The same way backups are most rigorously performed by people who've lost data, ECC is a non-negotiable requirement for people who've suffered slow data corruption via silent memory failures.
It surprises me that people are happy with 64GB+ builds of non-ECC, especially for NAS (ie. very long term storage, where corruptions probably wouldn't be noticed for years).
Periodically I look at replacing my small fleet of HP micro Gen8's, which use Xeons, have 4 x 3.5" bays (with proper h/w RAID1), but max out at a frustratingly low 16GB. They're quite robust, but because of their age - and HP - a horse veterinarian approach to component failures is usually indicated.
A Ryzen + ECC whitebox build is massively appealing, but almost everyone's build-out includes caveats like 'check the datasheet of the mobo and CPU' (because series aren't consistent), and about half the time a terrifying disclaimer to the effect of 'ECC is present / enabled in the kernel, but I can't tell if it's actually functioning properly'.
Older AGESA (part of the mobo firmware that handles system initialization) versions had a bug that prevented the chipset from recognizing and utilizing ECC ram properly even though the chipsets should support it. Check any motherboard in question for a firmware update which includes at least AGESA 1.0.0.5 patch C.
This. Additionally, there is the price point of modern AMD "workstationish" systems vs. used Intel "real server" systems. Efficiency together with more performance is great, but if I had to pay double the price for a system that offers lots of performance I won't need anyway I'm not willing to pay the price.
Used Intel Systems are just way cheaper, because nobody seems to want them anymore... Everyone wants a >= 8 core ryzen :-) I personally don't need this for a little Proxmox / NAS kind of system.
However, I'm hoping for frame.work to announce official ECC support[1] on their Notebook boards (pretty likely this will never happen). I would love to just use the coolermaster case with small efficient modern notebook hardware for 600 bucks just because I don't need additional harddisks and I would just buy one to support the company.
It surprises me that people are happy with 64GB+ builds of non-ECC, especially for NAS (ie. very long term storage, where corruptions probably wouldn't be noticed for years).
Periodically I look at replacing my small fleet of HP micro Gen8's, which use Xeons, have 4 x 3.5" bays (with proper h/w RAID1), but max out at a frustratingly low 16GB. They're quite robust, but because of their age - and HP - a horse veterinarian approach to component failures is usually indicated.
A Ryzen + ECC whitebox build is massively appealing, but almost everyone's build-out includes caveats like 'check the datasheet of the mobo and CPU' (because series aren't consistent), and about half the time a terrifying disclaimer to the effect of 'ECC is present / enabled in the kernel, but I can't tell if it's actually functioning properly'.