)?

            • Leader952
            • 2 years ago

            Xeon E3’s and i3’s have the same base with the Xeon enabling some extra features like ECC or Turbo Boost.

            [url<]https://www.avadirect.com/blog/intel-core-vs-xeon-which-is-best[/url<] Xeon E3-1225 V3 SR14U [b<]does have HT enabled[/b<]. Then Intel turned it off on new ones produced. If you are lucky you can still sometimes get them in used systems. I purchased two Dell T1700 SFF systems than had them and HT was enabled. [url<]http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20E3-1225%20v3.html[/url<] [url<]http://qdms.intel.com/dm/i.aspx/09585A06-A418-4623-8A2F-3185C4ACD8D8/PCN112293-01.pdf[/url<] I think it is funny that in the PCN Intel states that they are disabling HT and that it has [b<]No Impact to Customers[/b<]. It sure does have an impact as in lower performance in highly threaded workloads.

            • chuckula
            • 2 years ago

            MAN DOES DERFUNKENSTEIN HAVE EGG ON HIS FACE AFTER YOUR EPIC DIATRIBE!

            I think he’s going to have to flee the Internet for making that totally embarrassingly wrong statement that i3 parts have hyperthreading!

            • Leader952
            • 2 years ago

            Linus Trovalds looks saintly compared to your constant attacks.

            You have added nothing to this thread but garbage and attacks but then again an ASS must be an ASS which you seem to relish.

            • chuckula
            • 2 years ago

            Instead of hurling stupid insults at me, maybe you should develop 6th grade reading skills.

            From the only semi-relevant document in your delusional conspiracy rant, which is an obscure product change notification from 2013*, is that Intel had ADVERTISED that particular Xeon as [b<]not[/b<] having hyperthreading. So customers who bought this [b<]xeon[/b<] part didn't expect it to have hyperthreading turned on. The product change notification says that Intel is making the chip do what people expected it to do in the first place, and hence this statement, which my 3 year old could intellectually digest better than you can: [quote<]Reason for Revision: Internal system data clarification – No Impact to Customers Intel will be disabling the hyper-threading technology capability available in Intel® Xeon® Processor E3-1225 v3 [b<][i<]in order to align the processor to the published specifications.[/b<][/i<] [/quote<] Lemme translate that to idiot-speak for you: It's not a problem, it's an information statement. I'm sorry that the last 5 years of your life where you expected to triumphantly post a link to that stupid document and expected to be worshiped as the savior of mankind have been for naught. * Lemme guess, at the back of your closet there's a cork board with old newspaper articles, pushpins, and colored strings CONNECTING IT ALL TOGETHER??!?!? Given how you like to namedrop Linus Torvalds for no reason whatsoever, I'm hoping he at least gets a red pushpin in the board?

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            So that reads like Intel accidentally shipped some E3-1225 v3 CPUs that had HT by mistake, not that they nerfed the product mid-lifecycle.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            I’ve already PM’d Bruno to change my name to ferDunkenstein

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            OK first of all you’re talking about [url=https://ark.intel.com/products/75461/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1225-v3-8M-Cache-3_20-GHz<]Haswell parts with four cores[/url<], which does not mean Core i3. It means Core i5 or i7, depending on HyperThreading. The i3 had two cores and came from a different die. As for your point: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ...uh...sorry?

            • MOSFET
            • 2 years ago

            i3 to E3 – same die.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 2 years ago

            [citation needed]

            You’re going to have to prove that the E3 die with four cores and an i3 die with two cores with HT is the same die, because I’m pretty sure it’s not. Haswell, remember.

      • hansmuff
      • 2 years ago

      It seems to definitely be a problem on the mini ITX format boards. So far, I can not find a single one that has a CPU-less flash feature. ASUS has one that might be able to take the new APUs off the bat, but it doesn’t have any display output ports. LOL.

      Yeah, so for mini ITX it’s looking bleak right this moment. I’m sure it’ll improve.

    • morphine
    • 2 years ago

    But.. but… I only use vintage NOS AM4 mobos.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This