Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GA-P35-DS4 (rev. 2.1)

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
January 27, 2008 1:22:47 AM

I am in the process of my first time build. I notice revision 2.1 is out for this mobo. Here are some of the differences...

GA-P35-DS4 (rev. 2.1)

FSB 1600 OC/ 1333
DDR2 1200 OC/ 1066

GA-P35-DS4 (rev. 2.0)

FSB 1333
DDR2 800/ 1066

There are other differences when you look at and compare the specifications. Are these upgrades significant? Do you recommend this board. I plan do video editing and probably some gaming. Thanks for your help!

More about : p35 ds4 rev

January 27, 2008 2:05:04 AM

Unless you want to overclock your computer crazily, you wont see a difference, ever. Your ram and cpu will be limited by themselves before either board limits them, again unless you overclcok crazily.
a b V Motherboard
January 27, 2008 2:45:55 AM

Yeah I recommend the GA-P35-DS4 all right. You certainly don't need SLI or Crossfire for "probably some gaming", so it's a good choice.

I'm assuming you'll get a Q6600 for it, since that's the smartest choice these days for video editing. If you want an E8400 you'll need to flash the BIOS, AFAIK.

If you only use one (or two) monitors and don't need Firewire or eSATA then you could get a cheaper GA-P35-DS3R.

Take a look at aBit IP35Pro too while it's still on sale at newegg. It's extremely similar to the DS4.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813127030&Tpk=ip35%2bpro

Also look at the GA-X38-DS4. It's $30 more but it has some advantages (PCI-E 2.0, x16 on both video card slots instead of x16/x4). I don't know if you need any of these advantages though.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128080&Tpk=GA-X38-DS4
Related resources
January 27, 2008 11:15:21 PM

I will most likely go with the P35-DS4. I need firewire for video transfer from my camara. I also like that this board gives me room to grow. I have bought COD4 so I will at least play that game. As far as overclocking I have never done it but I love to learn new things so I might do some experimenting. I will get a quad core processor; either the q6600 or maybe wait for the q9450.
a b V Motherboard
January 28, 2008 2:11:46 AM

Some info to help you decide if you want to wait for Q9450 or not:

The Q9450 is expected at scan.co.uk on March 17, 2008. Price 218 pounds (Q6600 is 170 retail/154 OEM at the same site). Based on this I expect newegg to charge $349.99. I'm also guessing that the Q6600 will cost $249.99 at newegg after the end of March, maybe even a bit less.

The Q9450 will overclock higher than the Q6600. It will be about 5% faster at the same clock. If you don't overclock, a Q9450 will be about 15% faster than a Q6600 because it has a 10% higher clock by default (2.66 GHz vs 2.4 GHz).

Edit: before you get too excited about the 15% extra speed or about overclocking: some times you won't really benefit from either, because the hard disk will limit performance. For example, in DVD Shrink, a stock Q6600 at 81% usage and an overclocked Q9450 at 40% usage (or whatever) will still do the same video encoding job in the same amount of time. If you wait for the Q9450 I strongly recommend doing research about the fastest hard disks and/or RAID.
January 28, 2008 11:03:54 AM

How much should I factor in power usage and heat output? From what I understand the Q9450 uses less power and runs cooler than the Q6600.
a b V Motherboard
January 28, 2008 12:13:38 PM

Actually, both the Q6600 G0 and the Q9450 have a TDP of 95W. The Q9450 is more efficient though, because it runs at a higher clock (2.66 GHz instead of 2.4 GHz) and with a larger cache while still using the same power. As for heat, I assume that's very much related to power consumption, so it should also be similar. Yes, the Q9450 uses less power and runs cooler AT THE SAME CLOCK, but they're not running at the same clock.
January 28, 2008 1:02:12 PM

aevm thanks for your imput, I may just go with the q6600. It will save me a little money and I can get it now.
!