Section by Gavin Bonshor

X570 Motherboards: PCIe 4.0 For Everybody

One of the biggest additions to AMD's AM4 socket is the introduction of the PCIe 4.0 interface. The new generation of X570 motherboards marks the first consumer motherboard chipset to feature PCIe 4.0 natively, which looks to offer users looking for even faster storage, and potentially better bandwidth for next-generation graphics cards over previous iterations of the current GPU architecture. We know that the Zen 2 processors have implemented the new TSMC 7nm manufacturing process with double the L3 cache compared with Zen 1. This new centrally focused IO chiplet is there regardless of the core count and uses the Infinity Fabric interconnect; the AMD X570 chipset uses four PCIe 4.0 lanes to uplink and downlink to the CPU IO die.

Looking at a direct comparison between AMD's AM4 X series chipsets, the X570 chipset adds PCIe 4.0 lanes over the previous X470 and X370's reliance on PCIe 3.0. A big plus point to the new X570 chipset is more support for USB 3.1 Gen2 with AMD allowing motherboard manufacturers to play with 12 flexible PCIe 4.0 lanes and implement features how they wish. This includes 8 x PCIe 4.0 lanes, with two blocks of PCIe 4.0 x4 to play with which vendors can add SATA, PCIe 4.0 x1 slots, and even support for 3 x PCIe 4.0 NVMe M.2 slots.

AMD X570, X470 and X370 Chipset Comparison
Feature X570 X470 X370
PCIe Interface (to peripherals) 4.0 2.0 2.0
Max PCH PCIe Lanes 24 24 24
USB 3.1 Gen2 8 2 2
Max USB 3.1 (Gen2/Gen1) 8/4 2/6 2/6
DDR4 Support 3200 2933 2667
Max SATA Ports 8 8 8
PCIe GPU Config x16
Memory Channels (Dual) 2/2 2/2 2/2
Integrated 802.11ac WiFi MAC N N N
Chipset TDP 11W 4.8W 6.8W
Overclocking Support Y Y Y
XFR2/PB2 Support Y Y N

One of the biggest changes in the chipset is within its architecture. The X570 chipset is the first Ryzen chipset to be manufactured and designed in-house by AMD, with some helping ASMedia IP blocks, whereas previously with the X470 and X370 chipsets, ASMedia directly developed and produced it using a 55nm process. While going from X370 at 6.8 W TDP at maximum load, X470 was improved upon in terms of power consumption to a lower TDP of 4.8 W. For X570, this has increased massively to an 11 W TDP which causes most vendors to now require small active cooling of the new chip.

Another major change due to the increased power consumption of the X570 chipset when compared to X470 and X370 is the cooling required. All but one of the launched product stack features an actively cooled chipset heatsink which is needed due to the increased power draw when using PCIe 4.0 due to the more complex implementation requirements over PCIe 3.0. While it is expected AMD will work on improving the TDP on future generations when using PCIe 4.0, it's forced manufacturers to implement more premium and more effective ways of keeping componentry on X570 cooler.

This also stretches to the power delivery, as AMD announced that a 16-core desktop Ryzen 3950X processor is set to launch later on in the year, meaning motherboard manufacturers needed to implement the new power deliveries on the new X570 boards with requirements of the high-end chip in mind, with better heatsinks capable of keeping the 105 W TDP processors efficient.

Memory support has also been improved with a seemingly better IMC on the Ryzen 3000 line-up when compared against the Ryzen 2000 and 1000 series of processors. Some motherboard vendors are advertising speeds of up to DDR4-4400 which until X570, was unheard of. X570 also marks a jump up to DDR4-3200 up from DDR4-2933 on X470, and DDR4-2667 on X370. As we investigated in our Ryzen 7 Memory Scaling piece back in 2017, we found out that the Infinity Fabric Interconnect scales well with frequency, and it is something that we will be analyzing once we get the launch of X570 out of the way, and potentially allow motherboard vendors to work on their infant firmware for AMD's new 7nm silicon.

Memory Hierarchy Changes: Double L3, Faster Memory Benchmarking Setup: Windows 1903
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • John_M - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link

    Yes. The integrated memory controller is on the IO die, which is part of the Ryzen SoC, not the chipset.
  • BushLin - Monday, July 8, 2019 - link

    Right now, there's no indication what CL / timings are applied to all the other systems. CL16 is indeed bottom of the barrel for DDR-3200, you would hope there's no shenanigans with Intel getting CL12 DDR-2666. Why not just run all the systems with the same DDR-3200, it's not like they can't do it.
  • profiaudi - Wednesday, July 10, 2019 - link

    Not to be too rude, but the IMC is on the io chipLet, not the chipSet. The chipset actually has an important role for the memory speed, in that a chipset defines a platform and a platform imposes requirements on the power supply and trace routing. While the IMC in 3rd gen can handle 3200MT/s+ completely fine, it is guaranteed to do so only one X570. Anything older is a dice roll as the boards were not designed for such speeds (not a requirement for the older platform).
  • waja - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link

    Do you know george stevenson story?He earn 3657$ every month at home just working few hours on internet see more by open this connection and click home button.FOR MORE INFORMATION COPY THIS SITE..........
  • Andrei Frumusanu - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link

    Just as note for those who haven’t been following: This review wasn’t written by our usual resident CPU editor, Dr Ian Cutress as he unfortunately the timing didn’t work out. We only had a few days time with the new Ryzen CPUs, as such, you might noticed a few bits and pieces missing in our article that we’ll try to address in the next hours and days. We’ll be trying to update the piece with more information and data as soon as we can. Thanks.
    Also huge thanks to Gavin Bonshor who actually did all the testing and collected all the data for this review, thumb up to him.
  • plonk420 - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link

    hoping a speedy recovery for him! loved his video with Wendell!

    loving the article, too. don't suppose you could test cross-CCX latency?
  • plonk420 - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link


    main interest is if it is low enough to be harnessed by RPCS3 (PS3 emulator)
  • ballsystemlord - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link

    CCX benchmarks would be nice.
    IF power benchmarks were also done last time and probably in the works.
  • shakazulu667 - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link

    Are Intel results with or without spectre et al mitigations?
  • Ryan Smith - Sunday, July 7, 2019 - link

    They are with Spectre and Meltdown mitigations. They are not new enough results to include anything for Fallout/ZombieLoad.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now