B850M-X [WiFi] quick review.

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   So it is possible that putting 170W TDP CPUs on these things will get you lower performance than can be obtained on a more premium motherboard.

That is good to know.

It's not useful to me, because even if I had a 9950X3D or something, I'd run it with all BOOST disabled and TDP set to 105W or at most 120W.

I'm just weird that way.  I mean, how many people do you know who runs their 9800X3D at 65W TDP (88W PPT) mode?  In fact, after experimenting with DRAM settings, I settled on 5200MT/s, even though I have 5600MT/s DIMMs.

The IOD's voltage (and therefore its power consumption) is closely tied to UCLK (memory controller clock).  Running it as 2800MHz (1:1 for 5600MT/s) requires close to 1.2V for SOC, at least for the chip I have.  Running it at 1:2 (1400MHz) dropped that to under 0.9V.  SOC power consumption dropped by like half!  For someone running it at 65W TDP, that's a lot of power that can be given to the Cores instead.

But I didn't want to run 1:2 mode, so settled on 2600MHz UCLK (1:1 for 5200MT/s), which set the VSOC at just over 1.1V.

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
eccential Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 10 Oct 2022 Location: Nevada Status: Offline Points: 6455	Post Options Post Reply Quote eccential Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Topic: B850M-X [WiFi] quick review. Posted: 04 Jul 2025 at 8:39pm
	So it is possible that putting 170W TDP CPUs on these things will get you lower performance than can be obtained on a more premium motherboard. That is good to know. It's not useful to me, because even if I had a 9950X3D or something, I'd run it with all BOOST disabled and TDP set to 105W or at most 120W. I'm just weird that way. I mean, how many people do you know who runs their 9800X3D at 65W TDP (88W PPT) mode? In fact, after experimenting with DRAM settings, I settled on 5200MT/s, even though I have 5600MT/s DIMMs. The IOD's voltage (and therefore its power consumption) is closely tied to UCLK (memory controller clock). Running it as 2800MHz (1:1 for 5600MT/s) requires close to 1.2V for SOC, at least for the chip I have. Running it at 1:2 (1400MHz) dropped that to under 0.9V. SOC power consumption dropped by like half! For someone running it at 65W TDP, that's a lot of power that can be given to the Cores instead. But I didn't want to run 1:2 mode, so settled on 2600MHz UCLK (1:1 for 5200MT/s), which set the VSOC at just over 1.1V.

ATF Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 11 Feb 2025 Status: Offline Points: 235	Post Options Post Reply Quote ATF Report Post Thanks(1) Quote Reply Posted: 04 Jul 2025 at 7:39pm
	Tweakers, a Dutch site, reviewed budget B650/B850 boards. In Cinebench the power consumption is notably lower than on all other boards. https://tweakers.net/reviews/13412/20-goedkope-amd-b650-b850-moederborden-een-oudere-chipset-is-de-betere-keuze.html#anchor_energiegebruik

eccential Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 10 Oct 2022 Location: Nevada Status: Offline Points: 6455	Post Options Post Reply Quote eccential Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 04 Jul 2025 at 7:11pm
	Where did this "unofficial 160W limit" thing come from? ASRock lists 170W TDP / 230W PPT processors in their official "CPU Support List:" https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/B850M-X%20WiFi/index.asp#CPU Now, the board does have fairly minimal VRM setup, but it should be adequate. You just wouldn't want to run this in all liquid cooling setup with inadequate airflow over the VRM heatsinks. -------------------------------- ASRock does provide "Software/BIOS Setup Guide" here: https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/B850M-X%20WiFi/index.asp#Manual But it's probably not all that meaningful. You'd get way more info from watch a video like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C7P-V05SgQ Except for 20-series chipset boards (A520, etc.) that disable overclocking, I imagine most boards have similar features, even if organized a bit differently.

ATF Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 11 Feb 2025 Status: Offline Points: 235	Post Options Post Reply Quote ATF Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 04 Jul 2025 at 3:55pm
	Does this board have an undocumented 160 W VRM limit? Is a proper BIOS manual available?

Xaltar Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Moderator Group Joined: 16 May 2015 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 26118	Post Options Post Reply Quote Xaltar Report Post Thanks(1) Quote Reply Posted: 20 May 2025 at 2:58pm
	Yeah, it's a tricky thing to navigate. I chose to remove the link rather than ban and delete, just in case, but I am pretty sure it's just a spam bot. Generally I check the IP and account details, if it's posted with any of the VPNs I have blacklisted or has a bunch of website links in the info I just delete the account.


terribleperson Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 02 Mar 2025 Status: Offline Points: 105	Post Options Post Reply Quote terribleperson Report Post Thanks(1) Quote Reply Posted: 20 May 2025 at 11:58am
	I concur, I reported that post after I got the notification and read it. Not looking forward to forums drowning in almost-comprehensible AI spam posts.

eccential Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 10 Oct 2022 Location: Nevada Status: Offline Points: 6455	Post Options Post Reply Quote eccential Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 19 May 2025 at 6:46pm
	I'm about 97.1% sure that Alime1954 / mafer3 (above poster) is an AI. #1 The post is underhandedly promoting some AI site. The original post includes a link to it, but looks like Xaltar removed the link. #2 the writing is very much what an AI would create as a response to my original post. #3 It has a misunderstanding of the topic, where it says, "I agree that stability and speed are more important than the number of slots, especially if you don't plan on extreme overclocking." This is wrong because extreme overclockers actually do care about the number of DIMM slots. They prefer just one DIMM per slot. I predict various online accounts (Fakebook, X, and even Instagram and the likes) will become infested with AI sooner than later. Heck, most "users" on them might already be AI. We have an interesting future ahead of us.

mafer3 Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 19 May 2025 Status: Offline Points: 15	Post Options Post Reply Quote mafer3 Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 19 May 2025 at 8:40am
	Congratulations on the new build! It's very interesting to read about your experience with AM5 and the choice of AsRock ??ECC memory support is really rare and a big plus. Your approach to two DIMM slots instead of four is also logical, especially considering the release of 64GB DDR5 modules. I agree that stability and speed are more important than the number of slots, especially if you don't plan on extreme overclocking. About the sound with Realtek ALC897 ??it's also annoying why manufacturers save on this when they could have installed at least ALC1200 and added a little to the price. By the way, if you're involved in assemblies and community support, I recommend taking a look at Overchat AI, it's a very convenient tool for managing feedback and bug reports, it helps keep everything in one place and quickly respond to reviews. I think it will be useful for you when coordinating such complex projects. I wonder how the 9800X3D performs in ECO mode without a discrete graphics card - I think you have a unique configuration. Thanks for sharing such details! Edited by Xaltar - 19 May 2025 at 2:51pm

eccential Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Joined: 10 Oct 2022 Location: Nevada Status: Offline Points: 6455	Post Options Post Reply Quote eccential Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 02 May 2025 at 8:44pm
	I see ZERO difference in the Specification pages between the original and the R2.0. WRONG! PCIe x16 slot went from Gen.4 to Gen.5. I also compared all the Gallery photos, and the only differences are the main PCIe slot cover design, and some silkscreen differences. RTC battery warning mark moved, and the logo changed a bit. Ahh! I see it. Original's main PCIe x16 slot is limited to Gen.4. R2.0's main PCIe x16 slot supports Gen.5. I imagine this is to keep up with what Gigabyte is doing. I'm not sure if there is actual trace difference or not. I do see that the slot has a different metal design, but I don't know if it's required to support faster PCIe speed. If someone is brave, try forcing the R2.0 BIOS onto the original and see if it supports PCIe x16 Gen.5 (laugh). Edited by eccential - 02 May 2025 at 8:53pm

ATF Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Newbie Joined: 11 Feb 2025 Status: Offline Points: 235	Post Options Post Reply Quote ATF Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 02 May 2025 at 7:55pm
	There's now a R2.0 What changed?