Five $160 To $240 990FX-Based Socket AM3+ Motherboards
Tags:
- Socket
-
Motherboards
Last response: in Reviews comments
Forty-two PCIe lanes give the 990FX a clear connectivity lead over competing Intel chipsets. We compare five class-leading products using AMD's FX-8150 to see which offers the best combination of performance, overclocking, integrated features, and value.
Five $160 To $240 990FX-Based Socket AM3+ Motherboards : Read more
Five $160 To $240 990FX-Based Socket AM3+ Motherboards : Read more
More about : 160 240 990fx based socket am3 motherboards
timbo1130
November 7, 2011 4:19:07 AM
julianbautista87
November 7, 2011 4:23:56 AM
Related resources
- Will my Gigabyte GA-M61PME-S2P motherboard support Am3 socket Athlon II X2 240e Cpu? - Forum
- Motherboards for am3 socket - Forum
- Best 2014 Motherboard With AM3+ Socket? - Forum
- What Is the best motherboard (1150 socket) for under $160 - Forum
- Motherboard with AM3+ Socket, PCIe 3.0 and DDR3 2400? - Forum
mayankleoboy1
November 7, 2011 4:36:17 AM
ellmondo
November 7, 2011 4:56:20 AM
_Pez_
November 7, 2011 5:09:16 AM
theuniquegamer
November 7, 2011 5:23:29 AM
frostweaver
November 7, 2011 5:30:55 AM
Tijok
November 7, 2011 5:34:59 AM
First off, thanks for the great article, good to see Tom's is keeping up the top notch quality!
Secondly, I would really like to see a piece on extreme CFX/SLI configurations on rigs like this. It seems an article with reliable information on this would be beneficial to gaming enthusiasts, IT professionals, and HPC builders alike!
Hope to see an article along these lines soon!
Secondly, I would really like to see a piece on extreme CFX/SLI configurations on rigs like this. It seems an article with reliable information on this would be beneficial to gaming enthusiasts, IT professionals, and HPC builders alike!
Hope to see an article along these lines soon!
Score
9
ta152h
November 7, 2011 6:08:59 AM
What a bunch of pretzel logic we have in this article.
So, x58 is irrelevant, because SB beats it. Except AMD's offering is somehow relevant even though both x58 and SB beat it. What?????
If you ignore x58 because SB offers better performance, you ignore anything AMD has because a SB setup offers better performance. If you want 36 or less lanes, x58 still offers better processors than you can hope to get from AMD. Bizarre logic.
Not that AMD is irrelevant, just the logic is badly flawed.
Quote:
Of course, a fan of Intel's work could argue against the need for 42 lanes of second-gen PCIe when the 36 native to X58 Express support multi-card graphics configurations just as capably. But such a comparison really isn't necessary. After all, we've known for almost a year that Intel’s lower-cost Sandy Bridge-based part outperform the pricey six-core Gulftown-based processors in many desktop benchmarks, including pretty much every gaming scenario we throw at the two platforms.So, x58 is irrelevant, because SB beats it. Except AMD's offering is somehow relevant even though both x58 and SB beat it. What?????
If you ignore x58 because SB offers better performance, you ignore anything AMD has because a SB setup offers better performance. If you want 36 or less lanes, x58 still offers better processors than you can hope to get from AMD. Bizarre logic.
Not that AMD is irrelevant, just the logic is badly flawed.
Score
14
we_san
November 7, 2011 6:32:00 AM
TA152HWhat a bunch of pretzel logic we have in this article.So, x58 is irrelevant, because SB beats it. Except AMD's offering is somehow relevant even though both x58 and SB beat it. What????? If you ignore x58 because SB offers better performance, you ignore anything AMD has because a SB setup offers better performance. If you want 36 or less lanes, x58 still offers better processors than you can hope to get from AMD. Bizarre logic. Not that AMD is irrelevant, just the logic is badly flawed.
That's what it looks like after copy-edit.Originally it referred to AMD's insistence of comparing its FX-8150 to the 990X to prove that the FX-8150 had far better value. The original version of the paragraph referred to that comparison method a sham, and THEN referred to the SB vs BD debate. I guess it's neither nice nor necessary to call the 8150/990X price/performance comparison a sham, so the paragraph was altered to improve it's tone
Score
1
Device Unknown
November 7, 2011 7:21:24 AM
jdwii
November 7, 2011 7:33:40 AM
masterofevil22
November 7, 2011 7:51:42 AM
kg2010
November 7, 2011 8:24:49 AM
Dear Tom's,
Please do a Tri-Sli review with 580's in it.
Compare the 8150 @ $279 vs the 2500K @ $215, who would you recommend?
Hint: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/03/amd_fx8150_mu...
Please do a Tri-Sli review with 580's in it.
Compare the 8150 @ $279 vs the 2500K @ $215, who would you recommend?
Hint: http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/03/amd_fx8150_mu...
Score
0
g00ey
November 7, 2011 9:36:16 AM
I have read that the Gigabyte UD5 and UD7 motherboards have vdroop issues due to lack of an LLC unit. There has been a lot of talk about this in different forums with a lot of people getting disappointed about it. When I wrote to the Gigabyte support team they said that they have added the LLC in revision 1.1 of the UD7 motherboard in the review. According to your review you have the rev 1.1 of this motherboard and yet LLC features are missing in the BIOS, so there are still vdroop issues with this motherboard, am I to understand that this is correct?
Score
0
tmk221
November 7, 2011 9:47:15 AM
dkraptor
November 7, 2011 11:00:21 AM
SessouXFX
November 7, 2011 11:02:02 AM
Sabertooth 990FX was my first choice, before I sprung for the Crosshair V Formula. Can't knock me for getting a great board for Open Box prices, because that was the only way I was going to get a Crosshair V.
As for MoBo's making a difference in how a CPU performs, it's about tweak-ability, or the lack thereof. Crosshair V is simply awesome in that regard. But if you do it wrong, you could end up with far worse performance than realized. I've seen a few posters on other sites dogging the board out, because they didn't have an understanding of what to look for and such. And as such, they resold or returned the board for something else.
julianbautista87thanks for this article. I was waiting for it since some guy said that the 8150 was performing badly because of the mainboard used, but now I see that that was not correct.
As for MoBo's making a difference in how a CPU performs, it's about tweak-ability, or the lack thereof. Crosshair V is simply awesome in that regard. But if you do it wrong, you could end up with far worse performance than realized. I've seen a few posters on other sites dogging the board out, because they didn't have an understanding of what to look for and such. And as such, they resold or returned the board for something else.
Score
2
dkraptor
November 7, 2011 11:02:25 AM
dkraptor
November 7, 2011 11:07:09 AM
silverblue
November 7, 2011 11:22:00 AM
SessouXFXSabertooth 990FX was my first choice, before I sprung for the Crosshair V Formula. Can't knock me for getting a great board for Open Box prices, because that was the only way I was going to get a Crosshair V.As for MoBo's making a difference in how a CPU performs, it's about tweak-ability, or the lack thereof. Crosshair V is simply awesome in that regard. But if you do it wrong, you could end up with far worse performance than realized. I've seen a few posters on other sites dogging the board out, because they didn't have an understanding of what to look for and such. And as such, they resold or returned the board for something else.
I think the expectation came from the fact that the HardwareHeaven review used an ASUS 990FX Extreme4 board and it seemed to perform very well on one. Shame it's not in this review, however you couldn't really expect a motherboard to make a huge amount of difference.
[EDIT]ASRock, sorry, not ASUS.[/EDIT]
Score
1
SessouXFX
November 7, 2011 11:41:23 AM
Depends...
Naturally, a few things willing improve. The 890/990 wasn't that bad to begin with. I wouldn't mind seeing it carry on for awhile personally. But none of it will matter much if the CPU won't perform worth anything on it's end.
Like with the Bulldozer, I knew from my first experience with Phenom, it's better to wait for the 2nd-3rd Gen chip to be on the safe side, thanks to teething issues. I doubt AMD saw the whole TLB Erratum saga approaching after release. After B2 and B3 stepping, things changed for the better. It may not have been a barn burner, but Phenom eventually became a real value and powerful chip for what it was. And during that time, they went from one chipset to the next, improving as they went along.
Vishera (Enhanced Bulldozer) should be out by Q3 next year. If they don't improve things by then, AMD will be in serious trouble. In fact, I'd go as far as to say, they should just sell their stock to Intel or ARM and close their doors if things haven't changed by then. I personally have my reservations about a 8 core chip, when they haven't shown that it's worth having anything more than a 6 cores at this point. But if they intend to increase performance, they better think about the here and now, and focus more attention to single thread performance. That's what biting them in the rear.
Naturally, a few things willing improve. The 890/990 wasn't that bad to begin with. I wouldn't mind seeing it carry on for awhile personally. But none of it will matter much if the CPU won't perform worth anything on it's end.
Like with the Bulldozer, I knew from my first experience with Phenom, it's better to wait for the 2nd-3rd Gen chip to be on the safe side, thanks to teething issues. I doubt AMD saw the whole TLB Erratum saga approaching after release. After B2 and B3 stepping, things changed for the better. It may not have been a barn burner, but Phenom eventually became a real value and powerful chip for what it was. And during that time, they went from one chipset to the next, improving as they went along.
Vishera (Enhanced Bulldozer) should be out by Q3 next year. If they don't improve things by then, AMD will be in serious trouble. In fact, I'd go as far as to say, they should just sell their stock to Intel or ARM and close their doors if things haven't changed by then. I personally have my reservations about a 8 core chip, when they haven't shown that it's worth having anything more than a 6 cores at this point. But if they intend to increase performance, they better think about the here and now, and focus more attention to single thread performance. That's what biting them in the rear.
Score
1
silverblue
November 7, 2011 12:43:16 PM
I went with the Sabertooth myself this past summer as I was building to last, and the five year warranty was particularly impressive. I had hoped Bulldozer would be good, but even if I never get one, the 970BE I'm running should meet my needs for the foreseeable future. I would like to have seen a comment about the MemOK feature of the Sabertooth though, as it is another useful feature that distinguishes this board from the others in the roundup.
Score
0
SpadeM
November 7, 2011 2:36:33 PM
Quote:
Asus proclaims quad-GPU SLI support, referencing a pair of dual-GPU GeForce GTX 590s. In fact, that arrangement is supported by all SLI-capable motherboards. Our problem with the quad-GPU terminology is that it almost appears to be an attempt to confuse neophytes into believing this four-slot board will take four cards working cooperatively. Asus clearly indicates on Page 2-16 of its manual that this is a triple-card SLI design, though.Quick question .. is it still possible to run 4 separat cards into quadfire/crossfire-x; quad-sli? I remember a long time ago in a SBM 4x4850 (or something similar). So ... are there still cards out there with that option?
Also ... if it's a motherboard round up .. how come there's no LAN, audio, esata, usb tests going on?
Score
2
Anonymous
a
b
V
Motherboard
November 7, 2011 3:03:51 PM
g00eyAccording to your review you have the rev 1.1 of this motherboard and yet LLC features are missing in the BIOS
Please try reading the entire page instead of the first three paragraphs, it says the LLC setting missing from one menu is found in another.dkraptorHmmm. So where is the most important of them all? Asus Crosshair V Formula?
Asus had to make a choice since, at 2-3 days per board, there wasn't enough time to give everyone the option to include two boards.jtt283The Crosshair V has an expander board that can supposedly run four cards all at x8, but I don't think the Sabertooth has anything like it. It looks like the Gigabyte board in this roundup can do it though.
You do understand that expander boards are used for bench testing only, right? I mean, it's no like you're going to put cards that stick out too far in a case
jtt283I would like to have seen a comment about the MemOK feature of the Sabertooth though, as it is another useful feature that distinguishes this board from the others in the roundup.
I tried it to recover from a bad O/C, believing it would temporarily lower the actual settings without changing the programmed settings. I was wrong, using it deleted my programed settings. So rather than fuss about how it sort of works but not as well as expected, I ignored it. Score
0
But the UD5 I've chosen was $10 cheaper than the Sabertooth, and has all the features of the UD7 except for quad SLI. It really was the ideal board for me, and the superior overclocking makes it a win in my book.
Anyway thank you very much for this article. Seems everyone has written off BD a a fail, but there are reasons to be hopeful for the future. Even without a Bulldozer CPU, I like my Gigabyte board very much and find that I really don't care about a lack of UEFI.
Anyway thank you very much for this article. Seems everyone has written off BD a a fail, but there are reasons to be hopeful for the future. Even without a Bulldozer CPU, I like my Gigabyte board very much and find that I really don't care about a lack of UEFI.
Score
0
josejones
November 7, 2011 10:34:33 PM
meh, I'd rather wait to see the benchmarks for the new boards with PCIe 3.0 support. When in the world will AMD be coming out with their PCIe 3.0 mobos? I'm curious to see how they'll stack up against Intel's PCIe 3.0 boards.
August 3, 2010: PCI Express 3.0: On Motherboards By This Time Next Year?
AMD Radeon HD 7000 GPU Series to Feature PCI Express 3.0 Support
August 3, 2010: PCI Express 3.0: On Motherboards By This Time Next Year?
AMD Radeon HD 7000 GPU Series to Feature PCI Express 3.0 Support
Score
-2
buzznut said:
But the UD5 I've chosen was $10 cheaper than the Sabertooth, and has all the features of the UD7 except for quad SLI. It really was the ideal board for me, and the superior overclocking makes it a win in my book.Anyway thank you very much for this article. Seems everyone has written off BD a a fail, but there are reasons to be hopeful for the future. Even without a Bulldozer CPU, I like my Gigabyte board very much and find that I really don't care about a lack of UEFI.
Fail is a little to harsh, more like underwhelming. It's an increase from Phenom II X4 era but not enough of one to justify it's costs. It's barely faster then the X6 and even slower in some areas. It does provide you with a very wide set of processing resources, but unless your coding your software specifically for it then those don't really matter. And it seems to have some severe L2 Cache issues, so severe that it's crippling the chips performance.
Recommendation now is to just wait it out for revision 2 or 3.
Score
0
Anonymous
a
b
V
Motherboard
November 8, 2011 4:25:19 AM
Anonymous
a
b
V
Motherboard
November 8, 2011 6:26:48 AM
asusmemok4872MemOK! - you're using it wrong. Save your settings to a testing profile before you reboot. If it fails, press MemOK! and it'll boot with defaults. Reload your OC profile and figure out where you went wrong. It's awesome.
But I could do that with CLR_CMOS. So, what's "awesome" about MemOK? Score
0
Crashman said:
But I could do that with CLR_CMOS. So, what's "awesome" about MemOK?MemOK is just a press button for testing the upper limits of memory, it's an extension of the built in overclocking system. Generally it's only useful for testing how high your base memory clock can go before memory becomes unstable (204/210 ect..).
Interesting note on the Sabertooth board. The original BIOS was set to do stability testing ~every time~ the system powered on, meaning its BIOS POST time was a good 30+ seconds. If the board detects a CPU / Memory failure then it will auto-revert to base known-good defaults and alert you that there was a overclocking failure. The second BIOS for it fixed it so that it only does this test the first time you change settings then skips it afterwards.
Also the board is a little -too- smart for it's own good. I put in a set of four 4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 memory sticks. The SPD settings are DDR3-1333 but the XMP settings are DDR3-1600. The sticks are rated at 1.5v and are quite sensitive to voltage. Took me forever to figure out how to get them to run at 1600 speed. I had to manually set the voltage to 1.5 rather then leave it at auto. What was happening was when I put in the manual timings are set it to DDR3-1600 speed, the BIOS would try to auto-set the voltage to 1.6 and the sticks would stop working and never POST. Setting the voltage manually prevented this from happening.
Next is during my OC on the Phenom II x4 970BE on water. Stock speed is 3.5Ghz. I can get a stable POST at 4.5 but windows bombs out trying to boot. I can get a successful boot at 4.4Ghz but windows randomly reboots / shuts down. 4.3Ghz it lasts longer but eventually will crash / reboot, Prime95 has it crashing in minutes. 4.2Ghz has been running fine for awhile now, Prime95 goes for 6+ hours no issues. Something I noticed during this time is that you don't have to set the voltage on the CPU, it will automatically adjust it for you. With the CPU voltage set to auto and 4.2Ghz clock I would run CPU-Z and CPUspeed program. You can see the voltage starting at 1.45~1.47 with the CPU at 4.2ghz. Start up prime95 and it starts running, you immediately see the voltage spike to 1.5. I don't allow the board to set it higher as I'm not sure what the highest "safe" setting could be before damaging my CPU.
Overall the Sabertooth is a great overclockers board if a bit too smart for it's own good.
Score
0
palladin9479 said:
Overall the Sabertooth is a great overclockers board if a bit too smart for it's own good.Score
0
Crashman said:
Sabertooth is an AWESOME overclocking board but I wish there was a way to force it to boot at default settings while storing previous settings (boot failed, press F1 to load defualts or DEL to enter BIOS) etc.Actually there is kinda. Under tools there is a place to save your current settings to a profile. I made profile #1 be my default profile (it is by default) and made profile 2 my OC settings. You can store up to 7 or 8 separate OC settings.
If the systems detects a OC failure it will revert to default "safe" settings and prompt you to go to setup "F1". It will appear that your settings were wiped but they aren't. If you reboot (don't save) then it'll try to boot with what you had previously and fail again. Instead go to where you had your profile saved and tell it to load whatever profile you were testing. *POOF* everything is back again. Now go find your failed setting and test again. I did ALOT of this when I was trying to find right OC settings for my rig.
Score
0
palladin9479 said:
Actually there is kinda. Under tools there is a place to save your current settings to a profile. I made profile #1 be my default profile (it is by default) and made profile 2 my OC settings. You can store up to 7 or 8 separate OC settings.If the systems detects a OC failure it will revert to default "safe" settings and prompt you to go to setup "F1". It will appear that your settings were wiped but they aren't. If you reboot (don't save) then it'll try to boot with what you had previously and fail again. Instead go to where you had your profile saved and tell it to load whatever profile you were testing. *POOF* everything is back again. Now go find your failed setting and test again. I did ALOT of this when I was trying to find right OC settings for my rig.
Score
0
andywork78
November 8, 2011 10:19:54 PM
Crashman said:
Yes, I've done this with CLR_CMOS a bunch of times too.CLR_CMOS is only for when the system won't even get to POST which would indicate a basic failure of the CPU / memory subsystem. A hotkey to "default" BIOS wouldn't work then anyway, the keyboard controller wouldn't of had time to be initialized by the failed CPU. Maybe 10 years ago when things were pretty much hardwired on startup but nowadays everything is soft loaded by the CPU during system POST. The best you can hope for is a rear mounted CLR_CMOS button so you don't have to open the case, but honestly I'd be afraid of having something like that near the back of my box.
Score
0
f-gomes
November 9, 2011 12:33:03 PM
psiboy
November 9, 2011 10:16:29 PM
- 1 / 2
- 2
- Newest
Related resources
- SolvedMotherboard support Socket AM3 125watt CPU? Forum
- Athelon x2 240 supports AM3 socket board?? Forum
- SolvedGigabyte GA-970A-UD3P Socket AM3 AMD ATX Motherboard bios update Forum
- SolvedIs the MSI 970 GAMING Socket AM3+ 7.1-Channel HD Audio ATX Motherboard any good? Forum
- SolvedWanting to Upgrade, but I have a AM3 socket motherboard and am on a budget! Forum
- i have ga 78lmt usb3 motherboard and using 1TB HDD +240 gb HDD now can i add one more hardisk of 160 GB it wont be so harmful Forum
- SolvedAM3+ Socket and SLI compatable motherboard needed Forum
- SolvedCan a FM2 or FM2+ CPU fit in a AM3 or AM3+ socket of a motherboard? Forum
- AMD Athlon II X2 240 Regor 2.8GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM3 65W Dual Forum
- SolvedMotherboard (within 100 USD) with video ports. AM3+ socket. Forum
- SolvedWhat am3+ socket motherboard to buy for a budget gaming pc? Forum
- SolvedIs cheap am3+ socket motherboard can support 8 core amd processor? Forum
- SolvedBest motherboard for AMD AM3+ socket Forum
- SolvedWould Like Socket AM3 Motherboard Recommendation - Not ASUS Forum
- SolvedWill AM3+ CPU work with a AM3 Socket Motherboard? Forum
- More resources
!
that is the smartest choice. I think.