Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Best p67 or z68 motherboard?

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
August 10, 2011 4:56:02 PM

Hello, I am currently in the process of building a new pc for gaming, you can see my current list of selected components towards the bottom of this thread. One thing I'm having a hard time deciding on is the motherboard. I'm looking at the z68 boards and at the moment(but also now looking at p67) I'm looking at the a Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD5 but am not 100% on my decision so I'm asking for some recommendations on the best overall z68 board.

More about : p67 z68 motherboard

a c 717 V Motherboard
August 10, 2011 5:11:21 PM

Depends on you 'GPU' goals.

2-WAY + PhysX + OC = Gigabyte's UD5 lines
3-WAY - PhysX + OC = Gigabyte's UD7 lines
3-WAY + PhysX + OC = {P67} ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution {period}

There's no benefit for Z68 vs P67 in gaming, and SSD Caching is a joke with 'Gaming' setup; get a 120GB+ SSD and it's 2x~4X faster.
m
0
l
August 10, 2011 5:21:21 PM

jaquith said:
Depends on you 'GPU' goals.

2-WAY + PhysX + OC = Gigabyte's UD5 lines
3-WAY - PhysX + OC = Gigabyte's UD7 lines
3-WAY + PhysX + OC = {P67} ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution {period}

There's no benefit for Z68 vs P67 in gaming, and SSD Caching is a joke with 'Gaming' setup; get a 120GB+ SSD and it's 2x~4X faster.


At the moment my plan is to get a single GPU (GTX 570) and later when the prices have gone down grabbing a second. Whats wrong with SSD caching?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 717 V Motherboard
August 10, 2011 5:43:32 PM

SSD Cashing is as good as what's on the SSD itself otherwise your down to pokey-slow HDD speed + latency.

IF you have 20GB SSD:
OS = Fast
Game1 = Fast ; playing Game1 repeatedly until the SSD is FULL and/or 'Cached' to SSD.
Game2 = Slow ; switch to Game2 HDD speeds

then switching Games; Game 2 played a few times
OS = Fast
Game1 = Slow ; switch to Game1 HDD speeds ; Game1 is 'Flushed' from the Cache
Game2 = Fast ; playing Game1 repeatedly until the SSD is FULL

The USAGE DETERMINES the speed; aka Cache. To most Gamer's this is CrAzY, and the cost of e.g. 64GB SSD is not so far off from a 120GB~128GB SSD; look at the cost per GB. So in the end it's like a dog chasing it's tail. Now if you add, as most do Game3~Game10 and play then in some form of rotation then you end-up with HDD 'speeds.'
m
0
l
August 10, 2011 9:45:13 PM

jaquith said:
SSD Cashing is as good as what's on the SSD itself otherwise your down to pokey-slow HDD speed + latency.

IF you have 20GB SSD:
OS = Fast
Game1 = Fast ; playing Game1 repeatedly until the SSD is FULL and/or 'Cached' to SSD.
Game2 = Slow ; switch to Game2 HDD speeds

then switching Games; Game 2 played a few times
OS = Fast
Game1 = Slow ; switch to Game1 HDD speeds ; Game1 is 'Flushed' from the Cache
Game2 = Fast ; playing Game1 repeatedly until the SSD is FULL

The USAGE DETERMINES the speed; aka Cache. To most Gamer's this is CrAzY, and the cost of e.g. 64GB SSD is not so far off from a 120GB~128GB SSD; look at the cost per GB. So in the end it's like a dog chasing it's tail. Now if you add, as most do Game3~Game10 and play then in some form of rotation then you end-up with HDD 'speeds.'


Wow... thats making m rethink going z68. So P67 would be better for gaming then? I was planning on getting an SSD for my my OS and games but if thats how it will work with a Z68 its making me rethink my choice. About that Asus board, what makes you recommend it? The huge number of negative rating in comparison to the positive ones on newegg makes me a bit leery.
m
0
l
a c 717 V Motherboard
August 10, 2011 10:09:32 PM

Both the P67 and Z68 perform about the same for 'Gaming'; the benchmarks I've seen show identical to perhaps a small FPS loss {1-2} in Z68 - the UD7 same FPS.

Z68 has shown some USB and SATA MB/s loss -> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4330/asus-p8z68v-review/5

Z68 SSD Caching works, but it works as I stated.

Z68 iGPU {i-Mode & d-Mode} - I hate the Virtu Control panel, IF a game is not listed it defaults to i-Mode FPS in other words - WTF?!

ADVANTAGE Z68 - IF you plan to produce a lot of MPEG-2/4 then Z68 is a MUST HAVE :) 

If you mean the ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution then it has perfect PCIe spacing, and it's the only 'stock' PCIe arrangement where you can have 3-WAY SLI + PhysX GPU. I told David's client that his MSI Big Bang-Marshal won't work, http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/293079-30-asus-maximu... Posts + PMs, and begged them to use the ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution so they 'could' fit 4 GPUs. See -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5epgiEpjCg
m
0
l
August 10, 2011 10:29:31 PM

jaquith said:
Both the P67 and Z68 perform about the same for 'Gaming'; the benchmarks I've seen show identical to perhaps a small FPS loss {1-2} in Z68 - the UD7 same FPS.

Z68 has shown some USB and SATA MB/s loss -> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4330/asus-p8z68v-review/5

Z68 SSD Caching works, but it works as I stated.

Z68 iGPU {i-Mode & d-Mode} - I hate the Virtu Control panel, IF a game is not listed it defaults to i-Mode FPS in other words - WTF?!

ADVANTAGE Z68 - IF you plan to produce a lot of MPEG-2/4 then Z68 is a MUST HAVE :) 

If you mean the ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution then it has perfect PCIe spacing, and it's the only 'stock' PCIe arrangement where you can have 3-WAY SLI + PhysX GPU. I told David's client that his MSI Big Bang-Marshal won't work, http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/293079-30-asus-maximu... Posts + PMs, and begged them to use the ASUS P8P67 WS Revolution so they 'could' fit 4 GPUs. See -> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5epgiEpjCg


MPEG-2/4? Sorry if this is something I should be aware of but this is the first computer I'll have ever built myself so I've been on a self directed crash course in computers these last few days and I've likely missed some or a lot of things on the way. :p 
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
August 10, 2011 10:36:59 PM

If you are not tri-sli'ing or tri-cf'ing, get the board with the most value, most features, good reviews, and offers some future proofing. That board is the ASrock Extreme4 z68 gen3. It will be PCIe 3.0 compatible with ivy bridge (not that it is needed but I see more of a likelihood of utilizing that versus tri-sli'ing..)

It is also waayy less money than the gigabyte ud5 line...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
August 10, 2011 11:18:31 PM

chillin15 said:
If you are not tri-sli'ing or tri-cf'ing, get the board with the most value, most features, good reviews, and offers some future proofing. That board is the ASrock Extreme4 z68 gen3. It will be PCIe 3.0 compatible with ivy bridge (not that it is needed but I see more of a likelihood of utilizing that versus tri-sli'ing..)

It is also waayy less money than the gigabyte ud5 line...

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


In all likely hood I won't be going tri sli or cf, 2 cards would be enough for me and thats not even gonna happen likely for a while till there is a price drop on the card I'll be getting. I'll have to read up on that board some, is it safe to say thats the board you own? lol I had looked at asrocks initially when I started researching my build but the fact that they only have a 2 year warranty as opposed to most other companies 3 struck me as a little odd. Even with the Gigabyte board I was looking at I'm still a good amount under my budget so cost isn't really a concern. I've heard a lot of good things about gigabyte boards and since the money was in my favor I looked at it because why not? :p  But If there is a board that gives me as much or more bang for my buck for less that is great quality I'd be happy to look into it. I'm not dead set on anything one way or another so I'm open to any suggestions, be it company or chipset. Only things I'm 100% sure on are my processor choice(i5-2500k) and gpu( x1 GTX 570, an additional one down the road) everything else is flexible to me.
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
August 10, 2011 11:24:37 PM

I do not own that board but will very soon :) 

If you want to OC above or near 5GHZ, the gigabyte boards are for you - the UD5 line is great for OC'ing.

But if you want to OC below 4.8 ghz and keep your vcore below 1.5, the asrock board I linked you to is great for that.

If you want best bang for your money and a modern bios (which gigabyte does not have), go with either asus or asrock.

m
0
l
August 10, 2011 11:42:25 PM

chillin15 said:
I do not own that board but will very soon :) 

If you want to OC above or near 5GHZ, the gigabyte boards are for you - the UD5 line is great for OC'ing.

But if you want to OC below 4.8 ghz and keep your vcore below 1.5, the asrock board I linked you to is great for that.

If you want best bang for your money and a modern bios (which gigabyte does not have), go with either asus or asrock.


Vcore? Whats this? Apologies if I should know but this will be the first pc I've built without someone guiding me so there are likely lots of gaps in my knowledge. The BIOS thing was the one thing that was kind of bothering me about the gigabyte, I'd love to have a more modern one but its not 100% necessary, just a nice feature.

Oh and a quick question about PCIe 3.0, could those slots be used with 2.0 cards? I noticed the asrock you mentioned only has one 2.0 slot. Would this prevent me from going sli with two 2.0 cards?
m
0
l
a b V Motherboard
August 10, 2011 11:47:33 PM

Here you go, look at this thread to compare features, etc:

http://www.overclock.net/intel-motherboards/916189-comp...

Vcore is just the voltage supplied to the processor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_core_voltage

You want to keep this as low as possible with your overclock as high as possible until one tells the other it is not happy. Again, any decent 10 or 12 phase mobo will get you to the mid 4.5ghz with decent voltage increases. If you want to go beyond 5ghz, go with the gigabyte ud5 line but there is no reason real world benefit to go beyond 5ghz..
m
0
l
August 11, 2011 12:20:30 AM

chillin15 said:
Here you go, look at this thread to compare features, etc:

http://www.overclock.net/intel-motherboards/916189-comp...

Vcore is just the voltage supplied to the processor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_core_voltage

You want to keep this as low as possible with your overclock as high as possible until one tells the other it is not happy. Again, any decent 10 or 12 phase mobo will get you to the mid 4.5ghz with decent voltage increases. If you want to go beyond 5ghz, go with the gigabyte ud5 line but there is no reason real world benefit to go beyond 5ghz..


Ahh ok. Now in regards to overclocking I'm very inexperienced and in fact my current computer...

Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz
EVGA 640-P2-N821-AR GeForce 8800 GTS (in SLI)
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2
EVGA 122-CK-NF68-A1

I've never gotten to hold an OC the few times I tried, I'm gonna try in earnest with this new build because its something I've always wanted to due but never could quite figure it out on my current one(even people I know who knew more then me and tried to help me do it couldn't get it to hold so maybe its the board?). So I don't need to go crazy, my goal is to be able to run more graphics intensive games much more smoothly at higher FPS, something my current pc is really showing its age with. So so long as I can run pretty much everything currently out or coming out in the near future I'll be happy.

I also have a quick question in regards to the extreme4, I noticed it only has 1 PCIe 2.0 slot and two 3.0 slots. Can the 3.0s be used with 2.0 cards? I know nothing about 3.0 since its not out yet I haven't read anything on it. I also noticed on that chart that the extreme 4 is listed as having 8 phase for power but I've also seen it as 8+4, what does this mean?
m
0
l
a c 717 V Motherboard
August 11, 2011 12:53:08 AM

witches_jelly said:
In all likely hood I won't be going tri sli or cf, 2 cards would be enough for me

As I mentioned:
Depends on you 'GPU' goals.

2-WAY + PhysX + OC = Gigabyte's UD5 lines <OR> ANY of these -> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submi...|13-128-492^13-128-492-TS%2C13-128-513^13-128-513-TS%2C13-131-730^13-131-730-TS%2C13-131-771^13-131-771-TS%2C13-188-082^13-188-082-TS
m
0
l
August 11, 2011 1:03:45 AM

jaquith said:
As I mentioned:
Depends on you 'GPU' goals.

2-WAY + PhysX + OC = Gigabyte's UD5 lines <OR> ANY of these -> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submi...|13-128-492^13-128-492-TS%2C13-128-513^13-128-513-TS%2C13-131-730^13-131-730-TS%2C13-131-771^13-131-771-TS%2C13-188-082^13-188-082-TS


I've read a bit about PhysX but don't understand how to determine the proper board for it. I did a search on those boards you mentioned and I saw nothing about it.
m
0
l
a c 717 V Motherboard
August 11, 2011 1:16:59 AM

The PhysX is fine in x4 PCIe lanes, ALL of the MOBO's I linked are the same: (x16 + x4 or x8/x8 + x4) and the x16, x8/x8 '16' lanes are directly to the CPU's x16 lanes (GPU PCIe lanes), the x4 isn't; the x4 is for a Physx GPU. IMO - I don't mix DirectX 11 and DirectX 10 PhysX; GTX 590/580's + GTX 460 or GTS 450.

Again, the MOBO's I linked above are ALL good for 2-WAY + PhysX + OC, and can easily run 1 GPU, 1 GPU + PhysX, 2-WAY SLI, 2-WAY SLI + PhysX. PhysX and SLI is an nVidia 'thing' only so you cannot use an ATI/AMD + PhysX - will not work. And for those smarty pants - an OLD hacked driver is nuts.

PhysX -> http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_new.html

m
0
l
August 11, 2011 2:15:24 AM

jaquith said:
The PhysX is fine in x4 PCIe lanes, ALL of the MOBO's I linked are the same: (x16 + x4 or x8/x8 + x4) and the x16, x8/x8 '16' lanes are directly to the CPU's x16 lanes (GPU PCIe lanes), the x4 isn't; the x4 is for a Physx GPU. IMO - I don't mix DirectX 11 and DirectX 10 PhysX; GTX 590/580's + GTX 460 or GTS 450.

Again, the MOBO's I linked above are ALL good for 2-WAY + PhysX + OC, and can easily run 1 GPU, 1 GPU + PhysX, 2-WAY SLI, 2-WAY SLI + PhysX. PhysX and SLI is an nVidia 'thing' only so you cannot use an ATI/AMD + PhysX - will not work. And for those smarty pants - an OLD hacked driver is nuts.

PhysX -> http://www.nvidia.com/object/physx_new.html


So could I use one of my old 8800 GTS cards for PhysX then? It sounds like a cool feature, just trying to figure out if this would indeed be worth the added money to add. Does the use of PhysX detract from FPS at all? Also Awhile back you mentioned that Z68 is the way to go if I plan to produce a lot of MPEG-2/4. Can you explain this? I'm still learning all this stuff as I research this build and have no clue what this means. lol the things you listed that ended with Z68 with the advantage seemed like negatives so I'm just trying to make sure I fully understand.
m
0
l
a c 717 V Motherboard
August 11, 2011 3:07:30 AM

You can certainly try the 8800 GTS card (1) for PhysX. However, as I recall those 8800 GTS run hot.

MPEG-2/4 are encoding for movies like YouTube, home DVD production, iPhone, etc. Here's more info on Quick Sync ; Google Quick Sync:
link1 - http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-rev...
link2 - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/z68-express-lucidlo...
demo - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfANycNU7h8

For a Desktop I would probably choose Z68, but for Gaming I'd choose P67.

However, iF I wasn't in a rush then LGA 2011 {+$200~+$400} and 20%~30% faster coming in November 2011. I'm probably updating our X58 Gaming -> Z79 + LGA 2011 {Quad Channel, 32-PCIe 3.0 lanes, etc} + 6-core SB-E Core i7 Extreme 3980X {still hoping for an 8-core ;)  }.

PhysX FAQ:
"Which NVIDIA GeForce GPUs support PhysX?
The minimum requirement to support GPU-accelerated PhysX is a GeForce 8-series or later GPU with a minimum of 32 cores and a minimum of 256MB dedicated graphics memory. However, each PhysX application has its own GPU and memory recommendations. In general, 512MB of graphics memory is recommended unless you have a GPU that is dedicated to PhysX."
m
0
l
August 11, 2011 4:16:20 PM

jaquith said:
You can certainly try the 8800 GTS card (1) for PhysX. However, as I recall those 8800 GTS run hot.

For a Desktop I would probably choose Z68, but for Gaming I'd choose P67.

However, iF I wasn't in a rush then LGA 2011 {+$200~+$400} and 20%~30% faster coming in November 2011. I'm probably updating our X58 Gaming -> Z79 + LGA 2011 {Quad Channel, 32-PCIe 3.0 lanes, etc} + 6-core SB-E Core i7 Extreme 3980X {still hoping for an 8-core ;)  }.

PhysX FAQ:
"Which NVIDIA GeForce GPUs support PhysX?
The minimum requirement to support GPU-accelerated PhysX is a GeForce 8-series or later GPU with a minimum of 32 cores and a minimum of 256MB dedicated graphics memory. However, each PhysX application has its own GPU and memory recommendations. In general, 512MB of graphics memory is recommended unless you have a GPU that is dedicated to PhysX."


You mean like physically hot? That shouldn't be to big an issue as even now running 2 in sli they aren't too bad. I've been thinking about PhysX though and honestly it seems like something I can live without. When looked up what games are currently out that support it I found only a single one that I own and or am interested in and thats Metro 2033, so whats the point if its not used to great effect across a great deal of games? So I'm thinking I'm basically looking at
SLI + OC at this point. The Asrock board that was mentioned sounds quite nice from what I've read, and the fact that the Asrock none Gen3 version of that board is a recommended buy is kind of reassuring. Plus that all black look, like on the gigabyte boards is extremely aesthetically appealing. :p  I'm hesitant to look into Asus boards as the boards I've looked at they all seem to have a lot more negative reviews in comparison to other manufactures, be it doa boards, poor customer support, and failure rate. But maybe I haven't gotten a good picture of them so I suppose I'll look into them so more since I have looked at them much.

Its a tough call on Z68 vs P67 for that reason, This new computer is gonna be pulling double duty as both, I'd say about 75% of the time I use it for internet and other things but I still want it to be the best gaming PC I can make within reason. One thing I've noticed is that P67 boards seem to have more USB ports then Z68 which is always useful, but unless I add anything more to my current set up 4 ports is adequate as I only have 3 of the 4 on my current board in use and another on the front panel. Also been thinking about the use of integrated graphics, obviously not something I absolutely need since I'll be running with a GPU but the power saving options with it when I'm not game is fairly appealing as is the fact that it would be a nice little back up in the event I had to RMA or replace my GPU.

You know I've heard the 2011 was coming out this year but I never looked into it because I figure that; first, being new tech it will likely be out of my budget, second how long till the next great thing comes out after that :p  , and third I figure by this time sandybridge has had time to mature where as that will be new and I hate being a guinea pig. :p  So I think I'll stick with my original decision of an i5-2500k I don't need the newest and the best, just something in my budget that eclipse my current build. :D 
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 717 V Motherboard
August 11, 2011 6:37:14 PM

If you only have (1) game that supports PhysX and it doesn't matter to you then it's pointless to mess with PhysX.

As far as MOBO choices ASUS vs Gigabyte - see my 1st post. I see no point in a 'Gen 3' ASRock, I get the PCIe 3.0 - I moreover get you'd have to toss both your CPU and GPU(s) to see any benefits - period - weakest link; it's an all PCIe 3.0 or none.

LGA 2011 I'm certain it isn't going to be cheap, so if you want full PCIe 3.0 support: CPU, MOBO, and GPU(s) you're in a holding pattern till November - December. Otherwise March 2012 LGA 1155.

The Sandy Bridge is going to be replaced with Ivy Bridge - March 2012. There no time for anything to get mature - it's all being replaced too fast.
Share
August 18, 2011 12:33:56 AM

Best answer selected by witches_jelly.
m
0
l
!