I f I know what I need for I/O expansions and it is less then the 9 series has, can I then just go to the 8 series or am I loosing something other then options for expansion slots. Also within the 9 series chipset is everything equal in the chipset other then the different accommodation for expansion slots. Is one faster then the other for instance or does it address the information going through it differently. I'm looking at any socket am3+ with sata 600 controllers and usb3, I'll be running fx6300 and 90% of what I do is on the INTERNET.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Difference in chipsets
- Thread starter jbander
- Start date
Interesting question. There are 2 answers. The book answer
And the real world tests. I can only speak of my own real world experience. There is a difference in performance between the chipsets, depending on what CPU you run, and what you intend to do with it. I will elaborate if needed only because this post would wind up a text wall that nobody will read. For your particular situation, get a board that supports your 6300 and has a decent VRM section. It won't matter what chipset it has. Strong VRM and good cooling will make more of a difference to your experience.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_chipsets
And the real world tests. I can only speak of my own real world experience. There is a difference in performance between the chipsets, depending on what CPU you run, and what you intend to do with it. I will elaborate if needed only because this post would wind up a text wall that nobody will read. For your particular situation, get a board that supports your 6300 and has a decent VRM section. It won't matter what chipset it has. Strong VRM and good cooling will make more of a difference to your experience.
- Thread Starter
- #3
Ok thats great information, so should I be thinking of saving a few dollars on my motherboard choice,one with a decent vmr but a lesser chipset. to spend elsewhere. Like on memory . I found a list on overclocker .net that rates vrm's with good or bad rating. Could I come in here and ask the quality of the VRM on different possible motherboards that I'm looking at. I'm about to go to sleep but I will look at your wiki tomorrow. Thanks again.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
I would very much like to read it also, I do stalk you some, Mr. scott.
I use the chipset to gauge weather or not the board is up to an fx cpu, for me if it has less than a 990 chipset the rest of the board is not up to the task.
I have to have little rules of thumb, when I wonder around a store I can not carry around all the info I need to, I have to boil it all down.
I use the chipset to gauge weather or not the board is up to an fx cpu, for me if it has less than a 990 chipset the rest of the board is not up to the task.
I have to have little rules of thumb, when I wonder around a store I can not carry around all the info I need to, I have to boil it all down.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
Like caddi daddi said- you want a 990 board if you want to overclock an FX cpu. They tend to be more robust electronically. 970 boards seem a little weaker for the most part. 890 boards don't really support FX cpu's for the most part. Only the first FX cpu's and mostly with beta bios support so forget them. Plus they are long discontinued. Even then the 990FX boards can run the gamut from really good boards like Sabertooth 990FX R2 to boards that could easily burst into flames with a 83XX if you tried to run at anything but stock vcore.
- - - Updated - - -
Mr. Scott has some really good info to glean.
Last edited:
I'll put a little blurb together today for you guys.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
I'll put a little blurb together today for you guys.
Looking forward to it.
- Thread Starter
- #9
Me alsoI'll put a little blurb together today for you guys.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
Ok. Gonna be a bit longer seeing as how the guys digging out in the back yard decided to hit my electric and cable lines.
On my phone now.
They didn't do a "Call before you dig"?
OK, back in business.
CD is right, for FX's you pretty much need the 990 chipset for best overall experience. The Thuban Phenom cores perform better on it also. The Deneb Phenoms seem the perform better on the 890FX chipset boards. Thubans will run on a few of the black socket 890 boards without a problem, as will some of the FX's. The 890 black socket boards were actually really good high end boards. Given the choice, pending chip support, I would rather run a 890 black socket board than any of the cheap 960 or 970 chipset boards. The big noted difference I find between the 990 and 890 boards is the core control and unlocking features. They must use a different technology on the different chipsets because some of the unlockable chips I have will unlock on one chipset but not the other, and vice versa. That's why you often hear me tell people to try another board if they have a problem with their unlocking. Core control is kinda the same way as far as per core clocking is concerned.
The 790 chipset is a whole different animal. That is because there are basically two different chipsets to compare. Those being the 790X and 790FX. Difference being DDR2 or DDR3 support. The 790FX is not much different than the 890FX at all. Other than CPU support, they perform roughly the same, with a slight edge to the 890 chipset IMO. Again, core unlocking tech and core control tech between the 790 and 890 is slightly different, but unlike the 990, everything I can unlock on the 890 I can unlock on the 790 also. IMO, there is no real reason to go with a 790FX over a 890FX other than price or availability. They support the exact same products until you get into the FX's, where you should really be into a 990 board anyway.
The 790X is where it's at for the AM2 AM2+ AM3 chips. Very underrated boards. These will support AM2 all the way to Thuban without a problem. The big gaff is......DDR2 support only. Probably only a big deal to benchers, but still. Core control and unlocking is on par with the 790FX and 890FX. No issues overall. Try to find a 790X board if you're a bencher and you'll see what I mean about underrated and demand.
I'll probably add to this as I think of things.
If you have specific questions, I'll try to answer if I can.
All of this is based on my reviews and benching on many of these boards. I'm not a specific manufacturer fanboy either. I run everything.
CD is right, for FX's you pretty much need the 990 chipset for best overall experience. The Thuban Phenom cores perform better on it also. The Deneb Phenoms seem the perform better on the 890FX chipset boards. Thubans will run on a few of the black socket 890 boards without a problem, as will some of the FX's. The 890 black socket boards were actually really good high end boards. Given the choice, pending chip support, I would rather run a 890 black socket board than any of the cheap 960 or 970 chipset boards. The big noted difference I find between the 990 and 890 boards is the core control and unlocking features. They must use a different technology on the different chipsets because some of the unlockable chips I have will unlock on one chipset but not the other, and vice versa. That's why you often hear me tell people to try another board if they have a problem with their unlocking. Core control is kinda the same way as far as per core clocking is concerned.
The 790 chipset is a whole different animal. That is because there are basically two different chipsets to compare. Those being the 790X and 790FX. Difference being DDR2 or DDR3 support. The 790FX is not much different than the 890FX at all. Other than CPU support, they perform roughly the same, with a slight edge to the 890 chipset IMO. Again, core unlocking tech and core control tech between the 790 and 890 is slightly different, but unlike the 990, everything I can unlock on the 890 I can unlock on the 790 also. IMO, there is no real reason to go with a 790FX over a 890FX other than price or availability. They support the exact same products until you get into the FX's, where you should really be into a 990 board anyway.
The 790X is where it's at for the AM2 AM2+ AM3 chips. Very underrated boards. These will support AM2 all the way to Thuban without a problem. The big gaff is......DDR2 support only. Probably only a big deal to benchers, but still. Core control and unlocking is on par with the 790FX and 890FX. No issues overall. Try to find a 790X board if you're a bencher and you'll see what I mean about underrated and demand.
I'll probably add to this as I think of things.
If you have specific questions, I'll try to answer if I can.
All of this is based on my reviews and benching on many of these boards. I'm not a specific manufacturer fanboy either. I run everything.
Similar threads
