I'm building a budget gaming system leveraging an FX-6300 which I'd like to overclock. I've got 8GB of 1866MHz RAM ordered, 650W SeaSonic PSU, SSD, HDD. However, CPU, motherboard, graphics card not yet nailed down. It will likely be a 3GB 7950 or 2GB GTX 760. Last time I overclocked was five years ago, so I'm a novice at best. I'm not going to zomgliquidcool it -- Hyper 212 EVO, I guess? Life is busy so I need something simpler. Less time to tinker.
It'd be silly to ignore the easy overclock gains of an FX-6300 (or maybe even an FX-8350).
If you had to pick a budget (value) AM3+ overclocking board from this list at Microcenter, which would you choose? Why not the same manufacturer's cheaper model or a competitor's similarly priced model?
http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/a168f038#/a168f038/...
Keep in mind I will do basic overclocking: I am OK getting a B+ in overclocking; I don't feel the need to squeeze every last hertz from the components. That being said, I don't want to leave $50 of value on the table by skimping $10 on a motherboard. Also, although the FX-6300 only uses 95W, I could easily see myself doing a simple CPU upgrade in 6-12 months if there's a bargain AM3+ CPU, so the motherboard should be one which supports overclocking for even 125W CPUs (but not 220Ws).
It seems like the pattern in motherboards within the same manufacturer/product name is that a basic or older model will offer lower voltages/wattage and support slower memory; the middle model might improve voltages/wattage and support faster memory; and the high model adds bells and whistles I'll never use. It seems all support overclocking, but since overclocking involves increasing voltages/wattages, a middle-of-the-road motherboard is needed. Hopefully I'm on target here.