AMD Motherboard for X4 965 BE

[whatistaters]

Can someone give me a good motherboard (preferably under $150) for use with an AMD X4 965 BE processor? Additionally, 8gb of 1333 MHz RAM that is compatible with the motherboard too would be appreciated.

I am not looking to crossfire/sli right now, but may in future so that is an added bonus. Additionally, I plan to use a 2gb HIS radeon 6850 graphics card.

 

[Maziar]

ASUS M4A87TD EVO is a good choice

 

[rupankur]

Asus M4A89GTD PRO/USB3

 

[Maziar]

That's also good ^ the main difference between them is that the later supports CF @ dual x16 mode along with better OC'ng potential.

 

[geekapproved]

ASUS M4A87TD EVO is a good choice

No good for crossfire (16x/4x)

 

[geekapproved]

That's also good ^ the main difference between them is that the later supports CF @ dual x16 mode along with better OC'ng potential.

Nope (8x/8x)

 

[Maziar]

Actually x16x4 is good for PCI-E 2.0 boards.The difference between x16x4 and dual x8/x16 isn't noticeable in almost all games.(Again for PCI-E 2.0 boards)
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/08/25/gtx_480_sli_pcie_bandwidth_perf_x16x16_vs_x4x4/

And yes,I meant dual x8 not x16,thanks for pointing it out.

 

[sapreaper]

I dont crossfire yet either but went with Asrock's 890FX Deluxe4
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157208&cm_re=890fx_deluxe4-_-13-157-208-_-Product

dual PCIe is x16,x16, and can do up to Quad Crossfire also at x8 each.

The only issue which i think is cosmetic, is the raid utility under windows, which is just a web page built on the mobo/raid controller, shows my sata currently running at 1.5 instead of sata3 or even sata2
Again i think it is cosmetic but need to check into that.

more info here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3877/asrock-890fx-deluxe-full-review-and-an-investigation-of-thuban-performance-scaling

 

[geekapproved]

Actually x16x4 is good for PCI-E 2.0 boards.The difference between x16x4 and dual x8/x16 isn't noticeable in almost all games.(Again for PCI-E 2.0 boards)
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/08/25/gtx_480_sli_pcie_bandwidth_perf_x16x16_vs_x4x4/

And yes,I meant dual x8 not x16,thanks for pointing it out.

I don't see anything in that link you posted where they tested 16x/4x crossfire. Call me crazy.

16x/16x-16x/8x-8x/8x = ok

16x/4x = Not ok, imo.

 

[Maziar]

They tested at x4x4 speed which is even worse than x16x4,but even at x4x4,they didn't notice any major bottlenecks(so x16x4 is fine for PCI-E 2.0 boards)
"The results are actually a bit shocking to us to be honest. We weren’t so surprised that in the previous evaluation x8/x8 did not cause any differences at 2560x1600 but did at 5760x1200. However, we thought certainly at x4/x4 PCIe 2.0 mode there would be some kind of a bottleneck at 2560x1600, but the results have proven otherwise. Even with all the data that GTX 480 SLI is pushing across the PCIe bus, x4/x4 is NOT a bottleneck in a single display setup at 2560x1600 with AA enabled"