TRX40: More High-End Motherboards for TR3

The new sTRX4 socket will be paired with a TRX40 chipset – a design that AMD says comes from an in-house team and built on GlobalFoundries 14nm. The new chipset, updated from the previous X399 in this space and even updated from the X570 in the consumer space, is the other half in the CPU-to-chipset bandwidth story.  By using a PCIe 4.0 x8 link, AMD is removing almost any practical bandwidth limitation downstream from the CPU.

The new TRX40 chipset will come with a degree of modularity.

From the chipset, we can see motherboard manufacturers afforded a full PCIe 4.0 x8 slot, up to another x8 lanes as two x4 connections or further bifurcated, or instead of those bifurcated lanes, either four or eight more SATA ports. That’s 8 SATA ports on top of the four already present on the chipset.

So I like these modular systems. It allows motherboard manufacturers to go crazy with offering potential systems. For example:

Potential TRX40 Variants
AnandTech CPU Chipset
TRX40 SATA Powerhouse
20 drives
x48 for PCIe slots x8 for downlink 8x SATA from options x8 for dual NVMe 8x SATA from options 4x SATA from chipset
TRX40 NVMe
Powerhouse
18+ drives
x48 for PCIe slots x8 for downlink dual NVMe from options x8 for dual NVMe dual NVMe for options -

So that would be a motherboard with x16/x16/x16 (or x16/x8/x16/x8) in terms of PCIe 4.0 slots, a single x8 slot for a pair of NVMe drives, and then TWENTY SATA ports, all directly supported on the system without any additional controllers.

If SATA isn’t your thing, then the same arguments could be made for 48 PCIe lanes and six PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe slots, making a total of 18 high capacity PCIe 4.0 drives. The fact that AMD has put more PCIe lanes into their high end desktop platforms, plus this amount of modularity, wants me to play Dr. Frankenstein.

To be fair, those ideas are a bit extreme. Motherboard manufacturers will likely have to partition off a few lanes for 10 GbE networking, perhaps Thunderbolt, or maybe something more exotic like a RAID controller, or an RGB controller.

As noted in some of our previous news posts, motherboard manufacturers have been slowly leaking names of their TRX40 products. At this point in time we have seen mentions of the following:

  • ASRock TRX40 Creator
  • ASRock TRX40 Taichi
  • GIGABYTE TRX40 AORUS XTREME
  • ASUS Prime TRX40 Pro
  • ASUS ROG Zenith II Extreme
  • MSI TRX40 Creator
  • MSI TRX40 Pro 10G
  • MSI TRX40 Pro Wi-Fi

We expect details of some of these to perhaps be announced today, or on the 25th when the CPUs come to market. GIGABYTE has even been showing previews of their motherboards on social media, with one showing an obscene number of power phases, and we’ve seen images of boards with 8 SATA ports. We’ll have our usual motherboard overview article up on that date, and we’ll be looking at reviews of these motherboards through the new year.

I will address comments about potential TRX80/WRX80 motherboards which have been put into the ether as potential other chipsets being launched. When asked, AMD said that the only chipset they are launching today is TRX40.

3rd Gen Ryzen Threadripper, Up to 32 Cores AMD Athlon 3000G: Aligning Names and Numbers at $49
POST A COMMENT

162 Comments

View All Comments

  • Teckk - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    What is the peak power consumption for Core i9-10940X and 3950X given their TDPs 165 and 105W? Reply
  • deil - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    360W and 130W respectively if we should look at how they treated TDP in the past Reply
  • deil - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    I was not far from the truth:
    https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Y2BXYaZKaWsuFSWW...
    300 intel
    and
    180 AMD
    Reply
  • Teckk - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    Wow ! :| Reply
  • Gondalf - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    Ummm don't trust much in AMD marketing slides.
    AMD draw less only because the all core setup is unable to run at high clock, they barely can go a little over 4Ghz all core. Intel all core setup can go near 5Ghz for a short period (or longer if cooling setup allow this)..
    So at he end there is not this high peformance watt advantage they are saying, expecially because they are stuck to CB and do not show others benches to support their numbers.
    Bet on other workloads Intel is better than AMD in efficence.
    The long story of benches......
    Reply
  • Eliadbu - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    If you can handle the heat Intel CPU can run very high my i9 7900x is running at 4.8ghz all coees albeit quite hot under load but still high frequency for all core with some offset for AVX 512. I believe that with direct die cooling results might be even better. Reply
  • schujj07 - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    Right now the 3700X has near identical performance to a 9900K, they are within 5% of each other typically, and the 3700X draws 1/2 - 1/3 the power of the 9900K. This is when they are both running stock performance. That means that the Ryzen has far better efficiency than the Intel. Reply
  • airdrifting - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    Intel is trust worthy? 9900K has 95W TDP, but out of box without any overclocking it runs 4.7GHz all core turbo drawing over anywhere from 150-190W depending on motherboard. Reply
  • eddman - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    How many times it needs to be pointed out; intel's TDP does not cover turbo, certainly not a sustained one. Reply
  • airdrifting - Thursday, November 07, 2019 - link

    How many times you need to be told, Intel CPU runs turbo out of the box by default without any mess with BIOS? What's the point of having a TDP at a speed that your processor never runs at? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now