Best Mobo for FX-9590 under $150.00

[ShrimpBrime]

In gaming this hit will not be as substantial as it sounds, more likely just a few FPS. He'd get that back and considerably more if he upgraded his GPU.

It'll be a pretty big hit. 700mhz is what most people OC to for better frame rates.

Yes a larger GPU would help big time, but then the bottle neck would still be there only worse. you remove GPU bottle neck getting a larger GPU with the 9590, but then get more bottle neck from going lower in CPU mhz.

This is a no win situation IMO<>

 

[PetrolHead]

It'll be a pretty big hit. 700mhz is what most people OC to for better frame rates.

...and there are games on which that makes (roughly) zero sense. Of course there are also games that need more CPU power than others, but in general there are considerable benefits in upgrading the GPU even if you're running something like an FX-6300. For example Witcher 3 (1080p and Ultra) runs at nearly equal FPS values on an FX-6300 and an FX-8350, when both are paired with a single GTX 980. On the other hand the same comparison on Crysis 3 (1080p and Very High) gives a difference of about 15 FPS in both average and minimum FPS (31 and 51 vs 51 and 67 for FX-6300 and FX-8350 respectively). Finally, BF4 seems to run smoother (based on in-game video, not proper benchmarks) on a GTX 970/FX-6350/8GB system than on a GTX 960/FX-8320/8GB system, even though that's supposedly a game that benefits from an efficient CPU (edit: and more cores).

Of course there are lots of shades of gray regarding resolution, the amount of GPUs, the importance of minimum FPS etc. And maybe it is indeed a no win situation. It just seems that in general the FX-9xxx CPUs are not for people who aren't willing to take on a challenge. When it comes to someone who's just looking to play some games, the extra performance just doesn't seem worth the trouble, when an FX-6350 with a GTX 970 will probably (I'd like to say almost certainly) run most games at higher FPS than the FX-9590 with that Radeon 7950.

 

[DefiantReaper]

why does everyone recommend a sabertooth over a crosshair v formula z?? the crosshair imho is far superior and has had the highest clocks to date if i remember correctly.

i have a 9590.. they arent tamed easy but you can tame them.. its a blast running @ 4.9GHz.. theyre cherry picked 8350s so you can run 4.7 at lower volts than the 8350 at 4.7..
i believe mine was at 4.7 with vcore of 1.425.. i dont see many 8350s with that low of a vcore..

just my opinion...

oh johan45 thanks for that btw lowered my socket temps 9.5C adding that rear socket fan!

 

[ATMINSIDE]

why does everyone recommend a sabertooth over a crosshair v formula z?? the crosshair imho is far superior and has had the highest clocks to date if i remember correctly.

i have a 9590.. they arent tamed easy but you can tame them.. its a blast running @ 4.9GHz.. theyre cherry picked 8350s so you can run 4.7 at lower volts than the 8350 at 4.7..
i believe mine was at 4.7 with vcore of 1.425.. i dont see many 8350s with that low of a vcore..

just my opinion...

oh johan45 thanks for that btw lowered my socket temps 9.5C adding that rear socket fan!

The CHV-z is definitely the superior board, but note that there's a large price difference there over the Sabertooth that isn't justified by most people.

 

[DefiantReaper]

Well the CVZ is DEF worth the premium imo..
Its the ONLY board id consider when i hear 9590 lol

 

[Johan45]

I have both and unless I was going to freeze the FX regularly I'd get the Sabertooth. I agree with ATM on this. For an average user the premium isn't justified.

 

[ATMINSIDE]

Well the CVZ is DEF worth the premium imo..
Its the ONLY board id consider when i hear 9590 lol

How is it worth the premium when, on ambient cooling, the Sabertooth will get the same results?

 

[DefiantReaper]

i just feel the CVZ is made for abuse, and will most likely out-live the sabertooth. just my opinion..

only costs a little more to go first class... plus its usually found in the $200-$220 range.

gotta say i never paid much attention to the price difference its a little larger than i thought lol $50ish bucks

 

[Mandrake4565]

i just feel the CVZ is made for abuse, and will most likely out-live the sabertooth. just my opinion..

only costs a little more to go first class... plus its usually found in the $200-$220 range.

gotta say i never paid much attention to the price difference its a little larger than i thought lol $50ish bucks

I also agree with Atmin and Johan. I have both boards, unless one is looking to overclock the pee out of a Cpu on Subambient cooling the Sabertooth is as good as the CHV. As far as durability goes, my 1st gen Sabertooth has been pounded by myself and it's previous owner and still chugs along on a daily basis.

 

[DefiantReaper]

I also agree with Atmin and Johan. I have both boards, unless one is looking to overclock the pee out of a Cpu on Subambient cooling the Sabertooth is as good as the CHV. As far as durability goes, my 1st gen Sabertooth has been pounded by myself and it's previous owner and still chugs along on a daily basis.

yeah i never really realized that the sabertooths were that reliable.. i just normally see the best clocks on a CVZ

 

[ATMINSIDE]

yeah i never really realized that the sabertooths were that reliable.. i just normally see the best clocks on a CVZ

And we never said that the CHV-z isn't a better board, just that the Sabertooth is absolutely plenty for any ambient cooling.

 

[Dr. McCoy]

yeah i never really realized that the sabertooths were that reliable.. i just normally see the best clocks on a CVZ

The reason why is because of how extensive the BIOS is in comparison to the Sabo, the CHV-Z has every option you could ask for in it's BIOS including the kitchen sink with a garbage disposal unit.
The CHV-Z is an AMD tweaker's wetdream come true and it's certainly capable of squeezing every drop of performance from a CPU with all the fine tweaks and tuning it has built-in.

The BIOS in fact is so extensive, unless you really understand the in's and out's of a BIOS it can work against you to the point of confusion, The Sabo's BIOS is more user-friendly with less stuff to worry about.

Been happy with both models since I own one of each..... But for the purpose of abusing them to no end and the like the Sabo just makes sense since it's cheaper yet can still deliver the goods.
Know if doing heavy OC'ing the risk of grenading a CPU or board exists for everything and if it does go, you've lost less $$ over it vs the CHV-Z.

Unless you have plenty of $$ to burn or you find a fantastic deal on one, I'd get a Sabo and be done with it.
BTW don't worry, the guts between the two board models are more or less identical so no worries there.

 

[rts2468]

Why spend only < or = to $150 for a CPU 3x the amount of the MB, if anything you would want the reverse; spending 3x the amount of the CPU to the motherboard. IMO the Asus Crosshair V Formula -Z is the only one I recommend for this CPU.



This is a basic OC you can do on any FX series chip. The CPU/FSB Overclock is way more important than the cpu multiplier. IMO
a 25%-26% OC on the CPU/FSB will give you more Real World changes then changing the multiplier 1.0 to 1.5 x

 

[Mr.Scott]

IMO the Asus Crosshair V Formula -Z is the only one I recommend for this CPU.

You're entitled to your opinion. It's not one I share this time but, whatever.

This is a basic OC you can do on any FX series chip. The CPU/FSB Overclock is way more important than the cpu multiplier. IMO
a 25%-26% OC on the CPU/FSB will give you more Real World changes then changing the multiplier 1.0 to 1.5 x

Depends on what you're doing with the rig. FSB overclock skews all the buses, requiring much more testing and work to make it stable. Increased bus speed DOES increase productivity when benching but provides nothing noticeable in real world every day tasks and gaming........and most definitely not at the percentage you state, which IMO, depending on the chip and board is unrealistic for the average joe. Multi increase is much easier and everybody already knows that CPU MHz is king. Everything else provides a minimal plus to your computing experience.........unless you're benching.

 

[Mandrake4565]

I'll also add you can Oc on the Sabertooth using the FSB as well. rts2468, no one here is saying the CHV is not a good board, most of us own them. I love mine, but for the average user, "Not using Sub Ambient Cooling" the Sabertooth will give you everything you need. Some people do not have the resources others have and sometimes an extra $30/40 or $50 dollars makes a difference.

 

[chrisjames61]

Depends on what you're doing with the rig. FSB overclock skews all the buses, requiring much more testing and work to make it stable. Increased bus speed DOES increase productivity when benching but provides nothing noticeable in real world every day tasks and gaming........and most definitely not at the percentage you state, which IMO, depending on the chip and board is unrealistic for the average joe. Multi increase is much easier and everybody already knows that CPU MHz is king. Everything else provides a minimal plus to your computing experience.........unless you're benching.

The Stilt pretty much agrees that overclocking via BCLK is pointless as far as real world use. I don't see the point of making things more complicated than they have to be. Personally I much prefer unlocked cpu's.

 

[Mr.Scott]

The Stilt pretty much agrees that overclocking via BCLK is pointless as far as real world use. I don't see the point of making things more complicated than they have to be. Personally I much prefer unlocked cpu's.

Wow. Glad he agree's with me then. lol
Bclk OC'ing is fine if that's your only option.
To be perfectly honest, all of my overclocks include a little bclk.........but I like the challange and usually try to squeeze everything anyway.
Does it help on the rig I'm typing on right now?, probably not.....but it's OC'ed pretty good and it's stable.

 

[Dr. McCoy]

Sometimes having the ability to use some Bclk can make a difference with your OC'ing efforts - In my experience I've achieved some of the best results running a mix of multi and FSB, however know this pertains to benching itself.
I tend to lean somewhat on Bclk at times, that in certain cases will let me find the "Sweet Spot" for what I'm trying to do based on what I'm wanting from the system.

For everyday use it's effect is negligible and upping the CPU multiplier is the simplest yet most effective way to go about it.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Since most boards stop RAM divider at 2400mhz, you have no choice but to use reference clock to exceed 2400mhz RAM clocks.

What's better depends on who's doing what?

I run often many times under 200 reference clock with a much higher multiplier - Just what I do.

End result Cpu speed matters first and foremost. doesn't matter where you OC from. Sitting pretty at 5.2ghz stable..... I don't need to tell how it's done. At 5.3ghz loose stability via higher core temps exceeding 70c, so to the liking keep it at 5.2ghz and happy here.

Rig hasn't posted in 6 days. Settings unchanged, we're cruising some high web surfing speeds haha.