X870E motherboard
- Thread starter fabiosun
- Start date
Because the large L3 cache specifically helps with audio, or because it's all new and shiny?Probably a 9800x3d CPU
Physical x16 slot for GPU (x8 electrical should be enough, if need be)
2 x1 slots for audio cards
x4-8 slot for 10G NIC
1 SATA is not a constraint yet
some of the M.2 slots will have to come from the chipset, and share the x4 uplink to the CPU with other I/O
Throwing the constraints into my favourite search engine for specifications, I can see the problem but there are a few candidates.
My favourite would be Asus ProArt B650 Creator: CPU PCIe slots x16/x8 and x0/x8 for GPU and NIC, x1 and x4 slots from B650 and 3 M.2 overall.
(Make that ASUS ROG Strix B650E-F Gaming WIFI if you deem PCIe 5.0 and/or a full set of 16 lanes to thet GPU to be relevant.)
There are X670 options, but I don't like that most of the relevant I/O hangs from the second chipset as here: That's an unnecessary double hop to the CPU and even more overhard on the x4 uplinks. I'd prefer a B650 board, hanging everything from a single chipset.
Why are you not liking the new 870e? 9800x3d is king for gaming which i do sometimes. The only info I can get for audio performance for you is this article, they update it once a year https://www.scanproaudio.info/2024/09/12/5075/ and don't know if they will do the new chipset.
I did have a pro art board i think the gen before 650 and i couldn't get my carbon to work thru thunderbolt. So i settled on X570S AERO G, I cannot get the new mac os installed but i have sonoma last gen on it. I dont want to bother casey on it atm as he has help me so much trying to get this going. I could send you my efi if u wanna give it a shot.
They benchmark mostly vsti's. The most important thing would be audio latency and Avid carbon is real time thru there own dsp. Second would be ua but all the app have there own monitoring software and so the only thing you could benchmark for me in my world is literally triggering something like acoustic drum sample thru a e-drum set and get the lowest level of audio which is mostly based on companies drivers. In this area my m-box drive can go below 32 latency where is rme is lock at 32. To me its still sad that audio latency is still a massive bottleneck, people think 32 buffer is cool but its laggy as all hell. Since im mostly a jazz drummer and study tabla you would understand why all of this is important..
I did have a pro art board i think the gen before 650 and i couldn't get my carbon to work thru thunderbolt. So i settled on X570S AERO G, I cannot get the new mac os installed but i have sonoma last gen on it. I dont want to bother casey on it atm as he has help me so much trying to get this going. I could send you my efi if u wanna give it a shot.
They benchmark mostly vsti's. The most important thing would be audio latency and Avid carbon is real time thru there own dsp. Second would be ua but all the app have there own monitoring software and so the only thing you could benchmark for me in my world is literally triggering something like acoustic drum sample thru a e-drum set and get the lowest level of audio which is mostly based on companies drivers. In this area my m-box drive can go below 32 latency where is rme is lock at 32. To me its still sad that audio latency is still a massive bottleneck, people think 32 buffer is cool but its laggy as all hell. Since im mostly a jazz drummer and study tabla you would understand why all of this is important..
X670 is, literally, two daisy-chained B650, all going through a single PCIe 4.0 x4 link (Intel is now using PCIe 4.0 x8 for its consumers chipsets). And X870 is a minor design update on X670—so minor that there's no urgency to offer the single chip as B850. This looks like a pitiful marketing trick to have users think they need to buy a new and expensive 800 motherboard with their Ryzen 9000.
See that X670E Gaming Plus block diagram above? On the first chipset, you already have a x4 M.2 slot, plus all the USB and SATA connectivity. Then on the second chipset you have a second M.2 slot, three PCIe slots (x4, x1 and 3.0 x1), the NIC and some more USB. Any network traffic is taking one lane out of the four lanes that the two M.2 drives and the three PCIe slots also need to reach the CPU. If you have your two audio cards in these PCIe slots, there are at the bottom of this chain, sharing traffic with the NIC and USB but it should still fit; now if just one of these two PCIe 4.0 M.2 requires I/0 at the same time, there's not enough bandwith for everyone to operate at nominal rate.
X870 is going to be the same kind of oversubscribed contraption.
If latency matters, I think you should stay clear of X670/X870 and try to have only one hop to the CPU, hence a B chipset.
See that X670E Gaming Plus block diagram above? On the first chipset, you already have a x4 M.2 slot, plus all the USB and SATA connectivity. Then on the second chipset you have a second M.2 slot, three PCIe slots (x4, x1 and 3.0 x1), the NIC and some more USB. Any network traffic is taking one lane out of the four lanes that the two M.2 drives and the three PCIe slots also need to reach the CPU. If you have your two audio cards in these PCIe slots, there are at the bottom of this chain, sharing traffic with the NIC and USB but it should still fit; now if just one of these two PCIe 4.0 M.2 requires I/0 at the same time, there's not enough bandwith for everyone to operate at nominal rate.
X870 is going to be the same kind of oversubscribed contraption.
If latency matters, I think you should stay clear of X670/X870 and try to have only one hop to the CPU, hence a B chipset.
Open a support thread here, the more eyes on it the better. (I'm not an AMD expert by the way, I'm mostly follwing out of curiosity.)
