EVGA’s top CPU overclock was followed closely by Asus, with the Intel DP55KG’s third-place CPU overclock and leading base-clock making it a potentially better candidate for multiplier-restricted processors such as the Core i5-750. Perhaps a look at the overall performance difference could settle the debate?

Asus wins in overall performance, but its 0.11% lead over Intel is more than cancelled out by its 0.28% default overclock. And while EVGA fell to the bottom, its motherboard sets a 1.09% underclock by default. Since our performance charts reflect base clock massaging more than real-performance differences, we can’t quite base our final analysis on these.
This is normally where we would instead compare features to price on boards that finished so closely in other disciplines, yet buyers in the $200 and pricier P55 market tend to be a little less price-sensitive than many of our editors. When further considering each motherboard’s strengths, here is a list of how each of these could potentially be your winner:
EVGA’s P55 FTW had the highest CPU overclock and dual-EPS12V connectors that could make the board the best for extreme overclocking.
At only a few megahertz behind EVGA, Asus’ P7P55D Deluxe includes the company’s TurboV Remote, which probably makes the board best for habitual tuners.
Intel’s DP55KG has the highest base clock, but we’re certain it will appeal just as much to the legacy-free crowd as it does to mid-market overclockers. Yet two other features, Bluetooth support and first-class efficiency, will likely combine with Intel’s reputation for stability to win over a variety of computing professionals.
Gigabyte’s P55A-UD6 did everything well but nothing splendidly, and will likely attract the majority of buyers for its USB 3.0 and SATA 6.0 Gb/s controllers. Unfortunately, those controllers are deactivated in CrossFire or SLI modes, so the board can only be considered either a high-end gaming or top-featured power-user product, but not both, depending on what type of hardware is installed.
MSI’s P55-GD80 performed well, overclocked competitively, and offered many features, but didn’t win anything. As rebates come and go, it might be the best value of today’s contenders, depending on where and when it’s purchased.
- Mainstream Parts For High-End Systems?
- Features Comparison Tables
- Asus P7P55D Deluxe
- EVGA P55 FTW
- Gigabyte P55A-UD6
- Intel DP55KG
- MSI P55-GD80
- Test Settings
- Benchmark Results: Crysis And Far Cry 2
- Benchmark Results: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky And World In Conflict
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Benchmark Results: Synthetic
- Overclocking
- Power, Heat, And Efficiency
- Conclusion
Also for just $50 more one could get a reasonable X58 board and the core i7 920 would be a great buy. The only motherboard here that would be a "smart" buy with "long term" in mind would be the Gigabyte UD6 since it at least sports USB3.0 AND Sata 6.0. One would not need to purchase any expansion card for this feature as it will be used in the years to come. Also knowing that X58 will be used for 6core chips way ahead is comforting as these boards then will still be around and mainstream by the time those processors will even be relevant for avid/regular PC users.
I just have a few questions you may be able to answer, do you guys also choose motherboards from other countries? I have seen Foxconn and Emaxx in some reviews but I also know that they may not be the best quality boards but it would be great to compare those boards as well. Its also good that you placed a reference Intel P55 so people would know the standard in which to compare with. Also how come we still dont have a P55 or X58 XFX board? Has XFX stopped making mb's and only started to focus on GPU's?
In the article first page:" Can any LGA 1156 system truly be considered high-end? After all, there’s no practical way to supply two graphics cards with a full 16 lanes of bandwidth. However, only the most expensive graphics cards need more than eight PCIe 2.0 lanes, and not every high-end buyer wants a gaming system."
The reason for this is the GPU - CPU bridge on core i5 systems, which in previously intel boards was part of the southbridge chipset, is now integrated onto the CPU. Therefore it isn't the boards that limit GPU lanes to a maximum of x16 lanes total, but it is the p55 core i5 & i7 CPUs that do this.
Check this link for more on the CPU-motherboard layout:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/2920/intel_s_p55_express_lynnfield_chipset_overview/index2.html
Also see this artice on VR-Zone which explains the pitfalls of Gigabytes USB3/SATA3 implementation: http://vr-zone.com/articles/gigabyte-p55a-boards-usb3-sata3-issues-analysis/8158.html
Good point, perhaps the features comparison chart could be expanded a little.
who would buy a Phenom II rig to get 16 16? not comparing AMD but you would see better performance from a high model i5 with 8 8 lol good one
You can't enable USB 3.0 and SATA 6.0 Gb/s at the same time.
I'd rather have the ASUS or MSI (GD85) solution who use an additional PLX chip. The question was about being future proof and the Gigabyte solution is not as future proof as it seems.
Unfortunately Intel seems to be steering away from the X58 platform. There are more and more P55 motherboards coming out which have high end features. The top end Lynnfield CPUs have no problem outrunning the lower end Bloomfield CPUs. So saying a 1156 is midrange... that's giving it less credit than it deserves.
Btw, there are P55 mainboards from ASUS, MSI and EVGA with an NF200 chipset which do offer fullspeed dual CrossFire/SLI at 16/16. And those definitely don't have midrange prices.
msi products? lol yeah no thankyou
look at the benchmarks and tell me wether that nvidia chip is worth it, or 99% marketing BS, and paying that premium is stupid when you can get that 1366 platform for a little more with full options for 16 16 if required AND USB3 and SATA3 cards if required or onboard depending on model
Nor do they have full speed dual x16/x16 PCIe 2.0 bandwidth. NF200 isn't magic, it's simply a PCIe hub with x16 on one side and 2x x16 on the other. Tom's will likely have an article later showing how well this works compared to x8/x8 (p55 native) and true x16/x16 (x58 native) solutions.
You can get a very good X58 MB for $250, and the I7-920 can be had for $200-$250. So why would anyone spend the same amount of money on an inferior product (P55)?
Intel seems to have stepped over their own feet with this new chipset/CPU configuration. The only people benefitting from the 1156 is Intel and MB manufacturers. The new CPU's and MB's cost them less, but they are charging almost the same price as the superior I7-920 and X58.
You are forgetting that the AMD Phenom II 965 provides nearly identical gaming performance to the i5 for a few $$ less, and you can get an x16/x16 graphics solution, or even an x8/x8/x8/x8 quad type setup. Really, that is going to give you a better performance machine for similar cost as an i5/p55 setup. Don't just write off the AMD lines. BTW- I am running and i5 on the MSI P55-GD80 and I love it.
Also- for what its worth, the article mentions that MSI's OC genie exists, but doesn't say anything more about it, and compares it to the Asus remote thing? totally different things- OC genie is an automated overclock- not just onboard buttons to change OC settings.
The $100 P55 boards still exist and there are some really good ones. Some people want the newer stuff, but still want more options and features. Remember- this is the "Enthusiast" version of the p55 lineup.