Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Which of this 2 mobos is better?

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
February 16, 2011 1:47:48 PM

sup guys, which of this mobos is better?

GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 $179.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


ASUS M4A89TD PRO/USB3 $174.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


i cant decide in which one to get haha

More about : mobos

a b V Motherboard
February 16, 2011 2:47:41 PM

ASUS. More reliable mobo maker. Also outsells Giga by hundreds of thousands of units annually. The reason is ASUS are known to be better built, more reliable and offer better support.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
February 16, 2011 7:04:16 PM

Go with the Gigabyte. The Asus really lacks on expansion slots. Two PCI? If you use two double slot graphics cards in the Asus, your two remaining slots are PCIe x4 and PCI. With the GB, you'l have PCIe x1, PCIe x16, which will hold any PCIe card, and a PCI. GBs' are very good boards, great support and reliability.
m
0
l
Related resources
February 17, 2011 2:37:19 AM

what can you guys tell me about Asrock quality?? they mobos seem to have the same features as the ones i just posted and are a lot less expensive
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
February 17, 2011 3:37:31 AM

ASRock is good. If you plan to OC to over 4.2GHz or so, you might have a use for ASUS or Gigabyte, but ASRock is good. I'd buy an ASRock 870 Extreme3 and get a better graphics card.

Oh--and my vote's for the Gigabyte.
m
0
l
February 17, 2011 2:21:26 PM

well, im planning to overclock, so ill have to go for one of the other two haha, but im still cant decide which one to get haha, could u guys tell me the main differences between the two brands?
m
0
l
February 17, 2011 4:33:16 PM

but comparing the two mobos, the Gigabyte gives me more future proof we could say, because it has one more pci express 2.0 running at 8x so i could run triple crossfire x in the future if i want to, but still, i want to know which mobo has better quality or is better. The gigabyte also has %7 more 5 star ratings in new egg, but i dont know if i have to worry about newegg ratings
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
February 17, 2011 8:44:32 PM

You're not gonna run triple crossfire.

Gigabyte and ASUS both make excellent boards. I'd pick the Gigabyte because it has more PCI-e than the ASUS though.

But like I said, if you have a limit to your money--then the ASRock 870 Extreme 3 does everything you want and will let you OC up to 4.0GHz so long as your CPU isn't a dud (which Gigabyte and ASUS can't fix anyhow). And the Extreme 3 lets you spend an extra $80 on graphics--something you're really notice.

If you don't get the ASRock--don't get it because you can tell me how it doesn't do what you need--not because it costs less (unless you're made of money, in which case you should get an i7-950). And as we all know, you SHOULD wait for Sandy Bridge.
m
0
l
February 17, 2011 9:01:03 PM

dalauder said:
You're not gonna run triple crossfire.

Gigabyte and ASUS both make excellent boards. I'd pick the Gigabyte because it has more PCI-e than the ASUS though.

But like I said, if you have a limit to your money--then the ASRock 870 Extreme 3 does everything you want and will let you OC up to 4.0GHz so long as your CPU isn't a dud (which Gigabyte and ASUS can't fix anyhow). And the Extreme 3 lets you spend an extra $80 on graphics--something you're really notice.

If you don't get the ASRock--don't get it because you can tell me how it doesn't do what you need--not because it costs less (unless you're made of money, in which case you should get an i7-950). And as we all know, you SHOULD wait for Sandy Bridge.


i can wait for the sandy bridge and my budget is not that tight, first i was thinking in an ASUS crosshair IV formula and a Phenom ii x6 1090t, but then several people from omshardware corrected me that if it was going to be for gaming, the x4's would be better, and recommended me other boards too, like the ones in my first post, but i cant decide haha, i just saw some benchmarks from the sandy bridge and are impressive, too bad their boards where defective. Another thing i was thinking is in waiting for the bulldozer from amd, see some benchs and then draw my conclusions in which one to pick. but another thing i was thinking of is that when you play yours games with all the settings cranked up, the GPU becomes the most important part of a computer, of course you need to have a decent cpu, but just powerful enough for not being a bottleneck
m
0
l

Best solution

a b V Motherboard
February 17, 2011 10:27:18 PM

Yeah--if you look at a lot of Tom's Builds in the System builder marathons the GPU is like 40% of the total cost. And that makes sense when it's the most important performance component (assuming everything else is minimally adequate).

The 1090T costs you $70 more than a 955BE and the Crosshair IV Formula costs you $120 more than an ASRock 870 Extreme 3. If you put that $190 extra on graphics, you'll be a lot happier at the end of the day.

The thing about the Sandy Bridge systems is...if you run a part of 8800GTX's you'll see that they're less limited than a 5 year old computer they might be paired with. If you build a system today with say a Radeon 6950 2GB (w/ unlocked cores bios) and add a second in two years, the Phenom II would have trouble playing most games at highest settings 3 years from today. The Sandy Bridge would be fine through 4 years--which is a REALLY impressive lifespan to expect.
Share
February 17, 2011 11:10:56 PM

dalauder said:
Yeah--if you look at a lot of Tom's Builds in the System builder marathons the GPU is like 40% of the total cost. And that makes sense when it's the most important performance component (assuming everything else is minimally adequate).

The 1090T costs you $70 more than a 955BE and the Crosshair IV Formula costs you $120 more than an ASRock 870 Extreme 3. If you put that $190 extra on graphics, you'll be a lot happier at the end of the day.

The thing about the Sandy Bridge systems is...if you run a part of 8800GTX's you'll see that they're less limited than a 5 year old computer they might be paired with. If you build a system today with say a Radeon 6950 2GB (w/ unlocked cores bios) and add a second in two years, the Phenom II would have trouble playing most games at highest settings 3 years from today. The Sandy Bridge would be fine through 4 years--which is a REALLY impressive lifespan to expect.


Thats exactly what i was thinking of, the phenom ii x4 might be good for today's games, apps, and GPUs but spending just a bit more for the sandy bridge or even the bulldozer will give more future proof for more powerful cards in the future. and im still spending less that buying high end components today. Intel is learning that a lot of costumers are very interested in the bang for the buck, the core i5 2500k is faster that all today's I7s and costs only $230, while the lga 1155 mobos where out, they where not that expensive compared to the lga 1366 mobos or the high end am3's.
m
0
l
February 25, 2011 1:48:58 PM

Best answer selected by megagabobe1.
m
0
l
!