3 ms·
Gigabyte removes PCIe 5.0 support from B650 motherboards in latest BIOS update
- josephcsible 1y agoIt should be illegal to retroactively take back features from products that you've already sold, regardless of whether the feature was advertised or how buggy it is.
- karmakaze 1y agoAt least users can go back to older firmware and get 5.0 back. There was a story not long ago about some exercise equipment (I think) that remotely bricked the devices (when the company was being shutdown or something) though they could have worked offline just fine without that final update.
- baybal2 1y ago[dead]
- toast0 1y agoLately, some BIOS updates have been advertised as not revertable. I'm sure you can still program the old firmware with an external programmer, but "for security reasons", the in-system update won't let you revert some updates that fix security issues. Even without that barrier, it's not great when you have to pick between things like the bus speed and memory stability or other updates you want.
- SoftTalker 1y agoI almost never install BIOS updates unless I'm encountering a specific issue. Vendors tend to discourage it as well. It's just one of those things where "if it works, don't fuck with it" is good advice.
- homebrewer 1y agoI keep updating BIOS because newer versions often provide stability improvements and let you push higher overclocks. That in itself is not very interesting for an everyday overclock (which shouldn't push the hardware limits), but do allow for lowering the voltages used for sensitive components (like VSoC which was responsible for burning CPUs a couple of years ago). Lower voltage means safer operation and slower silicon degradation. For example, I'm now running 6000 MT/s on stock VSoC which definitely wasn't possible on my hardware 1.5 years ago. That said, my mobo vendor of choice is not known for doing rug pulls (unlike Gigabyte, who are also fond of releasing several board revisions under the same model with significant differences between them). It's the opposite — for example, a recent BIOS update added support for running internal graphics at 4K/120Hz on the same hardware that could only do 4K/60Hz before.
- SoftTalker 1y agoMakes sense if you're into that I guess. I never change the BIOS settings from their defaults unless something is causing a problem. I definitely don't fool with overclocking.
- homebrewer 1y agoYou still might want to look into curve optimizer, which is just a marketing term for an automatic undervolt. Since these AM5 CPUs are power limited, you can get (potentially) much higher clocks while still staying within the same energy budget. It's perfectly safe (AFAIK) since it doesn't involve pushing more energy into your chips (neither voltage nor TDP), and won't take very long.
- vladvasiliu 1y agoI'm all for naming and shaming, but why not also name and praise when a company does good by its users? I'm not exactly in the market for a mobo right now, but I think that's useful information.
- homebrewer 1y ago
- fsflyer 1y agoThis one? https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/07/firmware-update-hinders-echelon-smart-home-gym-equipments-ability-to-work-offline/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/07/firmware-update-hind... The company isn't shutting down, probably just an attempt to get more subscriptions. The company used to support Strava integration from their app in Free Ride mode. That broke last year, the app still reports that a ride happened, but the ride is reported as 0 miles, 0 minutes long. I have the low end bike and rower from them. The machines are great physically.
- bangaladore 1y agoThe HN title does not match the actual article title. Didn't look super closely, but I don't see anything in the article suggesting the article title was changed after publishing. > Gigabyte removes unofficial PCIe 5.0 support from B650 motherboards in latest BIOS update It seems that the board was actually running in PCIe 5.0 mode, even though it was only supposed to (by the specs/manual) do PCIe 4.0 It was never advertised as supporting 5.0
- accrual 1y agoRight, only the B650E chipset has official PCIe 5.0 support. The B650 may support it, but not officially. This was the root of the article in my opinion: > The issue may have emerged from the fact that PCIe 5.0 was enabled by default, and not clearly marked as experimental, and that may be something AMD did not like to see. However, it seems to just be speculation. I too would like to know what the real reason was. Was Gigabyte dealing with returns/RMAs due to the feature? Was there pressure from AMD to stop allowing their lesser chipset to access PCIe 5.0?
- bangaladore 1y ago> Was there pressure from AMD to stop allowing their lesser chipset to access PCIe 5.0? Would be my guess. The fact that the B650 can even do 5.0 on the GPU lanes (it is able to do 4x 5.0 on NVME) makes me wonder if the B650 chipset is the same silicon as B650E and the speed is just really a configuration setting. Across the board the B650 seems like it is the exact same as a de-rated B650E. It would surprise me if motherboard vendors who support 4.0 weren't actually compliant with 5.0 from a signaling / integrity perspective for future proofing and increased headroom.
- datadrivenangel 1y agoI would be surprised if they fully supported 5.0, because it's likely more expensive to maintain the 5.0 performance, and even $0.01 per mobo shipped could be millions of dollars in lost profit.
- toast0 1y agoThis happened on AM4 as well. https://www.techpowerup.com/258044/amds-latest-agesa-update-removes-pcie-4-0-support-from-pre-x570-motherboards https://www.techpowerup.com/258044/amds-latest-agesa-update-...
- oakwhiz 1y agoWere the lanes engineered for 5.0? Maybe this is a signal integrity issue.
- SilverBirch 1y agoThe way product segmentation works in this market it’s practically certain they’re physically identical to the board that supports 5 and the only difference is firmware locks and marketing.
- dale_glass 1y agoPCIe 5 is 32 GT/s (~4GB/s) per lane, and of course double of that of PCIe 4. It's a crazy rate that can't be trivial to achieve.
- kvemkon 1y agoIt seems pretty worrying, since PCIe 6 for the first time couldn't double the operating frequency and it's not likely to be possible in the feature for traditional copper lanes. I haven't heard how DDR6 will solve this issue. PAM or not PAM?
- Aurornis 1y agoHaving some PCB experience, I disagree. Targeting higher specs like PCIe 5.0 usually requires more expensive PCB materials and tighter qualifications at the test stage. If the boards were only being tested to PCIe 4.0 (their official spec) then you can't guarantee they perform the same as SKUs targeting PCIe 5.0. You can't notice these differences with your eyes.
- kvemkon 1y agoI'm not sure a PCB of such size can be made (without making the PCB actually more expensive) partially with worse and better materials, since the board does support four PCIe 5.0 lanes. The question is how much cheaper would it be to route the 16 lanes only for 4.0 speed rating.
- amatecha 1y agoHow does that work for the PC I just got a month ago that has this motherboard and was advertised as having PCIe 5.0 ? https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX00129652 https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX00129652 I just lose capability that was clearly marked as a specific feature in the item I purchased? Ah, I see that the PCIe 5.0 mentioned in the product specs is for the M.2 storage, not for the PCI slot for a graphics card. The post title should probably say "removes unofficial GPU slot PCIe 5.0 support" or something. But yeah, considering I have a 5060ti 16gb on this motherboard, I guess I'll be staying with the current BIOS version indefinitely... Just checked with CPU-Z, it says Bus: PCI Express 5.0, current link width: x8 , current link speed: 16GT/s
- kvemkon 1y agoIt's only for single SSD M.2 storage slot directly connected to the CPU.
- Semaphor 1y agoConfusing marketing. It supports PCIe 5 for storage, but not the GPU. Nothing official changed.
- amatecha 1y agoYeah so I just noticed, that is indeed confusing, though partly confusing on the post author's part. The marketing does indeed only mention PCIe 4.0 for the expansion slots.
- xmodem 1y agoIt sounds like this only applies to boards that were never listed as PCIe 5 capable in the first place.
- rtkwe 1y agoIf you read the detailed specs on the page closely it never advertised 5.0 speeds _on the PCIe slots_ only on the M.2 interfaces. The top line product name is deceptive, either intentionally or accidentally. Full expansion card specs only mention PCIe 4.0: https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX00129652#:~:text=environment%20and%20equipment.)-,Expansion%20Slots,-1%20x%20PCI https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX00129652#:~:text=en... M.2 Storage specs mention the 5.0 speeds and only for one of the slots: https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX00129652#:~:text=processor%20is%20used.-,Storage%20Interface,-1%20x%20M https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX00129652#:~:text=pr...
- Aurornis 1y agoSome important information missing from the headline: B650 motherboards never officially supported PCIe 5.0 on the GPU slot. You always had to get a B650E motherboard for that. You have to pay close attention to the difference between the M.2 slot (which can be PCIe 5.0 on B650) and the expansion slots (which were never advertised as PCI 5.0) Leaving PCIe 5.0 enabled on the GPU slot could have caused problems if the designs and boards were qualified with the expectation they'd only run PCIe 4.0 speeds. If a board physically can't handle PCIe 5.0 but it gets enabled, it could lead to random crashes and instability, which turns into a higher return rate and angry customers.
- TiredOfLife 1y agoFrom guidelines: "... please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
- jandrese 1y agoThis title appears to be misleading, or at the very least confusing.