Gaming PCs often come with costly motherboards that lack essential capabilities.
Gaming PCs often come with costly motherboards that lack essential capabilities.
I know Steve from Gamers Nexus really knows his stuff, and I totally agree with everything he said here. Right now I'm putting together my AM5 setup, and it's spot on for all of them. I hope companies pay more attention so we can get real usable features at a lower cost. You all should definitely check this out—he makes a solid argument.
The most affordable AM5 motherboard available is priced above 215 EUR. This is quite surprising, as lowering the cost would greatly encourage adoption of new platforms. I just watched the video and strongly agreed. A 7-segment display would be extremely useful for troubleshooting, especially for those less familiar with technical details. It could provide a solid foundation, potentially resolving issues simply by re-seating or replacing the component.
I paid around $400 for a B550 board. I didn’t want to spend $650 on the X570 Dark Hero, but I don’t regret it—I think it’s just like a B550 Dark Hero, it performs well.
Motherboards have become overwhelmingly complex, just like GPUs. I’m concerned that in a few years I won’t be able to assemble a PC on my own because the costs have risen so high that only the ultra-wealthy can afford such machines.
Sure thing! Your $150 AM5 MB is a great deal, especially compared to older models that cost more than 6 GB. Modern storage usually offers better performance and features, though prices have risen over the years. Remember, inflation plays a big role here. Back then, a beer cost about a quarter of what it does now, and your hourly wage was just $1.
It's not about our budget, it's about basic sense. Check the video, Steve has the right idea. @OU812 Building PCs will definitely become too pricey for most people eventually. I talked about this before, and then again in another discussion, though that one was mainly about GPUs. The logic applies to all key parts too. Remember when TSMC began producing 5nm chips? Reports said there could be big delays with these devices, and some engineers doubted they’d work well in real cores like CPU processors. Clearly, they pushed through the technical hurdles we now see in 5nm products. There’s also the heat problem—5nm is incredibly compact, so engineers once worried about overheating cores spiking beyond cooling limits. Now we see it happening with Intel 13th Gen and AMD Ryzen 7000 series, which automatically slow down to stay within safe limits. We know better than to rely on that; each CPU just throttles itself based on what the cooling system can handle. The RTX 4090 is huge and stays cool, but the cooler itself is bulky—like a house brick. If we could build a CPU with such a massive air cooler, maybe new chips could really push performance without hitting TJMax. Another issue is the limits of silicon transistors. As we approach 3nm and smaller sizes, many expect problems unless they switch to materials like carbon nanotubes. This could mean a steep rise in prices, especially as shrinking becomes harder and more costly. Until then, only the wealthy will afford carbon-nanotube chips, which could cost over $1000 today. The first carbon-based CPUs might be 100-200% pricier than their silicon counterparts, making it tough for families and hobbyists to justify the expense.
I had watched that video earlier. He raised some valid points about the affordable features, such as the error code display. Still, I never owned a board with that spec or required it. The performance per dollar keeps improving. If you're looking to cut costs, a solid AM4 setup works just fine. No one needs a $500 MB. It's more of a preference than a necessity. Inflation simply reflects the increased money supply. People continue to pay those prices, so they seem to place value there. SSDs aren't cheap even when considering speed boosts. Not too long ago I purchased a 256GB PCIe 3.0 SSD, but I opted for the NVME version since it was more expensive. Now you can find 2TB drives at similar prices, and NVME is the norm.
Inflation is out of our control, yet it doesn't alter the reality that hardware costs are rising far more rapidly than in other sectors. SSDs are incredibly affordable and it's true, but they're just one part of the system, and a piece that doesn't come with a high price tag compared to a CPU or GPU.
I previously purchased an i7-7700k for $330. Now I own a 7900 for just $100 more. It offers triple the cores, higher clock speeds and better performance per instruction. That’s a great deal. Alternatively, the 7600 costs $230 and is noticeably faster than the i7-7700k. My memory capacity was $150 compared to $100 six years ago. Today’s board includes a much improved BIOS, better VRM, additional fan headers, PCIe 4, three 4K ports, USB-C and more. An equivalent setup would have cost a lot more back then. It’s hard to see how I’m getting less value compared to past years. Essentials like food and other items have risen a lot, but hardware hasn’t improved much. A PC is usually better than just browsing unless you need the newest components for work. But it still makes sense to invest if you need it.