Mobo for X6 1055 or 1090

[hogan773]

Hi all - doing my research to narrow down to best value.

I want some longevity (hence looking at Sata6 and USB 3.0) and best build quality, also want some ability to play around with Overclocking so want to know if there is any difference between mfrs here.

NOT A GAMER and hoping to use integrated graphics for now. Will want to do some AVCHD video editing in the future but seems to be that IG can handle.

Is Gigabyte, ASRock or ASUS the best or is there any major diffs in build quality/reliability? I'm staying away from Foxconn, Biosystems etc. Looking at things like the following.....

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128444

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157191

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131646


I know there are others using the 890 chipset that are a few bucks more, but seems I don't need that if I'm not likely gaming.....

All of the 3 above seem to have good ratings.....the ASRock and ASUS seem to have eSata onboard and maybe the Gigabyte doesnt.

Any opinions from those with more knowledge/experience than I ?

 

[Gekko Shadow]

I prefer Asus. It has better quality than ASRock, and i'm not big on giggy.

Asus has never let me down, they have built good quality boards. As well as Giggy. ASRock is a cheaper run-down "Asus" in a manner of speaking. But it's safer with an ASUS (not ASRock) for quality.

The boards should work fine for now - but i would recommend you get a reliable graphics card once you do video editing. Just to help your whole system

 

[tecmo34]

I second the ASUS vote!!

 

[jaquith]

Out of the bunch, the ASUS M4A88TD-V EVO/USB3.

Here's a good side-by-side - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007625%20600007943&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&CompareItemList=22|13-131-651^13-131-651-TS,13-131-654^13-131-654-TS,13-128-444^13-128-444-TS,13-157-191^13-157-191-TS,13-131-646^13-131-646-TS

 

[hogan773]

Thanks - keep the input coming - for some reason I've been seeing in other posts that Gigabyte is the "gold standard" and ASUS "sells trash" (cause there were several examples of people whose mobos wouldnt post up)

who knows.....maybe it all depends on luck re: build quality.

 

[jaquith]

NO THAT IS NOT THE CASE!

1. EVGA {Intel}
2. ASUS
3. MSI
4. Gigabyte

One exception, I do like, the only Gigabyte I like, the Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD9 {if you're okay with a $600 MOBO}.

 

[hogan773]

Ok I'll look closer at ASUS then.

I assume ASUS has good BIOS for whatever simple OCing I might attempt...

 

[Gekko Shadow]

Pretty much they do. Shouldn't be too much of a problem to do some small OC. But if you ever plan on going all out, well you'll need to spare a little more cash x)

But that's just me, lol.

Let us know if you have any more questions =)

 

[Gekko Shadow]

Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD9 {if you're okay with a $600 MOBO}.

LOL, it's only $600 - clearly in the average user's budget range ;D!~

 

[jaquith]

The 'advantage' to the ASUS is its power 8+2 phase.

 

[hogan773]

Pretty much they do. Shouldn't be too much of a problem to do some small OC. But if you ever plan on going all out, well you'll need to spare a little more cash x)

But that's just me, lol.

Let us know if you have any more questions =)

If you mean "all out overclocking" with some liquid nitrogen cooler, then no. If you mean spending $1000 on the best Core i7 processor, then no. Sort of why I'm leaning to AMD even though I've always had Intel in the past...I like this "more processor for the money" idea.

Now I just need to decide whether to wait for Sandy Bridge. I wonder if there are any threads dedicated to that decision (buy now or wait for Bulldozer/Sandy Bridge)? just kidding as I know there are a million. :lol:

 

[jaquith]

^ I think @Gekko Shadow meant ASUS Crosshair IV Formula or ASUS Crosshair IV Extreme which are the 'best' AM3 OC'ing MOBOs; extreme OC generally implies 4.2~4.4+ GHz.

 

[Gekko Shadow]

If you mean "all out overclocking" with some liquid nitrogen cooler, then no. If you mean spending $1000 on the best Core i7 processor, then no. Sort of why I'm leaning to AMD even though I've always had Intel in the past...I like this "more processor for the money" idea.

Now I just need to decide whether to wait for Sandy Bridge. I wonder if there are any threads dedicated to that decision (buy now or wait for Bulldozer/Sandy Bridge)? just kidding as I know there are a million. :lol:

Well, if you don't NEED to build a new pc, maybe you should wait. According to the Anandtech review (linky hurr~) sandybridge will be quite a nice line of cpus. Of course the first sandies to hit the market (Q1 2011) will be for mainstream only, but even then the i5 they tested did really well (for not having HT enabled D:!). It's up to you really, but I would probably wait.

Course, i'm not building an 1156 build xD whoo go i7 six-core! lmao x)

^ I think @Gekko Shadow meant ASUS Crosshair IV Formula or ASUS Crosshair IV Extreme which are the 'best' AM3 OC'ing MOBOs; extreme OC generally implies 4.2~4.4+ GHz.

Oh yes! Definitely >:3 you know you love pushing it xD! :lol:

 

[hogan773]

I don't NEED to build a new PC today. I've been living with my trusty (?) Dell Pentium D since 2005.

That said, I also don't want to get into the tech paralysis where I'm constantly waiting "just another 3 or 4 months" until the next gen appears promising an increase. I am a value guy and definitely not bleeding edge - will not pay up 10x to get the last 10% in performance. But I will wait when it makes sense to wait. Example: I am waiting right now to get the next iPhone or Android that will work on Verizon's LTE network early next yr. See no reason to commit 2yrs to a 3G phone today when LTE much better performance will come in a few months.

I am not an expert as many of you are but perhaps it seems that Sandy Bridge could be a big enough leap that its worth waiting to see what comes....perhaps there will be an interesting offering that would make we want to move to that system, but worst case I would THINK that it would put some downward price pressure on a chip like the Phenom X6 which I am targeting. But if the SB chip starts at a $250 premium above others, plus the mobo is new and shiny and also more expensive, I don't envision myself paying a 2x system premium over an equivalent X6 setup.

The only thing that spurs me to rush is the prospect of Black Friday and not wanting to miss that "super deal" on something. I guess I can always keep an eye out for the other parts of my system that will be the same regardless of CPU and mobo, like case, psu, HDD, etc and maybe jump on any great deals there. Argghh.

 

[Gekko Shadow]

Ah i see, makes complete sense . Well two things can happen with the sandies, either they are worth the wait and you build yourself a nifty build OR you say "no" and still go with the regular i5's that will start to decrease in price (They are gonna want to get rid of them to make way for the sandies). Best thing in this case, wait more time and do more research.

Now as far as the Phenom x6 goes - well it's not a bad choice. Though I'd never get it. I could get an quad-core i7 that could match it's performance if not pass it =P. But it's like you said - you're a "more processor for the money" type of person. So the Phenom seems like a very good choice. And i doubt the sandies will be able to compete in that aspect. Sure they might have better performance, but they will cost about what the current cpus cost.

Lol, best bet just keep watching those deals. xD

 

[jaquith]

I don't NEED to build a new PC today. I've been living with my trusty (?) Dell Pentium D since 2005.

5 years is MAX for a PC, especially HDDs - back-up OFTEN! "Trusty" can turn into "Damn PC" in a few seconds. Anything 'new' you'll be paying the {Bulldozer} "10x to get the last 10% in performance."

Question, why the change from "Trusty" Intel to AMD? You stated earlier "AVCHD video editing" which is better on Intel, so again I'm confused. I am NOT trying to pick at you - instead I am trying to make you think carefully.

Just as a 'suggestion' I would highly recommend that you 'play' virtually with Configurations + Costs - try http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/

Just trying to help...

 

[tecmo34]

Just as a 'suggestion' I would highly recommend that you 'play' virtually with Configurations + Costs - try http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/

Good thing we are in the Motherboard Forum... We (they) have your head for recommending anything with a CyberPowerPC over a custom build :lol:

 

[Gekko Shadow]

5 years is MAX for a PC, especially HDDs - back-up OFTEN! "Trusty" can turn into "Damn PC" in a few seconds. Anything 'new' you'll be paying the {Bulldozer} "10x to get the last 10% in performance."

Lol, i have a 12-year old system (pentium III) that still runs, with the original 1GB hard drive xDD

Question, why the change from "Trusty" Intel to AMD? You stated earlier "AVCHD video editing" which is better on Intel, so again I'm confused. I am NOT trying to pick at you - instead I am trying to make you think carefully.

Oh shame on me for overseeing this - i did not notice "video editing" was in the picture! forgive me intel! :lol:

 

[hogan773]

5 years is MAX for a PC, especially HDDs - back-up OFTEN! "Trusty" can turn into "Damn PC" in a few seconds. Anything 'new' you'll be paying the {Bulldozer} "10x to get the last 10% in performance."

Question, why the change from "Trusty" Intel to AMD? You stated earlier "AVCHD video editing" which is better on Intel, so again I'm confused. I am NOT trying to pick at you - instead I am trying to make you think carefully.

Just as a 'suggestion' I would highly recommend that you 'play' virtually with Configurations + Costs - try http://www.cyberpowerpc.com/

Just trying to help...

No worries at all - I appreciate the dialogue as it helps me learn and most of you guys know way more than I do.

Re: 5 yr old computer.....note I've since added/updated with new 1TB Caviar Blacks (Dell originally had 250gb Seagate and I had bought a second 300gb which already has bit the dust actually...the original 250gb actually still works fine but unfortunately can't really hold a full drive image now as I've added more pics and video) plus have an external dock where I b/u and image the drives to an external....not a gamer and the Pentium D can still chug through the SD video editing I do now. Just means when I do a full transcoding to make a DVD I'll turn it on and let it run at night while I sleep......it can do it fine, just not FAST! Part of the desire to upgrade is because (1) I know that I can get a much faster PC now (2) having totally slept thru Vista by choice (still running XP) I now want to get Win7 and probably most importantly (3) I plan to buy an HD camcorder at some point and then I definitely don't want a Pentium D with 1.5 gigs of RAM and try to be editing AVCHD video.

Current thought re: AMD X6 is that it appeared to me based on some benchmarks that on threaded apps, of which video encoding would be one, the X6 can just lift more weight than an i5 760. As I said before, I am NOT going to spend $1000 just on the CPU and get the top of the line i7. At $190 for an i5 760 vs $265 for an unlocked 1090T that I can OC "easily" I thought the 6 cores running at 3.6 to 3.8 could give me good pull when video encoding vs a locked i5 760. If I wanted to mess around with a "full OC" then I could get the 1055T for about the same price as the 760.

I was not aware that AVCHD is "better on Intel" but would appreciate your view there.....anyway I guess I was thinking that even though the i5s are undoubtedly more advanced chip architecture, for a similar price I could get more brute power in the AMD X6 (again, the 6 core i7s are not on my wallet's radar screen)

Thanks and I really do appreciate your help in getting me thinking about the right things to consider

 

[jaquith]

Rendering is more about the CPU::GPU and to a lesser degree on cores themselves unless your Rendering App can utilize all cores; Adobe Premiere Pro CS5. It also depends on what you're encoding. In our office my media guy 'has to have' his 'Mac Pro Xeon', we built a dual Xeon WS that collects dust some of the time. {Our IDX clients have us render movies, etc for their websites.} Further, Intel + nVidia {Quadro} is the better choice.

Bench Reviews {few}:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/6
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/07/19/intel-core-i7-970-review/4
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/628441?tstart=0
http://ppbm4.com/Benchmark.html


@Gekko Shadow ^ My data is more valuable than the PC itself. Even at home I have a server to backup my data plus all the home rigs use RAID 1 {Data}; office servers RAID 10/5/6 + NAS. My best friend, who runs Morgan Stanley's network has your same Patrice & Preaching; I laughed my a$$ off when he lost his data TWICE at home.

Further, I have no patience nor trust when it comes to computers; I want them fast. Worst, I live in the US lightning & Brown-out capital of FL and even my LCD/Plasma TVs have UPS. Yes, all of my retired PCs still run; 5 years is my proscribed lifespan.

To each their own.

 

[Gekko Shadow]

Current thought re: AMD X6 is that it appeared to me based on some benchmarks that on threaded apps, of which video encoding would be one, the X6 can just lift more weight than an i5 760. As I said before, I am NOT going to spend $1000 just on the CPU and get the top of the line i7.

Lol, no one said about having to get the $1000 i7 xD there's other ones out there for about the same price as the X6 you want. If what you want is cores, then yeah the AMD had it for the best price.

Bench Reviews {few}:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/6
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/07/19/intel-core-i7-970-review/4
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/628441?tstart=0
http://ppbm4.com/Benchmark.html

^+1

@Gekko Shadow ^ My data is more valuable than the PC itself. Even at home I have a server to backup my data plus all the home rigs use RAID 1 {Data}; office servers RAID 10/5/6 + NAS. My best friend, who runs Morgan Stanley's network has your same Patrice & Preaching; I laughed my a$$ off when he lost his data TWICE at home.

Lol, oh no trust me i backup everything i have. I have backups for my backups. I gotta have my backups xD :lol:
I used to have RAID 1/0 but on IDE's (PATAS w/e ). Once i switched to SATA's i didn't go RAID no more.
And that pentium III is just for funs now. Hardly use it, and hardly need to. lol

Further, I have no patience nor trust when it comes to computers; I want them fast.

>:3 cannot disagree here!

 

[hogan773]

Well, if you don't NEED to build a new pc, maybe you should wait. According to the Anandtech review (linky hurr~) sandybridge will be quite a nice line of cpus. Of course the first sandies to hit the market (Q1 2011) will be for mainstream only, but even then the i5 they tested did really well (for not having HT enabled D:!). It's up to you really, but I would probably wait.

Course, i'm not building an 1156 build xD whoo go i7 six-core! lmao x)



Oh yes! Definitely >:3 you know you love pushing it xD! :lol:

Wow....somehow I missed the ACTUAL benchmarking article that Anandtech did in my research thus far. Based on that article, I don't see how I CAN'T wait until SB. The lower-end SB that they used was wiping the floor with the X6, even in some multithreaded apps. And it appears that the first chips will actually be in MY strikezone in terms of price (I just assumed that the new tech would start at the very top in terms of px and function, so I'd be waiting till Q42011 or something for a $200ish solution. Apparently not!)

So I guess I need to cool my heels now (darn it). As much as I'd like to do my first build ASAP, I'm gonna be feeling bad if I spend $265 on an X6 and in January I can be spending similar amounts on an i5 2500 that hauls arse. Only thing I'd really like is an unlocked MP too, which the X6 has, and I don't know how much an "X" Intel will cost. But in any case it looks like a stock SB may equal an OCed X6.

Thanks guys for the info.

Will they stop making i5 760s right around SB launch?

 

[jaquith]

^ that's an unending dog chasing his tail scenario. Moore's Law - processing speed doubling {progressively} every 18 months. [LGA 775, 1156, 1366 {X58 -> X68}]. Both the supporting architecture {MOBO} and CPU are in a constant state of change. Bleeding edge = $$.

Next, to really spin your mind is the forthcoming PCIe 2.x -> PCIe 3.x; however unless you're ready to throw $ at 3-WAY SLI/CF {in a Pro GPU} it won't matter.

Also, you stated SATA3 - BUT unless you are ready to buy the Crucial C300 SSD $300~$550 you won't be able to take ANY advantage to the SATA3; the C300 barely - I mean barely is beyond the SATA2 300 MB/s limit per device, and the fastest HDD is approximately 1/2 the SATA limit.
Example a SATA2 HHD 3 Gb/s = SATA3 HHD 6 Gb/s in SPEED; the {6 Gb/s is just the Controller and has zip to do with HDD X MB/s performance}.

Just food for thought.

 

[hogan773]

^ that's an unending dog chasing his tail scenario. Moore's Law - processing speed doubling {progressively} every 18 months. [LGA 775, 1156, 1366 {X58 -> X68}]. Both the supporting architecture {MOBO} and CPU are in a constant state of change. Bleeding edge = $$.

Next, to really spin your mind is the forthcoming PCIe 2.x -> PCIe 3.x; however unless you're ready to throw $ at 3-WAY SLI/CF {in a Pro GPU} it won't matter.

Also, you stated SATA3 - BUT unless you are ready to buy the Crucial C300 SSD $300~$550 you won't be able to take ANY advantage to the SATA3; the C300 barely - I mean barely is beyond the SATA2 300 MB/s limit per device, and the fastest HDD is approximately 1/2 the SATA limit.
Example a SATA2 HHD 3 Gb/s = SATA3 HHD 6 Gb/s in SPEED; the {6 Gb/s is just the Controller and has zip to do with HDD X MB/s performance}.

Just food for thought.

Not exactly sure the point of your msg -- saying its silly to wait (ever) because something better is around the corner? True true, but at some point it makes sense to wait right? I mean, taking it to the extreme, if I knew that TOMORROW they were launching a chip that was 1.3x as fast for $200, would I order today's $200 chip? No, I'd wait. My timelines may work a little different than others on this board, but up until now I have only been getting a new desktop every 4-5 years (however I was not a Tom's forum reader before now....I have a sneaking suspicion that if I continue to follow these boards, I wont be able to wait 4-5 years between refreshes any more!) And it appears the first Sandy Bridge chips are NOT going to be bleeding edge $1000 chips....if so, I wouldnt be waiting of course!

I also am aware that Sata6 is somewhat useless right now, but again, why WOULDNT I get a mobo that has it, because over the lifetime of the computer I may in fact have occasion to use it. I dont feel that getting a Sata6 and Usb3.0 mobo at this point results in paying bleeding edge prices.....if its an extra $15 on a $700 machine, it makes sense to me rather than regretting it in 2 yrs time, or being "forced" to upgrade then.....

 

[Gekko Shadow]

^ Lol well that makes sense. Although "regretting it" is always a possibility. The first batch of sandies will be for mainstream only. I believe by the Q3 (or Q4 idr) the sandies for performance will come out. So then you might think "oh noes! there's something better for $50!" or something lol. But the sandies would be the main arcs for a good solid year x).

Now i'm not saying don't wait - by all means go ahead x) i'm tempted as well - but of course i'm going with the X58 board so the next cpu lines for me won't be till a few month longer than the new sandies coming out.