Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

To z68 or to not z68 that is the question

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
May 6, 2011 6:51:08 PM

Let me explain what I am looking for. I want to mobo that can support high end gaming, I've already purchased a 6950 2gb and the i2400. I don't plan on oc'ing thats why i saved money on the 2400 so is there anything on the z68 board worth getting from my point of view? I like the ssd caching but could i go cheaper on the mobo and just buy a 128gb ssd. If you don't recommend the z68 what p67 or h67 would you suggest?

More about : z68 z68 question

a c 716 V Motherboard
May 6, 2011 9:17:58 PM

Here's the assumption of a problem, the Z68, most of them, will have an IGPU but in similar setups e.g. AMD 890FX vs 890GX the IGU shares bandwidth with the discrete GPU or in your case the HD 6950. The question is how much of an impact will it make and how many FPS will be lost. Guessing, 5~15+% on the primary GPU.

There are some Z68's that will not have an IGPU, defeats the purpose of the Z68, but those MOBO's without all seem to be crazy highend versions aimed at 3~4 WAY with NF200's.

Further, the Z68 'SSD Caching' adds ~5MB/s which is more a gimmick than a real gain and seemingly the gains are more suited for smaller SSD's or ~40GB. Next benefit is Quick Sync which is ideal IF you create a lot of MPEG-2 or 4 videos.

If you're not planning to create MPEG-2 or 4 videos then get a P67. I like the ASUS P8P67 PRO and really like the ASUS P8P67 DELUXE.

m
0
l
May 6, 2011 9:32:34 PM

Cool okay thats what i figured, thanks I like the asus pro but looking to be a bit more budget friendly plus i don't need a lot of bells and whistles. Something like the asrock p67 pro3. Watcha think?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 6, 2011 10:05:10 PM

If you'll never CF then the ASRock P67 PRO3, otherwise I would encourage you to spend another ~$40 on the ASRock P67 EXTREME4 (B3).

ASRock is owned by ASUS and it's essentially a non-doodad version of the ASUS, and since OC is out of the question the Phase power on the ASRock is fine.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 7, 2011 1:25:19 PM

jaquith said:
Here's the assumption of a problem, the Z68, most of them, will have an IGPU but in similar setups e.g. AMD 890FX vs 890GX the IGU shares bandwidth with the discrete GPU or in your case the HD 6950. The question is how much of an impact will it make and how many FPS will be lost. Guessing, 5~15+% on the primary GPU.

There are some Z68's that will not have an IGPU, defeats the purpose of the Z68, but those MOBO's without all seem to be crazy highend versions aimed at 3~4 WAY with NF200's.

Further, the Z68 'SSD Caching' adds ~5MB/s which is more a gimmick than a real gain and seemingly the gains are more suited for smaller SSD's or ~40GB. Next benefit is Quick Sync which is ideal IF you create a lot of MPEG-2 or 4 videos.

If you're not planning to create MPEG-2 or 4 videos then get a P67. I like the ASUS P8P67 PRO and really like the ASUS P8P67 DELUXE.
Where do you get the idea that there will be noticable performance loss on the discrete graphics card? You know Chris Angelini has already done a couple articles on this...
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 7, 2011 7:45:35 PM

Here we go again. :) 

I appreciate tests as long as they contain pertinent info, example when testing 3-WAY and NF200 use 'real world' 8xAA and resolutions ;)  My trusting them goes way up, but agenda testing is useless and sadly deceptive. Do it right...

Please provide multiple links with multiple gaming benches, and then we'll have a discussion.

I've seen only H67 vs P67 with a 'low-end' GPU e.g. HD 58XX and non-OC CPU, and nothing with a GTX 5XX or HD 69XX, etc. In the OP's case obviously with a 'non-K' the differences will be reduced.

So it's in your court now.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 7, 2011 9:04:40 PM

jaquith said:
Here we go again. :) 

I appreciate tests as long as they contain pertinent info, example when testing 3-WAY and NF200 use 'real world' 8xAA and resolutions ;)  My trusting them goes way up, but agenda testing is useless and sadly deceptive. Do it right...

Please provide multiple links with multiple gaming benches, and then we'll have a discussion.

I've seen only H67 vs P67 with a 'low-end' GPU e.g. HD 58XX and non-OC CPU, and nothing with a GTX 5XX or HD 69XX, etc. In the OP's case obviously with a 'non-K' the differences will be reduced.

So it's in your court now.
What's in my court, to link to a site I don't trust? Hardly. I do my own testing, and if you want to see it you'll have to wait for the first motherboard comparison. Until then I can only refer to the one person whose data I do trust.
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 7, 2011 9:34:26 PM

I saw the link, no cross comparisons -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z68-express-lucidlo... Never, trust any 1 source for benchmarks or reviews. Don't get me wrong Tom's is an excellent resource, and if others substantiate the same them I'm a believer. I've seen too many agenda, sponsor, bias, etc tests -- I ain't no sheep.

3D Mark11 Performance {stock single GPU}
Z68 GTX 580 5769
P67 GTX 580 6040+~6120+

That isn't good.
m
0
l
May 8, 2011 3:37:05 AM

I'm also waiting for tests on Z68. I don't believe QuickSync is going to be of any use to me, but if SSD Caching is really, really good, I'll wait another month or two and grab a Z68. Yeah, that's how long it takes for these products to be available in Brazil.

I'm mostly concerned with these lower gpu scores on Z68. is that only because you're using the video through Intel graphics instead of the dedicated GPU itself?
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 8, 2011 4:07:38 AM

Zeh said:
I'm also waiting for tests on Z68. I don't believe QuickSync is going to be of any use to me, but if SSD Caching is really, really good, I'll wait another month or two and grab a Z68. Yeah, that's how long it takes for these products to be available in Brazil.

I'm mostly concerned with these lower gpu scores on Z68. is that only because you're using the video through Intel graphics instead of the dedicated GPU itself?
I'm testing Z68 right now. I'm not testing SSD caching because I'm using an SSD drive for programs. I am testing GAMING however, and finding no noticeable difference between Z68 (with Virtu installed) and P67.

I still have more testing to do, but at this point I'm calling "blowing smoke" on anyone who says there will be a noticeable performance loss at the graphics card.
m
0
l
May 8, 2011 4:53:40 AM

Crashman said:
I'm testing Z68 right now. I'm not testing SSD caching because I'm using an SSD drive for programs. I am testing GAMING however, and finding no noticeable difference between Z68 (with Virtu installed) and P67.

I still have more testing to do, but at this point I'm calling "blowing smoke" on anyone who says there will be a noticeable performance loss at the graphics card.


And here was I thinking I was the only one working saturday night. Still, I'm sure you're having more fun than I am. :D 

I know you can't spoil the article about Z68 (one I'm looking forward to), but is as far as you can tell, is there any reason I should wait 1~2 months for Z68, for a gaming (and general use) setup? Will I miss something and regret if I pull the trigger on a P67 Extreme4? The system will be i5 2500K, 2x4gb, dual 6850s, and a 60gb ssd+1tb HD.

Also, will there be an article with tests of this ssd caching feature?
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 8, 2011 7:22:08 AM

Zeh said:
And here was I thinking I was the only one working saturday night. Still, I'm sure you're having more fun than I am. :D 

I know you can't spoil the article about Z68 (one I'm looking forward to), but is as far as you can tell, is there any reason I should wait 1~2 months for Z68, for a gaming (and general use) setup? Will I miss something and regret if I pull the trigger on a P67 Extreme4? The system will be i5 2500K, 2x4gb, dual 6850s, and a 60gb ssd+1tb HD.

Also, will there be an article with tests of this ssd caching feature?
Z68 is launching soon, that's why I'm working on it. I think the NDA date is...under NDA.
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 8, 2011 2:21:48 PM

Crashman said:
I'm testing Z68 right now. I'm not testing SSD caching because I'm using an SSD drive for programs. I am testing GAMING however, and finding no noticeable difference between Z68 (with Virtu installed) and P67.

I still have more testing to do, but at this point I'm calling "blowing smoke" on anyone who says there will be a noticeable performance loss at the graphics card.

Everyone knows already that the SSD caching is a negligible increase of 5 MB/s maybe 10 MB/s and is nothing that anyone 'should' be concerned about especially since it requires, similar to HHD, multiple accessing to 'cache' the data meaning tests like ATTO or AS SSD etc shouldn't see a gain. Since the migration towards ultra fast SSD's like Vertex 3 which are maxing out the SATA3 ports what's there to gain.

However, for "GAMING" no one is running 0xAA, and a few 4xAA when their GPU(s) is/are struggling, but the vast majority "GAMING" use 8xAA or higher details e.g. 16xAA.

You intensionally left out 8xAA and 16xAA out of your NF200 testing, nor was there a clock-per-clock comparison, nor a real resolution justifying the 3-WAY with 5900+ x 1080. As you recall, I mentioned all this prior to you publishing your article(s), I knew what the results would be from when I published my Building Chart back in mid January with 2560 x 1600 as the toss-up. IMO because it would have produced results inconsistent with your hypothesis, agenda. And you wonder 'why' I don't trust results?! Further assuming you're testing 2-WAY then use HD 69XX and/or GTX 5XX. I see a lot of testing, I remember the C300 testing on a SuperMicro with SATA2 and failing to mention a $400~$500 LSI Card was used for SATA3.

If you want your testing respected include:

Anti-Aliasing:
8xAA
16xAA

3DMark 11 {Performance & Extreme}

Reuse the prior GPUs in single and SLI/CF:
HD 6950
GTX 570

Resolutions:
1920 x 1080
2560 x 1600

If the testing shows a negligible to no difference between P67 vs Z68 in CF/SLI then it would conclude that the IGPU is fully switched-off from bandwidth sharing. I'd suggest that you research the 890FX vs 890GX to compare the differences on that platform, the primary differences become evident in CF.

Z68 release date is Saturday, May 14, 2011; I have no NDA to be concerned about.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 8, 2011 10:03:00 PM

jaquith said:
Everyone knows already that the SSD caching is a negligible increase of 5 MB/s maybe 10 MB/s and is nothing that anyone 'should' be concerned about especially since it requires, similar to HHD, multiple accessing to 'cache' the data meaning tests like ATTO or AS SSD etc shouldn't see a gain. Since the migration towards ultra fast SSD's like Vertex 3 which are maxing out the SATA3 ports what's there to gain.

However, for "GAMING" no one is running 0xAA, and a few 4xAA when their GPU(s) is/are struggling, but the vast majority "GAMING" use 8xAA or higher details e.g. 16xAA.

You intensionally left out 8xAA and 16xAA out of your NF200 testing...
I intentionally left out 8x AA and 16x AA from the games because some of the games didnt' support 8x AA. Using 4x made the charts easier to read, so I only had 1x of you rather than the 16x of newbies to deal with in the interpretation of results.

Motherboard roundups don't split the cumulative results into No AA / AA, so a couple of the games in the next roundup have higher settings.

Of course I did have an objective: I wanted to find the best CPU/GPU combination. If you're looking for someone who isn't "biased" towards superior performance, I suggest CNET.

And of course my results were different that some others even at the same game settings, because they were "intentionally" CPU-bottlenecking their graphics. Of course I believe that its ineptitude rather than intent that caused others to use slower CPU clocks, but the fact remains that evaluating GPU performance requires the removal of other bottlenecks to the greatest practical degree.

m
0
l
May 9, 2011 12:55:23 AM


Crashman said:
I'm testing Z68 right now. I'm not testing SSD caching because I'm using an SSD drive for programs. I am testing GAMING however, and finding no noticeable difference between Z68 (with Virtu installed) and P67.

I still have more testing to do, but at this point I'm calling "blowing smoke" on anyone who says there will be a noticeable performance loss at the graphics card.



Interesting. I'm building a pc mostly for pic/videoediting, and I'm waiting for the z68 to be out. For current games I play I'd say the IGP is more than enough (OpenTTD, FarmVille, Nethack, Creeper World & CivV), and later I'll buy real GPU when Diablo3 comes out.

Not sure how much you can reply due to your nda, but if you can cover some of these questions without problems, I'd be happy to hear your comments. I've tried to search for answers, but seems slim. I guess everyone has an nda.

-Is Virtu mature enough to be out next week? (i.e. if you yourself bought one next week, would you use it, or disable?)
-No point enabling virtu until I get a discrete GPU, right?
-How many boards do support virtu? The one surfaced in Taiwan didn't have support. Are all Asus MBs supporting?
-Currently you must connect cable to MB connector, not GPU. Right? And it might change later? What was drawbacks in each scenario?
-I'm also curious on the 2560x1600x32b performance, as that's my native screen. Will my IGP already die with those even on those easy games? (HD3000)



jaquith said:

Z68 release date is Saturday, May 14, 2011; I have no NDA to be concerned about.


Where did you find that information? I thought it'd be this Tuesday.
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 1:18:01 AM

No your agenda was to show to unsuspecting viewers that the P67 + NF200 was the Ultimate Gaming platform over X58. Using an i7 920 vs i7 2600K as the 'ultimate' comparison on a 60Hz 30"; you know for the same $ a 960 or better an unlocked i7 9XX would have been reasonable. Ultimate X58 is an EVGA 4-WAY or UD9 + 980X or now 990X OC to 4.6GHz+~5GHz and Koolance.

What were your 8xAA and 16xAA results? I know you did them. Post them here.

Footnote, I use P6X58D-E + i7 930 for dummy terminals to my servers with the occasional PHP/SQL code testing, plus a couple for home PC use; all identical except mine. Never would I dream of running those ASUS's as a Gaming Rig. To understand 'me' look at David Truby then multiple his income by 50X+.

In high-end gaming practical goes out the door. The last time I watched any CNET was when they had cable syndication in the 90's. Unfortunately, most of the benchmarks that interest me are from forum members...

I say all of this to encourage better testing, and I 'get' sponsors and I get 'agendas' but what I don't get is someone trying to convince someone like me?

Again, my thinking - I have an 'okay' gaming rig now, for me to ditch it for a P67 would make zero sense. I've got laser focus on the Z79, assuming Intel doesn't ditch another chipset to x3. Then lets compare 'mine' vs 'yours' -- again I'm not a consumer fanboy so P55 -> P67 isn't me and X58 -> 'Z79' is me. Further, IF Intel continues its path of a new chipset every 2~3 months I may wait even longer. Both the P67 and Z68 are already outdated with the Q1 2012 Panther Point.

Intel is out of their minds!
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 2:15:51 AM

It means the I made an oopsy, multitasking error opening Outlook confusing my schedule and looking at the wrong date. Wednesday is the P67 and Saturday my office meeting.

edit: I would not advise you to buy ANY MOBO day 1, give it a couple of weeks to let the dust settle and see customer feedback and forum problems. In as much as I want the Z79 there's a ZERO chance I'm buying day 1, after a lot of feedback and at least a BIOS revision or better 2 then yep.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 3:58:04 AM

jaquith said:
No your agenda was to show to unsuspecting viewers that the P67 + NF200 was the Ultimate Gaming platform over X58. Using an i7 920 vs i7 2600K as the 'ultimate' comparison on a 60Hz 30"; you know for the same $ a 960 or better an unlocked i7 9XX would have been reasonable. Ultimate X58 is an EVGA 4-WAY or UD9 + 980X or now 990X OC to 4.6GHz+~5GHz and Koolance.

What were your 8xAA and 16xAA results? I know you did them. Post them here.
Why would I do them? Unlike you, I'm honest. Now go away troll.

Edit: Really, just go away, you're deceiving people who don't know any better. You're giving them advice that you know yourself is wrong. And you're calling me dishonest while dispensing that dishonest advice. That's why I called you a troll. So seriously, go away (or at least grow a conscience).
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 5:43:21 PM

I'm the Troll?! That would suggest that I'm deliberately misleading and deceiving people. I think you're projecting yourself on to me. ;) 

I know I'm not.

"Apples to apples, I've found I've lost approximately 2-5% performance switching from pure 16x X58 lanes to 8x P67 lanes with a NF200 tossed in there." http://www.overclock.net/graphics-cards-general/903852-...

Tom's ran an early article comparing X58 vs P67 before yours and stated just what I've been saying all along that resolutions 2560 x 1600 are a toss-up and higher the X58 pulls ahead.

The reputation in other forums is screaming bias and fixed results and you're contributing.

Keeping it real, then there's games that do benefit from multi-core including 4-cores vs 6-cores:

• Medal of Honor ; 10%+
• Arcania - Gothic 4 ; 40%+
• Civilization 5 ;
• Dead Rising 2 ; 20%+
• Dragon Age ; 5%+
• F1 2010 ; 10%+
• Lost Planet 2 ; 15%+
• RUSE ; 20%+
• Anno 1404 ; 30%+
• Metro 2033 ; 20%
• Prince of Persia ; 10%+
• Bad Company 2 ; 10%+
etc...
ref - http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,794274/From-Medal-of...

And ... I'm the deceptive one! :lol:  Tell people the whole truth - it would be a pleasant experience.
m
0
l
May 9, 2011 6:30:37 PM

I don't understand what anyones talking about :3 I think I'll just get a P67. SSD's are too expensive for me to use the new caching feature.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 6:47:28 PM

jaquith said:
I'm the Troll?! That would suggest that I'm deliberately misleading and deceiving people.
I'm referring to your first statement since all my testing shows no performance loss on the primary graphics adapter (discrete) with the integrated enabled. Now if you want to say something silly, like....

"Favoring the faster CPU proves that you're biased"

Well...it doesn't bother me to hear that at all :p 
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 6:52:33 PM

David164v8 said:
I don't understand what anyones talking about :3 I think I'll just get a P67. SSD's are too expensive for me to use the new caching feature.
It's not about drive caching, it's about transcoding video at breakneck speed with Quick Sync
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 6:52:56 PM

We're arguing an old heated topic, your post unfortunately has become ground zero. Crashman has sadly reduced it to name calling.

For the vast majority and typical gaming the P67 or Z68 either is perfectly fine. If you don't care about or need Quick Sync or SSD Caching then the P67 is the most cost effective choice. Then there's the good/bad of new with the Z68.
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 9, 2011 7:17:58 PM

Crashman said:
I'm referring to your first statement since all my testing shows no performance loss on the primary graphics adapter (discrete) with the integrated enabled. Now if you want to say something silly, like....

"Favoring the faster CPU proves that you're biased"

Well...it doesn't bother me to hear that at all :p 


The [b said:
question is how much of an impact will it make and how many FPS will be lost. Guessing, 5~15+% on the primary GPU.]The question is how much of an impact will it make and how many FPS will be lost. Guessing, 5~15+% on the primary GPU.
[/b]
This is Trolling?! You owe me an apology - big time! You're way out of line. I made absolutely no de facto claim(s) regarding the Z68. You love to argue just as much as I do :kaola: 

I'd appreciate you editing-out inflammatory words, equally I'm fine with hitting the edit button.
m
0
l
May 10, 2011 12:32:41 PM

Hey Crashman,

I recently purchased the P67 V3 not knowing about the Z68.
I do a lot of 3D Modelling as well as a pretty hardcore gamer.

But I take it in your words that the Z68 will be worth the wait for me and I should defiantly return the P67. As for my rendering the difference is pretty substantial?

m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 10, 2011 1:33:25 PM

hearmenow said:
Hey Crashman,

I recently purchased the P67 V3 not knowing about the Z68.
I do a lot of 3D Modelling as well as a pretty hardcore gamer.

But I take it in your words that the Z68 will be worth the wait for me and I should defiantly return the P67. As for my rendering the difference is pretty substantial?
It's currently only compatible with MediaEspresso and Media Converter 7 AFIAK. But it is a big difference, huge in fact.
m
0
l
May 10, 2011 4:17:30 PM

Crashman said:
It's currently only compatible with MediaEspresso and Media Converter 7 AFIAK. But it is a big difference, huge in fact.


Intel says:

Many independent software vendors (ISVs) have begun optimizing their products for this new technology, including:
Arcsoft MediaConverter*
Arcsoft MediaImpression*
Badaboom Media Converter*
Corel Digital Studio*
CyberLink MediaEspresso*
CyberLink PowerDirector*
MainConcept*
Movavi Video Converter*
Roxio Creator*


I'm not using any of those, but I'm hoping the SWs I'm using would start supporting soon. Otherwise no point for me waiting for the Z68 to come out.

That would make me feel really dumb for first waiting, and then buying on day 1. And it wouldn't even do anything for me :p 
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 10, 2011 4:37:19 PM

Not to butt in, but go to your vendor's site to see if there's a plug-in. Quick Sync is accelerated transcoding.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 10, 2011 4:38:20 PM

tpatana said:
Intel says:

Many independent software vendors (ISVs) have begun optimizing their products for this new technology, including:
Arcsoft MediaConverter*
Arcsoft MediaImpression*
Badaboom Media Converter*
Corel Digital Studio*
CyberLink MediaEspresso*
CyberLink PowerDirector*
MainConcept*
Movavi Video Converter*
Roxio Creator*


I'm not using any of those, but I'm hoping the SWs I'm using would start supporting soon. Otherwise no point for me waiting for the Z68 to come out.

That would make me feel really dumb for first waiting, and then buying on day 1. And it wouldn't even do anything for me :p 
I'm going to let you in on a secret. Quick Sync's super-fast transcoding is all on the DECODE side. for ENCODE, it's siimlar in performance to Cuda encoding. I found that out by disabling and enabling acceleration for each. Don't tell anyone our little secret.
m
0
l
May 10, 2011 5:08:32 PM

Crashman said:
I'm going to let you in on a secret. Quick Sync's super-fast transcoding is all on the DECODE side. for ENCODE, it's siimlar in performance to Cuda encoding. I found that out by disabling and enabling acceleration for each. Don't tell anyone our little secret.


When i convert a avi file to DVD, is that encoding or decoding, or both? Also, is there a software that utilizes the GPU (or might use QuickSync) for this particular task?
m
0
l
May 10, 2011 5:22:08 PM

Crashman said:
I'm going to let you in on a secret. Quick Sync's super-fast transcoding is all on the DECODE side. for ENCODE, it's siimlar in performance to Cuda encoding. I found that out by disabling and enabling acceleration for each. Don't tell anyone our little secret.


Lucky for me, I'm planning to do both on my pc. But my SW still don't support quick sync, so doesn't matter for me yet, but I'm hoping they start supporting soon.

But now I have more detailed questions, you mind PM me (username at gmail.com), don't want to crap too much off-topic stuff here?
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 10, 2011 5:36:48 PM

Zeh said:
When i convert a avi file to DVD, is that encoding or decoding, or both? Also, is there a software that utilizes the GPU (or might use QuickSync) for this particular task?
It's both.

Here's the thing, if you're going from a larger format to a smaller format, you're probably leaning pretty heavy on the decode function. That's probably why Intel is concentrating so heavily on apps that are designed to make HD content into portable device formats.
m
0
l
May 10, 2011 11:17:38 PM

Cheers for the info Crash, Just another question...

looking at http://forum.overclock3d.net/index.php?/topic/35297-int...

I'm pretty confused, obviously the more expensive the better... but, I have around £150 quid to spend is there one that you would particularly recommend. I have no idea when it comes to motherboards

Many thanks for any help in advance!
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 10, 2011 11:20:47 PM

hearmenow said:
Cheers for the info Crash, Just another question...

looking at http://forum.overclock3d.net/index.php?/topic/35297-int...

I'm pretty confused, obviously the more expensive the better... but, I have around £150 quid to spend is there one that you would particularly recommend. I have no idea when it comes to motherboards

Many thanks for any help in advance!
You'll have a bunch of information soon, but only on the first few boards I could get.
m
0
l
May 10, 2011 11:23:58 PM

Ah awesome. I recently ordered

MSI GTX 560 TWIN FROZR II 1GB GDDR5 Dual DVI HDMI Out PCI-E Graphics Card
Intel Core i5-2500K 3.30GHz (Sandybridge) Socket LGA1155 Processor - Retail
Coolermaster Hyper 212 Plus CPU Cooler
GB Mushkin Blackline LV #996995 (2x4GB) DDR3 1600MHz 9-9-9-24

https://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Components/Motherboards...

Would probably be the best bet?

Sorry for the Newbish questions xD
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 3:05:09 AM

hearmenow said:
Ah awesome. I recently ordered

MSI GTX 560 TWIN FROZR II 1GB GDDR5 Dual DVI HDMI Out PCI-E Graphics Card
Intel Core i5-2500K 3.30GHz (Sandybridge) Socket LGA1155 Processor - Retail
Coolermaster Hyper 212 Plus CPU Cooler
GB Mushkin Blackline LV #996995 (2x4GB) DDR3 1600MHz 9-9-9-24

https://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Components/Motherboards...

Would probably be the best bet?

Sorry for the Newbish questions xD


Don't you void your warranty by using aftermarket coolers? I've read it somewhere, it just doesn't make much sense to me. I *was* going to buy that same cooler, but im in doubt.
Hell, i'm going way off-topic here.
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 7:10:41 AM

meh, like they know. =/
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 8:29:35 AM

z68 at newegg now go buy it lol
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 8:37:59 AM

jaquith said:
Here we go again. :) 

I appreciate tests as long as they contain pertinent info, example when testing 3-WAY and NF200 use 'real world' 8xAA and resolutions ;)  My trusting them goes way up, but agenda testing is useless and sadly deceptive. Do it right...

Please provide multiple links with multiple gaming benches, and then we'll have a discussion.

I've seen only H67 vs P67 with a 'low-end' GPU e.g. HD 58XX and non-OC CPU, and nothing with a GTX 5XX or HD 69XX, etc. In the OP's case obviously with a 'non-K' the differences will be reduced.

So it's in your court now.


FWIW, a local DIY magazine just published some benchies results. The test setup was i7-2600k, Asus P8Z68-V Pro vs Asus P8P67, 6970 2GB, 2x2Gb DDR3-1333, W7-64 bit on Catalyst 11.4

Z68 seems to do slightly better than P67 or at least we're not seeing any performance degradation by having the iGPU in addition to the dGPU.

Now to me, the bigger question is can I still take advantage of QuickSync if I intend to have only one displayed plugged into the dGPU...
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 11, 2011 1:47:00 PM

I'd read this, this is where my assumptions came from in the first place -> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z68-express-lucidlo... The first 3 paragraphs seem to contradict each other, but statements like "Mainly, you’re now able to run natively from discrete graphics and virtualize HD Graphics instead" indicate that you can.

Also, "d-Mode is provided for demanding 3D gamers to achieve 3D performance of discrete GPU installed in the system. In this mode, Virtu allows user to utilize Intel special features such as transcoding, while display is connected to discrete GPU." http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-r...

Maybe Tom's {Crashman's} are different.
m
0
l
a c 716 V Motherboard
May 11, 2011 3:09:34 PM

And I was the Troll! Some people's guesses are better then some people's facts. My GUESSING was pretty darn good.

The [b said:
question is how much of an impact will it make and how many FPS will be lost. Guessing, 5~15+% on the primary GPU.]The question is how much of an impact will it make and how many FPS will be lost. Guessing, 5~15+% on the primary GPU.
[/b]
This is Trolling?! Crashman - You owe me an apology - big time! You're way out of line.

While Lucid's "Virtu" GPU virtualization software still has some rough edges— you must manually designate programs you want it to apply to, and not all programs can be so designated— but within these relatively minor constraints it works very well, imposing roughly a 5% performance penalty as compared with a "native" Radeon 6850 in my testing, and saving a significant amount of power when the performance of the discrete video card isn't needed. Remember, though, that multi-GPU setups cannot benefit from Virtu's i-Mode and its power-saving features. Perhaps NVIDIA's forthcoming Synergy will enable power savings for NVIDIA SLI setups.

Reference -> http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 5:24:23 PM

it was approx. a month ago that jaquith believed Z68 platforms would be much inferior to P67 platforms and was telling people in tom’s forums that Z68…

- should be used with a non-K cpu
- would only allow the cpu to be overclocked
- would have a single x16 pcie slot
- should be used with the onboard gpu (but a single discrete gpu could be used)
- would not be capable of SLI of CFX
- could only use one monitor (he still believes this)
- was only suitable for desktop/HTPC use
- would typically be underpowered with limited vrm phases
(amongst other erroneous claims)

ladies and gentlemen, jaquith is indeed a troll

he / she is also like a politician who answers the question they wanted to hear and not the question you asked them

i would highly recommended that any claim he makes be verified by other sources before spending any of your hard earned cash

and i do not believe anyone owes him / her an apology
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 5:26:57 PM

oh... and if you see any post in other threads about his explanation of vrm phases - he doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about
m
0
l
May 11, 2011 5:39:28 PM

tpatana said:
On the article http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-z68-express-smart-r...

it says:

Natively, Intel's output is limited to 1920x1200.

Why's that? I have 2560x1600. Can't I run it native from IGP? Does it support Dual-Link DVI?


Furthermore, at Asrock page http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=Z68%20Extre...


- Supports DVI with max. resolution up to 1920x1200 @ 60Hz
- Supports D-Sub with max. resolution up to 2048x1536 @ 75Hz
- Supports DisplayPort with max. resolution up to 2560x1600 @ 60Hz
m
0
l
May 12, 2011 5:31:40 AM

I found this post funnier than hell. Most of the reviews are saying the Z68 is a mixed bag. Besides the Z68 yielding slower frame rates the SSD & USB are also slower  http://www.anandtech.com/show/4330/asus-p8z68v-review/5 I like Tom's but lately a lot of their articles don't jive with most other sites articles.
 
It seems after the P67 bug things changed, Gigabyte are building nonspec Z68's without the iGPU I assume in an effort to ward off the bad P67 B2 stigma or maybe the confusing dGPU vs iGPU setups. I'm certain this wasn't in the Intel play book, and lacking the iGPU it kills the Z68 intended transcoding advantage. It seems like both the P67 and Z68 are proving grounds for the Z79 over the next few months.
 
I was shocked with the H264 encoding and Z68 were a mere 2 FPS faster and 10% faster transcoding 121s versus 135s from one article. What's going on, I was expecting a lot more like half the time.
 
The LucidLogix control panel scares the hell out of me, I've read it still has some bugs plus limited support. It seems like one more thing to have to deal with and maintain. It's  tough enough to keep up with graphic drivers, game patches, but an added burden and cog in the wheel seems bad.
 
SSD caching seems to be poorly thought out financially,  buying a $100 SSD to make my $70 HDD plus the Z68 premium of $30 to $40 to get 1/2 the pure SSD speeds seems nuts. Get a Vertex 3 and a HDD.
 
Gaming I'd get the P67 or wait for the Z79.
 
Majority of gaming get a P67 and a K processor, and mixing it up the Z68. For a nice desktop I would consider the Z68 using the iGPU most people don't over clock. I would never blow $350 either on a P67 or Z68 board, and I do care about phases if I over clock.
 
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 12, 2011 8:59:00 AM

sgxmombo said:
I found this post funnier than hell. Most of the reviews are saying the Z68 is a mixed bag. Besides the Z68 yielding slower frame rates the SSD & USB are also slower  http://www.anandtech.com/show/4330/asus-p8z68v-review/5 I like Tom's but lately a lot of their articles don't jive with most other sites articles. 
Easy answer: Tom's articles are right. Really, I've seen other sites use strange configurations just to prove that something they don't like is "bad" or that something they do like is "good".

But some of the conflicting data is coming from sites that connected to INTEGRATED output rather than DISCRETE output. And that's a problem, because the discrete GPU is forced to feed its data back through the PCIe and then the integrated GPU to get output in that configuration. You can save some power, yes, but there's a performance penalty to using the onboard graphics output as primary.

The problem goes away when you use the discrete card's outputs. In fact, I have not found any negatives with the Z68, and I've done a lot of testing. You'll see an article tomorrow with the results.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
May 12, 2011 5:14:43 PM

First of all -- enough with the war between jaquith and "Crashman." Crashman -- you _work_ here. Jaquith is a unpaid contributor to this site -- you can't just call him names because you don't like being asked hard questions.

Second of all, there are negatives to Z68 relative to P67 -- the price. What exactly do you get for Z68 that you can't get with H67 or P67? You get a combination of overclocking, onboard graphics, quicksync, and SSD caching.

Is that worth the extra cost? I would say no.

SSD caching has been shown to have very limited impact on actual use. Is there a performance increase? Yeah, but not a big one. Is it worth an extra $40 or even $20? I would say no.

On the quicksync -- I just don't see the application. First of all, quicksync does nothing for _encoding_. All it does it increase the speed of _decoding_. So if you're ripping a DVD and encoding it for your iPhone, it doesn't help. The only way it helps is with transcoding, so from iPhone format to another format. The way it helps is decoding from the iPhone format -- it makes _that_ faster. How much does that really help the average user?

And even that only works with certain transcoding software packages -- I don't know which ones -- and if you have a discrete card, you have to install some third-party app to switch between the discrete card and the processors built-in quick-sync function.

I didn't care for the Tom's review on Z68 yesterday at all. It goes through and talks about all this that I've said and then basically says that if you're an "enthusiast" user, you should buy the Z68.

On the price delta, I found the review very interesting:

Quote:

Interestingly, the price difference between Z68 and P67 is smaller than you might think. According to contacts in Taiwan, manufacturers have been drawing down their P67 inventory in preparation for Z68. There will be Z68 bundle packages that bear a price premium, but early quotes suggest similar pricing to the current P67 selection. Instead of charging more, some motherboard vendors intend to swallow the cost upfront, which is great news for anyone about to build a Sandy Bridge-based system.


While there may be no price delta in the future, there certainly is one right now. Just comparing the P8Z68 Pro ($210+$8 shipping) to the P8P67 Pro ($179; free shipping) on newegg yields a delta of $39. I don't think quicksync is worth that.
m
0
l
!