• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Which Gigabyte board?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

TechJunky

Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD3
OR
GIGABYTE GA-970A-UD3

I am trying to do a budget build. I dont understand the advantage of the 990 over the 970 for my needs... So maybe someone can help me finalize my decision.

Here are my components... I dont plan on OC'ing insane, hoping for around 4.1-4.2Ghz Stable.

Processor: AMD FX-6300
Memory: 8GB Corsair Vengeance 1600 -Purchased
Video: Gigabyte 2GB 7850
Hard Drive: Vortex 4 128GB - Purchased
Power Supply: Corsair 430CX - Purchased
Heatsink: Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus
Case: Cooler Master - Purchased
Optical Drive : LG DVD/RW - Purchased
 
@TechJunky if you decide to go for a budget motherboard and install a series FX6XXX or FX8XXX i would really believe you would run into problems!!! In answer to your main question what's the Diff between 970 and 990 Heat Sinks and VRM's the Section on the motherboard that supply's the power to the CPU when at standard or Overclocked. So i would say to get to 4.1 or 4.2 Stable you really need a very good motherboard. Like a GA-990FXA-UD5 or UD7!!! AJ.

P.S. The other ones that members may suggest as well!
 
I agree with AJ. If you are planning on overclocking, you may get away with it on a budget board, then again you may not. The FX 6xxx and 8xxx series chips will run stock clock for the most part one a decent budget board. If you are planning on overclocking, do it right the first time and get a decent board. If it were my money it would be the 990fx UD3 at least.
 
I don't think you can really go wrong with the 990 UD3, I currently have that board, I haven't had the chance to do much overclocking. Comparing it to my friend's UD5, the big differences are that the UD5 has more Sata ports, and more PCI-E slots. Otherwise the cooling systems are pretty similar, the UD5 has a slightly larger heatsink for the VRM, but I don't think it makes that big of difference for the price if you have good ventilation.
 
The GA-970A-UD3 should be fine, I don't see much difference between it and the GA-990FXA-UD3. Both seem to have the same PWM setup. I'm recommending this board for a friend's upcoming build actually.
 
Both of the selected motherboards have 8+2 phase VRM and VRM cooling I wouldnt be to worried about it. I took my 8120 to 5.4Ghz on a 990FX-UD3 which also has the exact same VRM circuit and it was fine.

The 970-UD3 electrically is a decent motherboard, but some of the BIOS options are not as clear as they are on the 990X, either way both boards are solid performers.

Just know that there are better options out there also..
 
I've got the 970A-UD3. There is also a 970-D3, which is the lower end board that doesn't have heatsinks on the VRM, and I believe has lower quality components/smaller power phase.

The difference between the 970-UD3 and 990fx essentially boils down to sli/crossfire options. With the UD3, I can only do 4x in the second x16 lane if I do SLI or crossfire (990 either splits the two lanes in 8x each, or 16x each, I can't remember). Overclocking has been fantastic on the UD3, but as far as how the bios is laid out between the two, I can't comment.

What I'm saying is, the UD3 has been a great board to me, so I would recommend it for the price.

EDIT: They also have a new revision (3 I think) from my board, but I could not find documentation for what they changed.
 
Whatever it was that prompted Asus to release an R 2.0 board in about every AMD model they sell is what the rest are catching up to now most likely.

Asrock has a "9" added oddly in the name of some of their boards and is said to be "new".
 
I've got the 970A-UD3. There is also a 970-D3, which is the lower end board that doesn't have heatsinks on the VRM, and I believe has lower quality components/smaller power phase.

The difference between the 970-UD3 and 990fx essentially boils down to sli/crossfire options. With the UD3, I can only do 4x in the second x16 lane if I do SLI or crossfire (990 either splits the two lanes in 8x each, or 16x each, I can't remember). Overclocking has been fantastic on the UD3, but as far as how the bios is laid out between the two, I can't comment.

What I'm saying is, the UD3 has been a great board to me, so I would recommend it for the price.

Seconded. For a board you can get for $100 you will not be disappointed. If you do want to run 2x GPUs, go with the 990.
 
Thanks for all the input. This will be a single GPU use box.

Should have all my components here in the next week and will report back on how she OC's
 
Both of the selected motherboards have 8+2 phase VRM and VRM cooling I wouldnt be to worried about it. I took my 8120 to 5.4Ghz on a 990FX-UD3 which also has the exact same VRM circuit and it was fine.

The 970-UD3 electrically is a decent motherboard, but some of the BIOS options are not as clear as they are on the 990X, either way both boards are solid performers.

Just know that there are better options out there also..

I use the 970A.I like working with the old school bios.This board its perfect for overclocking,and made for 1 vc,to get the best performance.The nb does does not run hot in my experience,but some people complain it does!.The next step up would be GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD3, in a ud3 board.Beside the bios options (?)you mentioned,the vrm cooling on the 990FXA does not seem any better,and if you believe the complaints,people say that nb runs hot.I take all that with a GRAIN of salt,but would like to hear your experience.Judging your oc, it seems this isn't your first ride.How are your board temps? I think good air flow is the key here,but its hard to compare,when I never had this board.It looks sweet in black.

Why cant amd make boards with 8+4 Power Phase :cry:

http://www.pcforce.co.nz/asrock-z77...mium-gold-caps-quad-sli-supported-p-2192.html

Current oc @ 4.4g on 1.35v. Failed Prime 95 on 4.5g @ 1.35v,so backed it down.Passed 2 hour stability test,using amd overdrive,on lower clock.My goal.Highest clock,but keep temps under 50c.

Props to RGone for the temp chart,specifically reading temps on gigabyte boards.
 

Attachments

  • 1.35v.jpg
    1.35v.jpg
    577.2 KB · Views: 94
  • save.jpg
    save.jpg
    331.9 KB · Views: 89
Last edited:
I never had any issues with any of my 3 UD3s running to hot on VRM or NB under reasonable to high overclocks. Admittedly I don't have a lot of numbers to go with that as post 1-2 week burn in I watercooled the VRM and NB on all 3 while I owned them. I will say that with quality VRM and NB cooling taking my CPUs to their limits was just as successful as it has been on my sabertooth, if not more so. It had no issues dishing out 1.7V when I asked it to, and pushing the NB frequency up to 3000 was not a concern either.

I will note that I found at least with my setups, turning the rear exhaust into an intake does great things for the VRM temp on these motherboards. I experienced the same effect on my wifes gigabyte FM1 board.
 
Meh, dont get me wrong but its not the end all and be all either. Any board with the required VRM and decent bios can push within 1-2% of what the sabertooth can. I simply desired to check out another board. Ive used the UD3 boards, sabertooth r1, and sabertooth r2, and a couple lower model Asus boards since the launch of FX. Performance/Cost UD3s are pretty much unbeatable. The 990X EVO is a pretty solid contender for it, but it even cost a bit more than the 990FX UD3 so I still call that a win for gigabyte.

I understand that the R3.0 boards come with UEFI now so that puts them back in the running with Asus offerings.
 
Whatever it was that prompted Asus to release an R 2.0 board in about every AMD model they sell is what the rest are catching up to now most likely.

Asrock has a "9" added oddly in the name of some of their boards and is said to be "new".

Would you elaborate on that, please?
 
Back