what do you think of this Mobo as a replacement?

[magnus28]

had an asus 880g motherboard, fried the ethernet controller on it. Rma process has already started. Decided i was gonna spend some extra $$$ and go with the 890fx chipset.. what do you think of this board?

$180 is about most i'm gonna spend right now on a mobo, so Crosshair IV is out of the question. I'm also partial to Asus... ;-)

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131655

this other one seems pretty similar, 15 bucks cheaper, doesn't have usb 3.0, or apparently the Asus overlocking software, but I plan to O'C through the bios anyway...

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131645

which one?

 

[Dolk]

Both are the exact same board and are the sisters to the Cross IV. In all actuallity they are the Cross IV with out the added ROG featuers.

I have the cousin 89GTD PRO and its great. You will not have any trouble with the boards at all.

The only real difference between 89TDPRO/USB3 and 89TDPRO is that one has USB3 and the other doesn't.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

For $180, I would go with the Gigabyte UD5. It has USB3, Sata 6gb/s and much much more. I love the fact that Gigabyte not only have great quality boards, but they load them with features.

 

[xoke]

If you want very few features, want to save a buck or two, and don't like blue (lolz@Chance) the TA890fxe has been great to me. But as stated, nothing wrong with either of the boards your looking at or the UD5.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

^^^ The FXE is a great board. You save around $40 by getting that board too. Only thing I have to say is no USB3. Honestly, I would still buy the board though because I don't have any USB devices that saturate the USB2 bandwidth.

 

[xoke]

^^^ The FXE is a great board. You save around $40 by getting that board too. Only thing I have to say is no USB3. Honestly, I would still buy the board though because I don't have any USB devices that saturate the USB2 bandwidth.

Also, only 5 SATA ports...my other complaint about it. It's very basic no frills. I was on the fence for days going back and forth between the UD5 and this FXE.

 

[magnus28]

The only real difference between 89TDPRO/USB3 and 89TDPRO is that one has USB3 and the other doesn't.

apparently the $189 one has all the overclocking software on it like Turbo II and Turbo Evo V, and the other one doesn't. Not that I care about that if I overclock through the bios.

I don't care about USB 3.0, USB 2.0 is good enough for my mouse and keyboard.

I had a Biostar Ta790GX and I must say they are lower quality, cheap motherboards with cheap components.

Gigabyte are overpriced with not as many features that are packed into ASUS boards.

 

[magnus28]

another note:

I have Gskill PIS PC16000 ram, so the UD5 would be no good to me.
also, for a ATX board it only has 1 pci slot.

 

[Dolk]

No the 89TDPRO has it all

go to page xii on their manual, it says it right there.

Trust me, I know my Asus

 

[ChanceCoats123]

Gigabyte are overpriced with not as many features that are packed into ASUS boards.

Is this a joke? The board I posted is right in between the price of both boards you posted, and has more features than both of them put together.

I admit that I'm a Gigabyte fanboy, but I can back it up with things UD5 has.

 

[magnus28]

Is this a joke? The board I posted is right in between the price of both boards you posted, and has more features than both of them put together.

I admit that I'm a Gigabyte fanboy, but I can back it up with things UD5 has.

I very much doubt it.

- ASUS has mutiple software programs for fine tuning/tweaking. They have a energy saving profile to only run your hardware at minimal power consuption. They also have a neat little button called " mem ok" that automatically sets your memory voltage,fsb, and timings back to original in case you fail an OC, so you don't have to reset your cmos.

- the UD5 has none of this, also no 2000Mhz support for ram.

so I need the board to support my memory.

edit: maybe the Ud5 has a program for the fine tuning, but definately doesn't compare to ASUS for features.

 

[xoke]

I very much doubt it.

- ASUS has mutiple software programs for fine tuning/tweaking. They have a energy saving profile to only run your hardware at minimal power consuption. They also have a neat little button called " mem ok" that automatically sets your memory voltage,fsb, and timings back to original in case you fail an OC, so you don't have to reset your cmos.

- the UD5 has none of this, also no 2000Mhz support for ram.

so I need the board to support my memory.

edit: maybe the Ud5 has a program for the fine tuning, but definately doesn't compare to ASUS for features.

I don't want to get into this Asus vs. XXXXXX argument again, but almost all motherboards have the features your listing. My cheap Biostar has them all except the memory OK thing (which is a bit gimmicky).

The one thing spec wise the Asus has over the Ud5 is the RAM speed, and to be honest that is going to be hampered by your CPU long before your motherboard.

Asus makes great boards, I'm not going to deny that, but some of the things your listing as features are pretty weak arguments is all I'm saying.

 

[magnus28]

I don't want to get into this Asus vs. XXXXXX argument again, but almost all motherboards have the features your listing. My cheap Biostar has them all except the memory OK thing (which is a bit gimmicky).

The one thing spec wise the Asus has over the Ud5 is the RAM speed, and to be honest that is going to be hampered by your CPU long before your motherboard.

Asus makes great boards, I'm not going to deny that, but some of the things your listing as features are pretty weak arguments is all I'm saying.

nothing weak or gimmicky about the Mem ok button. Think about how many times your computer crashes while you're overclocking and fine tuning voltages. How many times does it crash during burn in or benchmarking? Well If you're lucky enough to have a jumper on your cmos to reset it, that's not half bad. In most cases you need to unplug your video card and remove it in order to get at the cmos again. This is a pain in the A$$ when you have to repeat this process 20-30 times. Nothing weak about that feature.

I think i'm going to go with this board.

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product...82E16813131645

Any final arguments for choosing another board from Gigabyte or MSI?

 

[xoke]

I almost never have to reset my CMOS, mine just reboots with an overclock error warning. On the rare occasion I do need to, my CMOS is located above the cards for that reason.

Like I said, its a great board your getting...not arguing about that. Its just the features you site as being unique or superior are neither in my opinion.

No matter, I'm sure that thing will fly.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

Choose the board you wish. But one reason the Gigabyte boards don't have said MemOK button is because they have dual physical bios roms. I've only ever had to reset my Cmos once and that was because I had issues after a bios flash. With dual bios roms, if the first bios has an error, it reads from the second and resets the first.

I can list numerous tweaking and tuning utilities for Gigabyte boards. Try Here.

And finally most Amd cpu's won't run 2000mhz ram unless the timings are horrible. As much as I would like to see Amd running 2000mhz @ 6-6-6-22 like intel does, it's just not going to happen. You're Pi's will likely run 2000mhz around Cas 8-9. I would much rather run 1600mhz @ cas 6 anyway since it performs better in basically every benchmark. Facts are facts.


Ohhh yeah! And this is actually helpful. Just letting you know that none of the Amd boards support a memory divider of 2000mhz so you will have to run a ref. clock of 250. It's not a set and forget thing like intel. Ask around mate. It says 2000 (O.C.) for a reason.

 

[QuietIce]

Personally, I'd take the cheaper of the two boards - I have no need for USB3. If you have something that can use the extra speed then spring for the other board.

ASUS has mutiple software programs for fine tuning/tweaking. They have a energy saving profile to only run your hardware at minimal power consuption. They also have a neat little button called " mem ok" that automatically sets your memory voltage,fsb, and timings back to original in case you fail an OC, so you don't have to reset your cmos.

I'm an ASUS fan, too (at least top-end ASUS) but your assessment of Gigabyte and Biostar is a little unrealistic. Let's break this down:

"ASUS has mutiple software programs for fine tuning/tweaking"
You do know that AOD is an AMD program, not developed by ASUS? But almost all manufacturers, and I know Gigabyte and Biostar in particular, have their own overclocking programs in addition to AOD.


"They have a energy saving profile to only run your hardware at minimal power consuption"
Windows can do that.
If you want to get really specific with your P-states K10Stat is as excellent, free program that works for all boards, not just the high-priced ones.


"They also have a neat little button called " mem ok" that automatically sets your memory voltage,fsb, and timings back to original in case you fail an OC, so you don't have to reset your cmos"
ASUS, and everybody else, has had some type of BIOS recovery for years. My older ASUS boards had CPR to reset a bad OC and, when that didn't work as well as I liked, I hooked the CMOS jumper up to an SPDT switch (that was easy). CPR has gotten MUCH better in the last few years as has everybody else's recovery program (my last two ASUS boards recovered from all OC errors). I particularly like Gigabyte's dual CMOS, though, a very nice feature that I wish ASUS would adopt.


Don't get me wrong - given a choice I'll take ASUS (as long as it's high-end) but the other manufacturers aren't as bad as you're making them out to be and ASUS isn't that much ahead of them, if any ...

 

[coonmanx]

^^^ That!

 

[magnus28]

And finally most Amd cpu's won't run 2000mhz ram unless the timings are horrible. As much as I would like to see Amd running 2000mhz @ 6-6-6-22 like intel does, it's just not going to happen. You're Pi's will likely run 2000mhz around Cas 8-9. I would much rather run 1600mhz @ cas 6 anyway since it performs better in basically every benchmark. Facts are facts.


Ohhh yeah! And this is actually helpful. Just letting you know that none of the Amd boards support a memory divider of 2000mhz so you will have to run a ref. clock of 250. It's not a set and forget thing like intel. Ask around mate. It says 2000 (O.C.) for a reason.

well played.. good points. I guess I couldn't see the forest for the trees?

I am not buying into the " ram runs better @1600 - - - timings." I read the reviews on tom's hardware, i've seen the benchmarks. I've personally tested my ram GSKILL PIS pc16000cl9 with 2000Mhz @9-9-9-24 1800Mhz @8-8-8-24 and 1600@ 7-7-7-24 (the tightest timings I could achieve). I ran Passmark 7.0, Benchmem, and Everest Ultimate editionm. In all 3 tests the 2000Mhz ram outperformed the other 2 with higher memory bandwith, and lower latency. A few test scored the 1600 with a few points higher in read/write cache, but less than 1% difference compared to the 3 nano second difference in latency and almost half a gig in bandwith that the 2000 memory out performed.

maybe other memory vendors are different, but in my case the 2000Mhz ram performs best at what it was intended to.

 

[ChanceCoats123]

While I can agree in theoretical tests, like Sandra, Everest, Passmark and Benchmem, let me look up some SS's for you of real world benchmarks.

Edit: To be fair, I don't have any benchmarks that are similar enough, I do have one thing to point out. My ram is 1600 Cas 8, which is killing me in benches. I try to oc' it as far as it can go with the lowest Cas settings so that I gives the most bandwidth when benching. Albeit at the same settings, more speed and a higher cas provides more clock cycles per Cas than lower, but when you start oc'ing the lower Cas gives you more bandwidth.

I'll give an example to clarify. First is all at a bus of 213. Ram divider of 3:10 gives me speeds of 710 with cas 7 timings. When you divide out, it's around 101.5 cycles per cas. With the divider at 3:8, it comes out to 568 with Cas 6, or around 97 cycles per Cas. But when you start talking of oc'ing, it's a different story. Now these tests are on a bus of 242. With a 3:10 memory divider, it's comes out to 806, but my ram won't run cas 7, so it gets bumped to cas 8 and you now get around 101 again. On the flip side, the 3:8 divider still runs at cas 6 and you get 645 with Cas 6. or around 108 cycles per cas. The lower Cas allows for more bandwidth once you reach higher clocks. It helps you to squeeze just a bit more out of your rig. ( see attachment)

 

[QuietIce]

While I can agree in theoretical tests, like Sandra, Everest, Passmark and Benchmem, let me look up some SS's for you of real world benchmarks.

Good try but I doubt it'll help ...

BTW - Even Paint can trim pics ...