WYP
News Guru
400-series users will have an upgrade path, but upgrading will be tricky.
Read more about AMD extending B450 and X470's motherboard support.
Read more about AMD extending B450 and X470's motherboard support.
AMD Changes Course - B450 and X470 will support Zen 3-based processors
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
This was probably planned from the start given how extremely quickly they changed their stance, They knew there would be customer backlash so now them "listening" makes them look like the good guys, Clever marketing.
AlienALX
Well-known member
Nah, I strongly doubt that. They've just seen the backlash, realised MSI and Co would be screwed and have changed their mind.
Remember, this will cost them a lot of time and money and will result in board failure and RMA. They will have to cover that, which is why they probably didn't want to go this route in the first place.
Fair play though. I doff my cap.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Pretty stupid how you cannot do a BIOS flash to an older version that doesn't support a Zen 3 CPU. Makes no bloody sense as to why.
Avet
Active member
Here is the deep dive by GN. It is just past the limits of the BIOS chip to support all that. Either old or new compromise is the only thing AMD could do. If you want the new stuff you probably won't go back to the old. If you want old just don't go for the special version of the BIOS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5X-8vZtml8
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
No that still makes no sense.
If you flash it with an older BIOS you are rewriting the entire file stored. It does not matter what is on it, you are deleting it to it's base functions to where it can still operate, but then writing new binary to it allowing for all the support needed. It does not matter what's written so long as it's able to be written.
Older BIOS will have a previous AGESA and CPU support. Newer BIOS version will have a new AGESA version and therefore new CPU support.
It doesn't matter if the "probably" event you mentioned occurs. It's the fact that it still makes no sense to me how they can prevent old flashbacks unless they are specifically writing code to prevent anything older than these new AGESA versions. Which is purposefully removing options from the user when there is 0 need to.
If you flash it with an older BIOS you are rewriting the entire file stored. It does not matter what is on it, you are deleting it to it's base functions to where it can still operate, but then writing new binary to it allowing for all the support needed. It does not matter what's written so long as it's able to be written.
Older BIOS will have a previous AGESA and CPU support. Newer BIOS version will have a new AGESA version and therefore new CPU support.
It doesn't matter if the "probably" event you mentioned occurs. It's the fact that it still makes no sense to me how they can prevent old flashbacks unless they are specifically writing code to prevent anything older than these new AGESA versions. Which is purposefully removing options from the user when there is 0 need to.
Last edited:
I assume this update is so large they have to remove the full bootloader(The bootloader for the UEFI chip rather than the PC) to be able to fit(or at least removing the flashing functionality). If you write software to an embedded processor without a bootloader than allows you to "flash" itself then you need to use a dedicated programmer to "re-flash" it.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Considering they are only supporting one lineup, Zen 3, they are actually using less storage as there are less CPUs being supported. It's a one way ticket. Zen 1/2 or 3. Not both.
The size of the AGESA procedure library required for Zen3 could still be larger than previous lines, particularly if the core design has changed notably.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
That's irrelevant.
The fact of the matter is there is no reason for them to block old BIOS files. Regardless of how large they are they still have to allow bootloader to work to be able to update to a newer BIOS. Which means flashing will still work. So if they let that happen they are purposefully blocking users from going backwards if they so desire.
The fact of the matter is there is no reason for them to block old BIOS files. Regardless of how large they are they still have to allow bootloader to work to be able to update to a newer BIOS. Which means flashing will still work. So if they let that happen they are purposefully blocking users from going backwards if they so desire.
looz
Active member
I doubt they're doing it just because. There is probably a legitimate hurdle, maybe some motherboard vendors made designs which make downgrading possible. At least AsRock has already had UEFIs which can't be rolled back once installed.
I'd like to highlight a bit of GN's earlier video (timestamped): https://youtu.be/T5X-8vZtml8?t=2080
I wonder how much the 16mb and 32mb bios chips cost to manufacturers. Would be funky to see multiple chips, between which you could change with jumpers for CPU support. Bring back the old times:
I'd like to highlight a bit of GN's earlier video (timestamped): https://youtu.be/T5X-8vZtml8?t=2080
I wonder how much the 16mb and 32mb bios chips cost to manufacturers. Would be funky to see multiple chips, between which you could change with jumpers for CPU support. Bring back the old times:
Nope, the bootloader for an embedded chip is within the program memory. You can program the chip to have just the program and not a bootloader, or you can program them to have both if you want to be able to do In-System Programming. If they deem this AGESA is the end of life and need additional memory space, they can allow this BIOS update to no longer contain a flashable bootloader. There is nothing stopping a bootloader within program memory from overwriting itself using XIP on an embedded chip. In fact, in every previous BIOS update the bootloader would overwrite itself, just with another(or the same) bootloader code.
TL;DR: The ability for an embedded processor to rewrite its own program space with new code requires code to already be on the embedded processor to tell it how to rewrite itself, if you delete that code (Which it seems AMD had to do to fit the new microcode in) you need a hardware programming device to flash it again.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
The point being even AMD promised it would all work through 2020. Which technically it is but it's an awful experience. The fact they didn't have the foresight to make CPUs that can address a 32mb rom is their own fault and saying "motherboards don't even have it" is purely because it's AMDs fault in the first place because even if the boards supported a larger size the CPU itself couldn't read them. This is the legitimate hurdle.
I just think this is a poor excuse and AMD is using this to look better from a marketing standpoint. For all the crap they throw at Nvidia I just find it ironic. Outside of that I really don't care about it since I am not on the AMD platform.
I just think this is a poor excuse and AMD is using this to look better from a marketing standpoint. For all the crap they throw at Nvidia I just find it ironic. Outside of that I really don't care about it since I am not on the AMD platform.
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
It's a non issue that people are having their usual over the top online nervous breakdowns over.
If you have a B450 or X470 motherboard and you want Zen 3, Then there would be zero point in having the capability to downgrade to an earlier CPU.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
You're missing the point entirely. Please reread what you quoted.
As for your second part. It removes the ability to completely upgrade your setup and then give your parts to say your kid and throw in a cheap Zen 2 CPU from eBay or something. Removing options for the consumer is never good.
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
Not missing any point, If you were to do your scenario then you'd just get a budget Zen 3 chip for your kid which will exist by the end of the year when they release and be even cheaper when Zen 4 rolls around next year which will be on a new socket anyway, It's a non issue.
People just love to moan.
AlienALX
Well-known member
To be fair to AMD it's a choice. It's better than the "choice" Intel gave people on Z170 (IE none) and you had to hack your board (and there were about two that worked).
It's better than nothing. TBH? I am amazed they are even bothering with B450. They were really cheap to begin with. I mean, £110 gets you a top end one.
I'd be more miffed if I spent a ton on a X370 tbh.
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
With X370 it's different IMO, We had 1st, 2nd and 3rd gen Ryzen support on X370 and AMD are still releasing chipset updates for X370 well into 2020.
Similar threads
