# AM3 Mobo which one???



## DaveSi677

Which is the best mobo out right now for the AM3 socket?

I am getting the AMD Phenom II x4 955 black edition... I would like to be able to overclock it with ease... I am just not sure which one to pick!


----------



## Drenlin

The 790FX is easiest to overclock with, but they can be pricey. What's your budget?


----------



## daisymtc

Single video card - 770 
Crossfire - 790FX
SLi - 980a
Onboard VGA - 785G/ 790GX


----------



## Drenlin

^ Why on earth would he want a 770? The 790FX is the one geared toward overclockers...


----------



## Analizer

If you have DDR3 RAM memory, go for

*GIGABYTE GA-MA770T-UD3P*
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128392&Tpk=gigabyte ga-ma770t-ud3p am3


----------



## Drenlin

He asked for the best, not the best value. The 790FX is the best for overclocking, is it not?

At the very least, a mobo with the SB750 southbridge would be good.


----------



## 87dtna

This one-

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128415


----------



## StrangleHold

DaveSi677 said:


> Which is the best mobo out right now for the AM3 socket?
> 
> I am getting the AMD Phenom II x4 955 black edition... I would like to be able to overclock it with ease... I am just not sure which one to pick!


 
If you want a single slot board. The only problem with these is they have no cooler on the mosfets which could be a problem after a point.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813128392
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813128419

Crossfire in 8X/8X
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813128378
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813128416
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813131402

Crossfire in 16X/16X
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813131363
http://www.newegg.com/Product/NewProduct.aspx?Item=N82E16813128415


----------



## DaveSi677

Drenlin said:


> He asked for the best, not the best value. The 790FX is the best for overclocking, is it not?
> 
> At the very least, a mobo with the SB750 southbridge would be good.



Exactly I want the best not the best value... I want my build to be top of the line!


----------



## 87dtna

The gigabyte board I linked to in post 7 is one of the best current AM3 boards.


If you are spending that much $, I highly recommend you build an I5 750 socket 1156 build instead.  The I5 crushes the Phenom II in every way.


----------



## DaveSi677

I plan on OC that is why I am going with the AMD


----------



## 87dtna

DaveSi677 said:


> I plan on OC that is why I am going with the AMD



Haha, is that a joke?

My I7 started out at 2.8ghz-







You won't see many AMD quads make it over 4ghz, and they start out at 3.2 or 3.4ghz (955 and 965) 

I used to have a Phenom II 550 unlocked to a quad, max OC was 3.9ghz which took 1.575 Vcore.  Normally I ran it at 3.6ghz at 1.425 Vcore.  I used to have an I5 before I got this I7, which clocked to 4ghz at 1.425 Vcore.  At 3.2ghz, the I5 was faster at EVERYTHING than the Phenom II quad at 3.9ghz.


----------



## daisymtc

DaveSi677 said:


> I plan on OC that is why I am going with the AMD



??
Intel is better overclocker...


----------



## El Gappo

Hmmmmmmmmm mine stated out at 3.4  

 It is easier rto overclock these phenom II's because of the unlocked multi and you will be hitting over 4.0 stable with a nice c3 955. That 790fxta is probably the best board but the bios isn't quite up to par yet, still very buggy so you may want ot consider a msi gd70


----------



## 87dtna

Thats probably not on air cooling, and even if it is you got a one in a million chip.  Most will barely hit 4ghz.  One other question, did you shut down any cores to achieve that overclock?  And what voltage is that on?


Like I said, I used to own AMD stuff, and I used to say the same thing about the multiplier.  But honestly, it's not really a big deal.

And an I5 at 4ghz will probably still beat out a Phenom II at 5ghz in most if not all multi-threaded benches.


----------



## El Gappo

87dtna said:


> Thats probably not on air cooling, and even if it is you got a one in a million chip.  Most will barely hit 4ghz.  One other question, did you shut down any cores to achieve that overclock?  And what voltage is that on?
> 
> 
> Like I said, I used to own AMD stuff, and I used to say the same thing about the multiplier.  But honestly, it's not really a big deal.
> 
> And an I5 at 4ghz will probably still beat out a Phenom II at 5ghz in most if not all multi-threaded benches.



The cpu-z shows the voltage and that all 4 cores are active so why are you asking?

No it won't, it may in some intel biased single threaded benchmarks like spi and pifast but in w-prime and gaming performance the phenom will be on a par or ahead of the 750. 


My point is that any noob can get a 4.2 stable 955 or 965  just ramping up the voltage and multi. 
Whereas messing about with dividers etc is a whole different story.


----------



## Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ

87dtna said:


> And an I5 at 4ghz will probably still beat out a Phenom II at 5ghz in most if not all multi-threaded benches.




o.0 no.


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> The cpu-z shows the voltage and that all 4 cores are active so why are you asking?
> 
> No it won't, it may in some intel biased single threaded benchmarks like spi and pifast but in w-prime and gaming performance the phenom will be on a par or ahead of the 750.
> 
> 
> My point is that any noob can get a 4.2 stable 955 or 965  just ramping up the voltage and multi.
> Whereas messing about with dividers etc is a whole different story.



Sorry I didn't click on that box, just read what was there.

I said MULTI threaded benchmarks, SPI is single threaded so I wasn't counting that.  
I've owned both, and the 750 OWNS the phenom II in gaming performance clock for clock sorry.  I don't know about W-prime, never tried it.


----------



## 87dtna

Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ said:


> o.0 no.



Well, El gappo is the only one here with a Phenom II clocked that high.  I would be happy to turn of HT on my I7-860, which will essentially make is an I5 750, and do whatever benchmarks he wants at 4ghz and he'll do them on his Phenom II at anything up to 5ghz and we''ll see.  I would honestly like to find out for real, don't care if I'm wrong I really want to know.  Based on the performance boost I saw going from my Phenom II quad to an I5 with the same ram I'm still willing to say I'm right.


----------



## Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ

I've owned a lot of hardware and that extends well into AMD and Intel product lines. There is absolutely zero performance difference between the two. Nada. Zilch. This has been confirmed through many sources of reviews. Mostly recently ABT, which pitted a Phenom II, i7, and a C2Q against one another.

I can honestly say, given my experiences with these products, that the performance you are noticing is entirely placebo. In an everday computing environment that includes desktop, e-mail, gaming, and watching your favorite porno the only difference at the end of the day is the cost of one another. 

The only difference that is noticed is when you are a novice benchmarker.


----------



## 87dtna

Nope.  Boot time was a couple seconds faster, and while gaming it used less % of the CPU playing the same game.

Well hell of course if all you use your PC for is email/internet and light gaming you won't notice any difference between and I7 975 and an E8400.  Encoding, rendering, etc will all favor the I5 clock for clock.


----------



## Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ

lulz. boot time and cpu cycle usage during gaming isn't a true indication of relative performance. 

Most of your boot times stem from HDD configurations and condition, as well as the number of services and programs that load on startup. This is purely decided by the speed of your boot device of choice. 
CPU cycle load is just how much your processor is active during a given task. Again, the Phenom II matches Intel in gaming performance.


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Nope.  Boot time was a couple seconds faster, and while gaming it used less % of the CPU playing the same game.
> 
> Well hell of course if all you use your PC for is email/internet and light gaming you won't notice any difference between and I7 975 and an E8400.  Encoding, rendering, etc will all favor the I5 clock for clock.



wat

Boot time is hard drive territory; your CPU is barely loaded at all while booting into  Windows...


----------



## 87dtna

Same hard drives peeps, same programs installed.

I truly notice how you guys both completely overlook the part where I said rendering and encoding with favor the I5 and only bring up the part about boot time.  Nice.  And with WinRAR file compression the I5 kills the the Phenom II.


From the research I've found, the I5 750 is roughly 20% faster at most tasks than a Phenom II 955.  This is at stock clocks, which bare in mind is 3.2ghz for all 4 cores on the 955 and with turbo the I5 at 3.2 for cores 1+2 and 2.8ghz on cores 3+4.


----------



## meticadpa

87dtna said:


> Same hard drives peeps, same programs installed.
> 
> I truly notice how you guys both completely overlook the part where I said rendering and encoding with favor the I5 and only bring up the part about boot time.  Nice.  And with WinRAR file compression the I5 kills the the Phenom II.



We don't deny that the i5 pulls ahead in encoding, etc. But it's equal with the Phenom II in gaming.

And it's equal in boot times, stop talking nonsense.


----------



## El Gappo

Have a go with wprime 32 and 1024m m8. Use version 1.55 which you can grab from hwbot  Ive run it with my 965 on air and water I think will have a root through my screenshots once you've done yours but don't expect them to be low 
Running on that sempron atm but I have to bench prime on a quad within the next 2 weeks anyway for a competition.


----------



## 87dtna

Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ said:


> There is absolutely zero performance difference between the two. Nada. Zilch.





meticadpa said:


> We don't deny that the i5 pulls ahead in encoding, etc. But it's equal with the Phenom II in gaming.




hmmm


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> Have a go with wprime 32 and 1024m m8. Use version 1.55 which you can grab from hwbot  Ive run it with my 965 on air and water I think will have a root through my screenshots once you've done yours but don't expect them to be low
> Running on that sempron atm but I have to bench prime on a quad within the next 2 weeks anyway for a competition.



Running it now.  Dig out your SS and post them.  This doesn't seem to be an intensive multithreaded benchmark too much, it only uses ~25% on the CPU pretty much.  Now wonder AMD does good with this benchmark   Y-cruncher uses all cores at 90-100%.  Just like I said before, you won't notice any difference in an I7 975 and an E8400 just using your PC for light tasks.  Therefore you need benchmarks that push the envelope for true testing.  I can tell already that clock for clock in this test they will probably be about the same.  Lets do Y-cruncher next huh?

Edit- Running the 1024m right now-


----------



## El Gappo

You have to click in the settings thing and change it to 4 cores  Right now you are using 1 core at 100% hence 25% overall lol.


----------



## 87dtna

OK, well I didn't know I never used this bench before.  Post up your shots, I'll redo the test.


----------



## 87dtna

You post up yours first because if I post mine first you are just gonna post something thats better whether it's yours or not.  I don't trust you, so you first.


----------



## El Gappo

1024m on air at what would of been my 24/7 overclock 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



And 32m with a little bump 





Not got any 5ghz one as yet but I think you can tell the gap isn't exactly mahusive between intel and amd in the most widely recognized multithreaded benchmark.


----------



## 87dtna

You lose.  30 seconds slower with 200 more MHZ.  Now let me run 4.2ghz and 4.3 and put you to shame.


----------



## El Gappo

Lol you don't trust me eh! No need to be childish I knew the i7 was going to be faster before you even posted but do you not think and extra 800mhz cant narrow down that 5 millisecond gap? Even tho I was running with no northbridge and stock ram the first time around? 
I think the 4 vs 5ghz remark you have made is completely null now. Time for a 3d rendering test? I think you know who will come out on top there


----------



## 87dtna

LOL, wow.  First you challenge me saying with Wprime that they will be the same clock for clock, then it's back to 4 vs 5ghz because you lost HUGE.   

Lets see your 5ghz 1024m on your Phenom II.

Here's 4.2ghz-







Looking at the margin of difference in 200 mhz, I'm feeling confident about 5ghz vs 4ghz at this point.  5ghz may slightly edge out an I5 750 at 4ghz, but 4.2ghz is probably about right.


----------



## El Gappo

Wprime doesn't react well to a high nb clock on the phenom II. Put your's to 2ghz like mine and see where it stands, I'm curious.

BTW I said it would be on a par, it isnt a huge gap and I didn't get beat "huge" its kinda obvious thus far a 4ghz 750 would not be a match for a 5ghz phenom. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Not my score fyi, I would of benched it completely differently but as you know I dont have access to my rig atm. 


87dtna said:


> Well, El gappo is the only one here with a Phenom II clocked that high.  I would be happy to turn of HT on my I7-860, which will essentially make is an I5 750, and do whatever benchmarks he wants at 4ghz and he'll do them on his Phenom II at anything up to 5ghz and we''ll see.  I would honestly like to find out for real, don't care if I'm wrong I really want to know.  Based on the performance boost I saw going from my Phenom II quad to an I5 with the same ram I'm still willing to say I'm right.





> And an I5 at 4ghz will probably still beat out a Phenom II at 5ghz in most if not all multi-threaded benches.


----------



## 87dtna

Dude the 32m test proves nothing, the 1024 is the true test.  Both at 4.2ghz the I5 is over 40 seconds faster, thats 15%.  So just roughly here, 4ghz I5 should be equal to about 4.6ghz of the Phenom II.

My Bios doesn't have options to set QPI that low.


----------



## El Gappo

Well I think because of that variable we will not see any accurate results. Look on hwbot for more 5ghz 1024m results then, because as you know I cant run it atm. 32m proves just as much as 1024 the gap is just a bit smaller and requires less stability.


----------



## 87dtna

OK. 4.5ghz pretty much same as you at 5ghz (didn't re-run the 1024m, thats still from 4.2ghz)


----------



## El Gappo

So "an I5 at 4ghz will not beat out a Phenom II @5ghz" ? Go on say it.


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> So "an I5 at 4ghz will not beat out a Phenom II @5ghz" ? Go on say it.



Yes it's true....but do you really think you won here??  The whole argument started because I said an I5 is faster clock for clock than the Phenom II and people argued with me.   I said 20%, it ended up being 15% oh well I was off a little.  Point is, the I5 beats the Phenom II clock for clock very easily and definitively.  And, typically, intel I5/I7 CPU's overclock further than Phenom II's on air.


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> in w-prime and gaming performance the phenom will be on a par or ahead of the 750.




Haha, look familiar?

You were beat at your own game, period.


----------



## jasonn20

i would like to see what the 890 chipset is going to do for AMD..  i hope it boost the NB frequency capabilities... it should be released sometime this year..  never know though..


----------



## 87dtna

El Gappo said:


> So "an I5 at 4ghz will not beat out a Phenom II @5ghz" ? Go on say it.



Hmm, on the same page-

http://hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/wprime_1024m/rankings?start=680&cores=4

An I5 750 at 4.38ghz was 5 seconds faster than a 965be at 5.22ghz.  Pretty close to a 4ghz___5ghz comparison right there.


EDIT- Oh the sweet smell of victory-


I5 at 4ghz-
http://hwbot.org/community/submission/954396_darksfa_wprime_32m_core_i5_750_7sec_718ms

965 at 5ghz- (slower than the I5 at 4ghz in case you didn't notice)
http://hwbot.org/community/submission/942159_gnidaol_wprime_32m_phenom_ii_x4_965_be_7sec_783ms

I also wanted to mention this small fact.  Take a look at the clock speed and times of the I5's-

http://hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/wprime_1024m/rankings?hardware=core_i5_750

And now the Phenom II 965's-
http://hwbot.org/rankings/benchmark/wprime_1024m/rankings?hardware=phenom_ii_x4_965_be

For the number one spot, the Phenom II is clocked 1.3ghz higher and is only 7 seconds faster.  Sad.  And you people really think the Phenom II is as fast as an I5 750?  Thats sadder yet.  Placebo effect huh?


El Gappo, thats now twice you lost at your own game by telling me to go to HWbot.  Epic fail.  Whats even worse is, you will either not respond anymore, or simply give a cop out response saying I'm just being childish or whatever.

In conclusion, I5 750 FTW!


----------



## jasonn20

965 at 5ghz- (slower than the I5 at 4ghz in case you didn't notice)
http://hwbot.org/community/submission/942159_gnidaol_wprime_32m_phenom_ii_x4_965_be_7sec_783ms




that is a pretty poor overclock to only have a 2600mhz NB frequency on Dice..  if AMD can open these chip up abit then it would make a big difference and I believe the limitation is the MB itself...  hurry up 890!


----------



## 87dtna

jasonn20 said:


> 965 at 5ghz- (slower than the I5 at 4ghz in case you didn't notice)
> http://hwbot.org/community/submission/942159_gnidaol_wprime_32m_phenom_ii_x4_965_be_7sec_783ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that is a pretty poor overclock to only have a 2600mhz NB frequency on Dice..  if AMD can open these chip up abit then it would make a big difference and I believe the limitation is the MB itself...  hurry up 890!



According to El gappo Wprime doesn't like high NB speeds.

Always just excuses for AMD.  Sorry, intel FTW.


----------



## jasonn20

You might be suprised AMD might pull a rabbitt out of the hat on you.. 

Not saying your wrong just saying the NB needs overhauled on AMD MB's it should boost there AM3 chip line in performance...  i would like to think anyway...  not much info on these boards yet... AMD better get there finger out of there butt or they are going to keep losing the market


----------



## Aastii

87dtna, in the past you have been known for your extreme fanboyisms, for instance, the last post here, so just about everything said in the last 3 or 4 of your posts I am taking with a massive pinch of salt

Now I think that the i5 is quicker than the PII 965's on benchmarks and such clock for clock, however, the "proof" of the 4GHz to 5GHz doesn't realy work, seeing as how the full specs aren't listed. If they were on comparable motherboards with the same NB frequencies, memory clocks and latencies, same hard drives, same everything except the CPU, so it is as damn close as possible, I bet that the difference would be in favour of the PII. Maybe not massively, but a 5GHz PII will beat a 4GHz i5 I'd have thought, just about indefinately

=EDIT=

I don't want to join in with this, but can I point out that it was said that AMD don't OC as well as Intel do. Well, look at the last 2 links in #44 and note that AMDs are up to 6.4+ while Intel are only at 5.1, so there is one part of this thread disproved fully


----------



## Drenlin

jasonn20 said:


> AMD better get there finger out of there butt or they are going to keep losing the market



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(processor)

And really I don't think they've lost the market, but they definitely don't have the "high end" spot. For cheaper rigs, though, AMD has better offerings than everything intel has under $200, except maybe the i3 530.


----------



## 87dtna

Aastii said:


> 87dtna, in the past you have been known for your extreme fanboyisms, for instance, the last post here, so just about everything said in the last 3 or 4 of your posts I am taking with a massive pinch of salt
> =EDIT=




Yeah that was because I bought a 4870 and the gts250 was almost as good performance using less power and less heat.  So I ended up selling the 4870.

I'm not a fanboy, I actually try out hardware on the other side.  I've owned many AMD setups in the past. 



Aastii said:


> I don't want to join in with this, but can I point out that it was said that AMD don't OC as well as Intel do. Well, look at the last 2 links in #44 and note that AMDs are up to 6.4+ while Intel are only at 5.1, so there is one part of this thread disproved fully



On air buddy, 99% of people only run air cooling.  And besides, why do you need 6.4ghz on a Phenom II when 5.1ghz on an I5 is nearly the same performance.  Oh that argument backfired on you didn't it 

One other thing to remember, the I5 started out at 2.6ghz not 3.4 like the Phenom II.  Lets look at an Intel CPU that started at 3.4ghz also-

http://hwbot.org/community/submission/952562_hicookie_cpu_z_core_i5_670_7124.7_mhz


----------



## Dazzeerr

I don't understand why there's an argument here.

87dtna is right. Intel have been dominating the gaming market for a while now.

I would love to see the figures for Intel vs. AMD sales for gamers since.. pfft.. 2004?

E8400/Q6600. Who doesn't know someone with one? What was out for AMD then? Phenom I, which lacked behind and was generally fail.

Core i5/Core i7. Who doesn't know someone with one/who want's one? AMD are lacking behind again with Phenom II's.

I can't see how millions of gamers are making the wrong choice. Call me a fanboy, call me whatever. Intel > AMD.

AMD were on top when Intel chips weren't unlockable, since then it's been Intel.


----------



## FairDoos

ASUS Crosshair Formula III 

or

MSI-GD70-790FX

I have owned both of these boards and i have to say i love them both !!

I also use that CPU


----------



## Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ

Again, I've owned both and for gaming there is absolutely ZERO performance difference between a Phenom II and any...YES ANY i7 or i5. Period. 

Let's not forget that AMD has traditionally not done well in PI's. Why? I dunno? To throw a couple of excuses out there as it could be to integer calculations or a simple fact that it could have been compiled with the Intel compiler. If you haven't kept up with this shamey on you. 

Also, you guys are using one aspect of benching to compare the processors, which of many reasons why this isn't good practice is because this person will not use or hit those frequencies, and it's a very narrow window for comparison. 

I love how everyone always throws out video encoding as if an AMD processor can't do this. An i7 will save you what? 30 seconds? With innovations in this field to off load this type of rendering onto the gpu it further makes it a moot point. I also find it even funnier that the people who use this as an excuse are the same ones who don't even do it. It just happens to fit their argument. Out of the many i7's I've owned I never once done any video encoding. How about FRAPS? Yes, I have noticed no performance difference. In fact, it almost seems that FRAPS actually works better on the Phenom II, but I really have no way of testing this. So for now, I'll call it equal. 

I'll reiterate, If the OP just likes to play games and mainly use his pc what 99.9999999 percent of other simple users use pc for, his money will be better spent on the AMD setup.  This will free funds for a better graphics processor and possibly an SSD, which have more of a bearing on "performance feel".


----------



## 87dtna

Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ said:


> There is absolutely zero performance difference between the two. Nada. Zilch.





Th3_Chill_ʇɔǝɟɟǝ said:


> Again, I've owned both and for gaming there is absolutely ZERO performance difference between a Phenom II and any...YES ANY i7 or i5. Period.



ohhhhh, now it's just gaming performance thats not different? 

Just how many time are you amd fanboys gonna shove your foot in your mouth?

On HWbot, look at any benchmark for quad cores, the first several hundred results will be I7's and I5's before you'll even find a Phenom II in there thats clocked much higher too I might add.  This isn't even a debate, the I7 and I5 OWN phenom II's.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i5-gaming,2403-5.html

^Before you say there's only 1-2FPS difference in most tests, bare in mind th I5 is less clock speed here.  The 965 has 3.4ghz across the board, the I5 has 3.2 on cores 1+2 and 2.8ghz on cores 3+4.  If the 750 was clocked to 3.4ghz on all four cores I'd imagine the gaming performance would be around 3-5 more FPS.


----------



## Drenlin

He does have a point. I don't agree that there's "zero" difference in games, but they're both fast enough that the bottleneck is most likely somewhere else in the system. The winner would probably be the one with the better GPU.


----------



## Aastii

87dtna said:


> Yeah that was because I bought a 4870 and the gts250 was almost as good performance using less power and less heat.  So I ended up selling the 4870.
> 
> I'm not a fanboy, I actually try out hardware on the other side.  I've owned many AMD setups in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> On air buddy, 99% of people only run air cooling.  And besides, why do you need 6.4ghz on a Phenom II when 5.1ghz on an I5 is nearly the same performance.  *Oh that argument backfired on you didn't it*
> 
> One other thing to remember, the I5 started out at 2.6ghz not 3.4 like the Phenom II.  Lets look at an Intel CPU that started at 3.4ghz also-
> 
> http://hwbot.org/community/submission/952562_hicookie_cpu_z_core_i5_670_7124.7_mhz



So ATi "blows", isn't fanboyism against ATi  kk

and What argument? I wasn't arguing, I was putting in my thoughts. It was said they wouldn't overclock as high initially, then the tune changed to "on air". Now that seems a little hypocritical, I mean, you are having a go at people for changing the parameters to which results should be based on, yet you yourself are doing it?

This is a pointless "debate" anyway, I mean AMD make fine, fully working CPUs that work in any sector, they have budget ones, mid range ones, enthusiast ones, as do Intel. Both companies make CPUs that work in these scenarios flawlessly and brilliantly. If one was massively better than the other, this debate would be pointless and most probably non-existant because it would have gone "why AMD, look at how crap they are *post reference to top end not being able to play games any more recent than 5 years ago*" and that would have been the end. The fact that a discussion is to be had proves that other than benchmarks, bragging rights and fanboyism, there is nothing really going for one over the other at all.



Dazzeerr said:


> I don't understand why there's an argument here.
> 
> 87dtna is right. Intel have been dominating the gaming market for a while now.
> 
> I would love to see the figures for Intel vs. AMD sales for gamers since.. pfft.. 2004?
> 
> E8400/Q6600. Who doesn't know someone with one? What was out for AMD then? Phenom I, which lacked behind and was generally fail.
> 
> Core i5/Core i7. Who doesn't know someone with one/who want's one? AMD are lacking behind again with Phenom II's.
> 
> *I can't see how millions of gamers are making the wrong choice. Call me a fanboy, call me whatever. Intel > AMD.*
> 
> AMD were on top when Intel chips weren't unlockable, since then it's been Intel.



I play games maybe 30 hours a week, an excessive amount yes, and my rig handles it fine, that is all latest games on full settings (except for uber intensive games, then it is my VIDEO CARD that holds me back). I payed a fraction of the price that I would have done for an i7 system, and yet my 3.2GHz quad core, that I got for the price of a tri core, Intel can't do that, can play the latest and greatest with no problems. If anything, gamers who go AMD are making the right choice, they are favouring their pockets over bragging rights.

However, if I had the money to build an i7 rig, I would. I would sooner have a 1366 system over AM3 with the money, however for my budget, I would sooner have an AM3 system over i3. AMD has the "budget" end of the market, and even the high end of the market, which the 955 and 965 fall into, they aren't far behind in practical use. A few seconds slower here and there, but even to an enthusiast, that isn't noticable under normal use, only when benching. Benchmarks mean diddly squat though. It is nice to have numbers on screen, but if those numbers don't equate to noticably better performance in real use, then they mean jack.

BACK OT THOUGH, +1 for the M4A79XTD EVO. On mine I have managed to get my 720BE unlocked to a quad core and totally stable with nothing changed but opening up the fourth core (mostly down to the chip, yes, but it was hella easy to do once I worked out the setting). I have overclocked as high as 3.6GHz on stock AMD cooling, haven't tried pushing it so far on my new cooler yet, but I can see it easily hitting 4GHz+ and not getting too hot. All of this so simple because of bios is so stable and easy to use. The NB is staying so cool even with a relatively small NB HS, the board layout is just about perfect, especially seeing as how they did something Asus normally don't do which is realise that SATA slots on the top can often impair a video card fitting in properly with a SATA cable in, so the top slots on the board doesn't affect the cards one bit, in CF or single card.

It also has a feature which I don't know why every mobo doesn't have it, and that is clips on the PCI ports. Rather than that bendy bit of plastic which, if you have dual video cards or an aftermarket NB heatsink or just fat fingers, you can't get them or they are fiddly as hell, especially to get both hands in there to move the plastic and pull it out. The clips though unlatch the card and push it out, sort of like the memory ones, and it makes things a hell of alot easier. I put, and took out, a 5850 off of one and it was so much easier that taking even an 8600GT out of my P5N-e SLI, which had the bendy plastic clips and a card which is about a quarter of the size of the 5850

It's got a load of neat Asus features too, like 8+2 phase, EZflash, Asus OS, which isn't made by Asus, but it is awesome for browsing the internet and listening to music and that, and is tiny


----------



## El Gappo

So I go out for a weekend and I'm busy during the day like most guys and suddenly I'm a coward? me having a social life is an excuse for you to send abusive pm's? 


			
				87dtna said:
			
		

> You are unbelievable, you battle me in that thread until I say I was wrong, but then when I make you eat your words you just leave the thread.  Coward.  Be a man an admit you were wrong.  The I5 is superior to the Phenom II clock for clock, and by a decent margin.
> 
> BTW, even though I did show a 4ghz and 5ghz comparison, I would take a 5ghz Phenom II over a 4ghz I5.



Right so please show me where you made me eat my words because Im dying to see. You said an i5 would beat a 5ghz phenom II, I didn't have access to mine so I post up my old air score at 4.4 (being completely polite through the whole thing as always) and you win with a lot of variables in your favor OMG congratulations, give yourself a pat on the back. You somehow see this as something to be pround of and mock me... I don't think you even realized That 1 test was run nearly 1000mhz off what you asked for but that's not surprising coming from someone of your mental status.  

Take a look at the title of the thread for starters, you are completely wrong on everything so far. 

No wonder there is a significant lack of knowledgeable people on this forum, they either get banned because so called "VIP's" feel threatened by them and hold threads hostage  or they get abused when here AND even when they aren't within 20 miles of a computer. 

Keeping people like me ncspecv81 and meticadpa around would of done your forum some good. You could of learned instead of trolling each and every one of our posts and being completely wrong in doing so but no.... 

A word of advice mep, you may want to remove some of these trolls as you know people take one look at this forum and notice nothing but a lack of quality information and a bunch of douchebags that hate new members. It's not exactly heaving because of it.


----------



## Aastii

I personally can see yet *another * thread being closed due to it going OT, then some trolling happens, then the OP doesn't get the answer they wanted because some selfish members decided to have an argument over someone elses thread rather than start another or carry it on over pm's. Nice work :good:


----------



## Dystopia

Aastii is right. Lets stay on topic. 

Best motherboard. Well, looks like you don't have budget, so: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131361&cm_re=AM3-_-13-131-361-_-Product would be the best one. It may already have been linked.


----------



## StrangleHold

Man, this thread has carried into the land of B/S. Over a motherboard. What a bunch of nimrods. One Fanboy of what ever he owns at the moment and one narcissist. Then blame each other. Think you both have proved yourself today.


----------



## mep916

I don't have any time to deal with this atm. It's disappointing to see all this hostility and bad vibes in the forum. I've been here for 2 1/2 years and never seen anything like this. It's been going on for weeks. 

I don't understand the obsession with "being right," or going to great lengths to make the other person look bad. We all love computers and we all want to learn. It would be nice if we could all show each other equal respect and engage with each other in a more polite manner. This isn't kindergarten. 

Members that continue to engage in arguments such as this will receive temporary, perhaps even permanent bans. This is my final warning. I don't want to go that route but I will if I deem it necessary. 

Also, if you send a PM to another user, do not flame them.


----------

