ASRock attributes premature Ryzen 9000 CPU failures to aggressive PBO settings, per YouTuber

News
By
Published

ASRock alleges that these problems have been fixed with their latest BIOS release.

ASRock Motherboard
(Image credit: ASRock)
11

A common thread among increasing user reports of failing Ryzen 9000 CPUs was their connection to an ASRock AM5 motherboard. Citing a conversation with the partner at Computex, Tech Yes City has brought to light that ASRock's initial PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) presets were set too aggressively for initial CPU samples. It is believed these aggressive settings are what ultimately lead to the premature demise of these processors. AMD declined to comment on the story, while ASRock wasn't immediately available.

Earlier this year, reports of failing AMD Ryzen 9000 (Granite Ridge) processors were common on Reddit and other forums. ASRock initially dismissed reports connecting their motherboards to the problem as 'misinformation', all the while supplying a new BIOS to address boot-up and memory compatibility issues. Affected users had no other choice but to RMA their broken CPUs.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Hassam Nasir
Hassam Nasir
Contributing Writer

Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.

11 Comments Comment from the forums
  • A Stoner
    These are complicated systems, but you have to wonder how so many errors have been happening in computing. Particularly with respect to overpowering the CPUs to the point of failure. Intel had a huge issue here, and now AMD. Don't these people read the literature of their own business and take lessons learned?
    Reply
  • redgarl
    A Stoner said:
    These are complicated systems, but you have to wonder how so many errors have been happening in computing. Particularly with respect to overpowering the CPUs to the point of failure. Intel had a huge issue here, and now AMD. Don't these people read the literature of their own business and take lessons learned?
    This is the AIBs fault. They are pushing for obtaining the performance crown at the expense of safe power distribution.

    Since more than 90% of the cases are reported with Asrock hardware, it is obviously an Asrock problem. AIBs are really quick to point fingers and deny they are responsible when, most of the time, their BIOS are the issue.

    This is totally different from Intel which literally choose to push the voltages on their CPU to be able to compete with AMD and TSMC.
    Reply
  • derekullo
    "ASRock has also reportedly reduced "shadow voltages," which are settings not visible to users."

    Reduced "shadow voltages" isn't exactly a vote of confidence!
    Reply
  • UnforcedERROR
    A Stoner said:
    Intel had a huge issue here, and now AMD.
    These are not comparable. Intel's was their design. AMD's was the result of a motherboard manufacturer. AMD had no issues with other vendors, so it's not something they caused.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    I mostly just wonder if this is like the overly aggressive SoC voltage which happened pre-Zen 5. That was mostly being exploited by Asus and had just been a setting AMD neglected to hard limit. These things happen and hopefully this is indeed the final resolution for this issue.
    Reply
  • Notton
    Ah, so exactly as I suspected when it was something like 50~80% of Asrock mobos with Sudden Ryzen Death Syndrome. (If anyone remembers Northwood SNDS) Except now the mobo manufacturer does it, rather than something you can only cause by yourself.
    Reply
  • HardwiredWireless
    UnforcedERROR said:
    These are not comparable. Intel's was their design. AMD's was the result of a motherboard manufacturer. AMD had no issues with other vendors, so it's not something they caused.

    UnforcedERROR said:
    Right, it would obviously be the fault of whoever it was that provided the specifications to the motherboard manufacturers for the AMD CPUs.
    Reply
  • EzzyB
    A Stoner said:
    These are complicated systems, but you have to wonder how so many errors have been happening in computing. Particularly with respect to overpowering the CPUs to the point of failure. Intel had a huge issue here, and now AMD. Don't these people read the literature of their own business and take lessons learned?
    Did they? I see it differently.

    I go back to building my current PC. It's based on a 9700K and a Gigabyte Motherboard. That processor is advertised as running at 3.6 GHZ with a boost of up to two cores to 4.8 GHZ. I assembled it and booted it up for the first time. With NO user intervention it booted up with all 8 cores at 4.7 GHZ and all cores would boost to 5GHZ.

    If something happens, is that Intel's fault? I don't think so. It's fine, it's actually been running at all-core 4.9 GHZ for five years now with no issues whatsoever (one blue screen after a week when I tried 5 GHZ so I dialed it back a notch.) Still, I wouldn't feel it was Intel's fault if that first boot had crashed.
    Reply
  • YSCCC
    derekullo said:
    "ASRock has also reportedly reduced "shadow voltages," which are settings not visible to users."

    Reduced "shadow voltages" isn't exactly a vote of confidence!
    I wonder what's the shadow voltage and it's value...
    Reply
  • dalek1234
    Motherboard manufacturers have been doing this sine I can remember. They OC stuff so that when compared to a competing motherboard, they can claim a win. The problem is that the other mobo is doing the same thing to win. ASRock just pushed it too far.

    I think that AMD should forbid mobo makers from doing this sort of shady stuff.
    Reply