A trio of USB 3.0 controllers, a pair of high-performance BCM57781 network controllers, and a sharp-looking red-on-black color scheme all set ASRock’s Fatal1ty 990FX Professional apart from similarly-priced competitors. Meanwhile, a large “clear CMOS” button on the I/O panel professes this model’s high-end overclocking intentions.
Spread three spaces apart for better GPU cooling, the top two PCIe x16 slots are both fixed with true x16 pathways to assure the best possible performance in two-way SLI or CrossFire. We didn’t really expect three-way SLI support from a sub-$200 motherboard, so the bottom slot’s four-lane limitation is only a minor disappointment. The slot could potentially be used in a three-way CrossFire configuration, though its modest bandwidth is better suited to high-end storage controllers, network devices, an dedicated GeForce graphics card for independent PhysX calculations, or additional 2D-only displays.
AMD’s SB950 southbridge feeds all six of the Fatal1ty 990FX Professional’s internal SATA 6Gb/s ports. Rather than give us a bunch of extra internal SATA controllers that most builders probably wouldn't use anyway, ASRock decided to try something different by adding a second internal header for a total of four front-panel USB 3.0 ports. Because USB 3.0 cables are notoriously thick and stiff, ASRock smartly places them above the add-in card slots for better clearance.
The Fatal1ty 990FX layout is very good overall, though we did notice a few small issues. For example, the single-sided DIMM latches originally designed to let you pull memory sticks without popping your graphics card out first face the wrong way, and some older case designs lack drive cage clearance for the forward-facing SATA ports. Overall, the port design makes sense because you're more likely to need vertical card clearance, but the potential for conflict still exists.

The most pleasing part of the Fatal1ty 990FX Professional motherboard’s bundle is its inclusion of a full set of six SATA cables, though we also really like the fact that ASRock adds a 3.5” bay adapter for cases that lack a front-panel USB 3.0 connector. Barely visible atop the installation manual are a single SLI bridge and audio patch cable.
ASRock offers a three-year warranty on specific high-end models, including the Fatal1ty 990FX Professional, but has not yet added a list of applicable models to its RMA policy page. We mention that only because we prefer to see our warranty coverage in writing!
- 990FX: AMD Leads The Chipset Game
- ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Professional
- Fatal1ty 990FX Professional Firmware
- Asus Sabertooth 990FX
- Sabertooth 990FX Firmware
- ECS A990FXM-A
- A990FXM-A Firmware
- Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7
- 990FXA-UD7 Firmware
- MSI 990FXA-GD80
- 990FXA-GD80 Firmware
- Test Settings And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: 3D Games
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Power, Heat, And Efficiency
- Overclocking
- Which 990FX Board Should You Buy?


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.
but great chipsets cant offset poor CPU's.
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!
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.
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
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_multigpu_gameplay_performance_review/1