Friday, June 7th 2019

MSI CEO: AMD Plans to Stop Being the Value Alternative, X570 Motherboards to be Expensive

MSI's CEO Charles Chiang, quoted by Tom's Hardware at COMPUTEX 2019, laid out what we were already seeing with motherboard designs from all vendors of AMD's X570-based motherboards: pricing is likely increasing across the board, and AMD's market positioning won't be of the alternative, lower-value brand.

As quoted, Chiang said that ""Lots of people ask me, what do you think about today's AMD? I say today's AMD is completely different company compared to two, three, five years ago. They have nice technology and they are there to put the higher spec with the reasonable pricing. But right now they say, "Hey Charles, let's push to marketing to the higher [end]. So let's sell higher-pricing motherboards, higher-spec motherboards, and let's see what will happen in the market. So I don't think that AMD is the company that wants to sell low cost here, low cost there." Which does make sense: AMD isn't in the position of the underdog anymore -at least technology and product-portfolio wise when it comes to consumer CPUs. With better products, comes a desire for higher margins, and a change in direction for a company that was basically forced to almost cut itself out of the market in terms of profits with its previous, non-competitive CPU designs.
Efforts to survive on AMD's part have been immense, with the company severely tightening its belt in all fields, including R&D, in the times leading to the launch of their previous-gen architecture, Bulldozer. And with the way that one architecture panned out in the market, AMD didn't really find a way to dig itself out of the trenches. No like it has with Zen: a lithe, small, highly efficient design that allowed the company to not only make up lost ground on technology and CPU performance but also on profits. That the company wants to price its products in higher segments, alongside their performance improvements and competitiveness against Intel's slow-moving lineup, makes all sorts of sense from a business perspective.
Charles Chiang said that there a multitude of factors contributing to the higher pricing of X570 motherboards: that AMD is planning to charge more for each chipset (compared to the ASMedia-designed X470), but also because of the integration of PCIe 4.0. PCIe 4.0 support has meant a higher-TDp chipset (which has required a throwback to the days of old with active cooling over AMD's chipset, which has increased its TDp up to 10 W compared to the previous gen's X470's 3 W); and because PCIe switches are another best entirely in terms of complexity and power delivery capabilities. All of these add cost, and this cost will end up being passed on to end users (at least partially): as it always is. Source: Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

151 Comments on MSI CEO: AMD Plans to Stop Being the Value Alternative, X570 Motherboards to be Expensive

#101
IceShroom
Valantar, post: 4061286, member: 171585"
Regular desktop Ryzen is also a full SoC - the chipset is an optional add-on for additional I/O beyond what's integrated into the die. The A300 and X300 "chipsets" are really BIOS settings for not having an external chipset, more or less. I'm also reasonably sure EPYC has all SATA and other non-PCIe I/O disabled for current designs (unlike Ryzen) - at least their datasheets don't mention it at all, making a "chipset" (a secondary southbridge, really) a useful and "cheap" (in terms of I/O) solution to adding SATA and other controllers. AMD themselves have stated that the X570 chipset is based off an enterprise design.
Never heard that kind of thing from AMD. You maybe quoting GN comment on that matter, but letter he corrected by saying that EPYC has no chipset.
Posted on Reply
#102
Captain_Tom
bug, post: 4060883, member: 157434"
This should be a reality check for those that thought AMD was undercutting Intel's prices out of the goodness of their hearts. But it won't be.
Hopefully it is also a reality check to Intel Fanboys who called Infinity Fabric a "One Trick Pony" too.....

Hahaha I am of course not holding my breath :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#103
Turmania
Normally, competition is good for consumers. In this case with AMD/Intel and Nvdia they bring the prices up.strange industry this is.
Posted on Reply
#104
XiGMAKiD
And B550 should be the best bang for the buck
Posted on Reply
#105
Metroid
Turmania, post: 4061430, member: 182201"
Normally, competition is good for consumers. In this case with AMD/Intel and Nvdia they bring the prices up.strange industry this is.
AMD paid a lot for r&d, truth to be told, the box and cooler cost a lot more than the cpu itself to be manufactured and for Intel is the same.

XiGMAKiD, post: 4061445, member: 161561"
And B550 should be the best bang for the buck
Well the idea here is sell the highest margin motherboards to whoever has more money than sense then when things simmer down, sales decrease then is time for b550, that will attract the people with more sense than money.
Posted on Reply
#106
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
phanbuey, post: 4060810, member: 45008"
2019 going on 2006


" That being said, our overclocked E6300 was able to equal and in all cases but one outperform AMD's Athlon 64 FX-62. In fact, in quite a few benchmarks, the overclocked E6300 is essentially out of reach of anything AMD can offer with their current K8 designs. At $183, the value here is tremendous, and if you're willing to overclock the benefits don't get any clearer than that. "
https://www.anandtech.com/show/2051/12
And before that the Athlons were the good choice. And anyway that situation is not comparable to anything today. My iirc €90 E4300 (1.8Ghz) did 2.8Ghz on a €60 motherboard without any kind of voltage trickery, I did 3.2 Ghz when upping the voltage iirc. And that was the norm.
Posted on Reply
#107
TheLostSwede
Turmania, post: 4061430, member: 182201"
Normally, competition is good for consumers. In this case with AMD/Intel and Nvdia they bring the prices up.strange industry this is.
How so? With the increasing R&D costs and the cost of making ICs on a cutting edge node, the cost of each part is going to have to go up every year, or are you expecting these "for profit" companies to sell their parts at cost or below cost?
To be honest, I'm not surprised that prices are going up. However, the rate at which some prices (*cough* Nvidia *cough*) have increased is a bit surprising.
It's clear some companies are taking advantage of being the industry leader, by quite a large margin compared to the cost of the actual hardware.
I think the industry as a whole has lost touch with their customers and we've ended up in a strange place where people seemingly strive to buy $1,000+ pieces of hardware, which I agree is strange, but it's not strange that we see more expensive hardware, as it's also a lot more capable and a lot more complex.
Posted on Reply
#108
john_
AMD needs market share and it can get it as long as Intel is stuck at 14nm. AMD will wait to see how much those expensive X570 boards will cost to Ryzen 3000 sales. If it becomes a problem, B550 will come really soon. If people are happy to use B450 or X470 motherboards with Ryzen 3000 CPUs, then things will stay complicated. Pay the extra money for the X570 or buy a 400 series chipset motherboard and keep thinking that "one day I will have to update my mobo".
Posted on Reply
#109
bug
john_, post: 4061485, member: 137560"
AMD needs market share and it can get it as long as Intel is stuck at 14nm. AMD will wait to see how much those expensive X570 boards will cost to Ryzen 3000 sales. If it becomes a problem, B550 will come really soon. If people are happy to use B450 or X470 motherboards with Ryzen 3000 CPUs, then things will stay complicated. Pay the extra money for the X570 or buy a 400 series chipset motherboard and keep thinking that "one day I will have to update my mobo".
Market share will fix itself, AMD has a strong position for now in the mid-range. What they need now is a solid high-end so they grab some server market share (and the cash/margins that go with that, too). Oh, some GPUs that aren't rehashes of an architecture built over 5 years ago would be nice, too.
Posted on Reply
#110
Vya Domus
john_, post: 4061485, member: 137560"
If people are happy to use B450 or X470 motherboards with Ryzen 3000 CPUs, then things will stay complicated. Pay the extra money for the X570 or buy a 400 series chipset motherboard and keep thinking that "one day I will have to update my mobo".
The problem is the mob mentality of needing to own the absolute highest end motherboard and being fear mongered into doing the same by clueless "enthusiasts". How many times have you seen on tech forums people writing things along the lines of : "oh don't touch that board because it will go up in flames with those VRMs, here buy this top of the line board instead".

Everything up until now points to X570 being an unnecessary addition for the most part. Intel for example understands very well the fact that high end boards are redundant so they've done the only thing left to ensure that their newest chipsets remain relevant no matter what : locking important features such as over clocking and restricting new CPUs being used on other chipsets.
Posted on Reply
#111
TheLostSwede
Vya Domus, post: 4061543, member: 169281"
Everything up until now points to X570 being an unnecessary addition for the most part.
Unless of course you have an older board that doesn't support the new CPUs, in which case you might want to consider X570, budget allowing...
Posted on Reply
#112
kapone32
EarthDog, post: 4061301, member: 79836"
Support is no different than before.... price is just higher.

What is quite low? IIRC, asrocks cheapest x570 is $199.
Is that US?
Posted on Reply
#113
bug
Vya Domus, post: 4061543, member: 169281"
The problem is the mob mentality of needing to own the absolute highest end motherboard and being fear mongered into doing the same by clueless "enthusiasts". How many times have you seen on tech forums people writing things along the lines of : "oh don't touch that board because it will go up in flames with those VRMs, here buy this top of the line board instead".

Everything up until now points to X570 being an unnecessary addition for the most part. Intel for example understands very well the fact that high end boards are redundant so they've done the only thing left to ensure that their newest chipsets remain relevant no matter what : locking important features such as over clocking and restricting new CPUs being used on other chipsets.
Tbh I've always thought you should never cheap out on the mobo. But at the same time, I've always bought based on my needs. My current mobo is the most expensive I've ever owned and only because I wanted 3 M.2 slots. I was hoping I will move to all M.2 some day, but since the SSD prices didn't fall enough, my SATA drives are still around. I would have been more stingy if this were a friend's budget instead, though ;)
Posted on Reply
#116
mstenholm
ZoneDymo, post: 4061593, member: 66089"
still though, with the 3900x being 500 dollar, I fear this one will be like 700 if not more.
I paid the full $999 back in the days for my 3670s. I would be OK with only 700 for this one.
Posted on Reply
#118
ZoneDymo
dicktracy, post: 4061601, member: 173119"
Fits well with the narrative of AMD abandoning their budget fanbase. I just hope we'll get a 64 cores TR under $3k lol
well abandoning, abandoning, they just have some high end stuff as well for high end prices, 8 cores 16 threads for 330 dollar is great value.
Posted on Reply
#120
TheLostSwede
kapone32, post: 4061612, member: 181865"
It would seem to me that the AM4 Ryzen2 has more OC based on more cores. A 4.7 boost clock vs the 4.6 on the 3900X may not seem like much but it is interesting.
Not the case, at least not from what I know. The 12 core part is apparently so far the best overclocker, but that is based on a small sample size, since there are only so many chips in circulation right now.
Posted on Reply
#121
Dave65
Think id rather hear that from AMD, not MSI!
Posted on Reply
#123
john_
Vya Domus, post: 4061543, member: 169281"
The problem is the mob mentality of needing to own the absolute highest end motherboard and being fear mongered into doing the same by clueless "enthusiasts". How many times have you seen on tech forums people writing things along the lines of : "oh don't touch that board because it will go up in flames with those VRMs, here buy this top of the line board instead".

Everything up until now points to X570 being an unnecessary addition for the most part. Intel for example understands very well the fact that high end boards are redundant so they've done the only thing left to ensure that their newest chipsets remain relevant no matter what : locking important features such as over clocking and restricting new CPUs being used on other chipsets.
The funny part here is MSI being a good example of "don't touch that board because it will go up in flames with those VRMs" at least on the AM3+ platform. They had produced a number of boards that where supporting 125W CPUs, but only in theory. In reality the chances of ending up with a dead motherboard where much higher compared to what someone would expect.

But you are right that many people pay more money than they should, for features that they probably don't need right now, or would probably never use. With X570 there are two things that could send people buy those motherboards. They are made with Ryzen 3000 in mind, but we will have to wait and see if there is any real advantage there, and the support for PCIe 4.0, that probably will be useless for like 99% of consumers, at least in the first year. Overcockers of course will find that 50MHz higher overclock at 0.01V lower voltage for the CPU and 10MHz higher overclock for the RAM, is justifying $100 or more.

ZoneDymo, post: 4061593, member: 66089"
still though, with the 3900x being 500 dollar, I fear this one will be like 700 if not more.
I wouldn't use the word fear for a price tag of $700 for a beast that has 16 cores. This is last year's ThreadRipper at a lower price than the starting price for the 16 core ThreadRipper. Thinking of that, we might get surprised with a lower or even a higher price. Anything is possible, depending on how AMD will market it. Destroy Intel's high end line? Max $700. Try to convince the world + dog that it is the premium brand? $999.
Posted on Reply
#124
moproblems99
TheLostSwede, post: 4061559, member: 3382"
Unless of course you have an older board that doesn't support the new CPUs, in which case you might want to consider X570, budget allowing...
That's true, but you still have the option of X470 and B450. That is likely they direction I will be headed while the 5 series mobos figure themselves out. It seems the only thing you lose is PCIE4 while XFR and PBO are the same among series. 5 and 4
Posted on Reply
#125
TheLostSwede
moproblems99, post: 4061630, member: 155919"
That's true, but you still have the option of X470 and B450. That is likely they direction I will be headed while the 5 series mobos figure themselves out. It seems the only thing you lose is PCIE4 while XFR and PBO are the same among series. 5 and 4
That we know so far...
X570 also gives you more peripheral connectivity and a faster chipset/CPU interface.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment