Five $160 To $240 990FX-Based Socket AM3+ Motherboards
Table of contents
- 1. 990FX: AMD Leads The Chipset Game
- 2. ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Professional
- 3. Fatal1ty 990FX Professional Firmware
- 4. Asus Sabertooth 990FX
- 5. Sabertooth 990FX Firmware
- 6. ECS A990FXM-A
- 7. A990FXM-A Firmware
- 8. Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD7
- 9. 990FXA-UD7 Firmware
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.
When it comes to the popularity of our stories, CPUs run second only to new graphics cards (which seem to get everyone's blood pumping the fastest). Motherboards fall behind quite a ways. That's a shame though, because the right board is an absolute necessity for connecting processors to GPUs, and every other components inside your machine.
This is where AMD gives a lot of love to its customers, whereas Intel tends to skimp more often. Nowhere is the difference between both company's mainstream parts more evident than in the chipset segment. The 990FX's 42 total PCIe 2.0 lanes provide a lot more potential throughput than Intel's popular Z68 Express, which is limited to 16 lanes from the CPU and a handful more on the Platform Controller Hub.

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.
And, it just so happens that Intel's mainstream (and multiplier-unlocked) Core i5 and Core i7 chips are more in the same league as AMD's most expensive enthusiast-oriented FX CPU.
The Importance Of PCIe
Gaming is where the Sandy Bridge architecture most easily proves that you don't need a thousand-dollar processor to turn in the best frame rates, and that's in spite of the 16 lanes built into each CPU's die. We've even seen situations where an NF200 bridge soldered down onto a Sandy Bridge-based motherboard enables performance just as compelling as a high-end LGA 1366 configuration. The thing is, a Z68 or P67 platform's 24 total PCIe 2.0 lanes aren't explicitly set aside for graphics cards. They have to handle every device attaching via PCI Express, including network and storage controllers.
We’ve even tested a few "enthusiast-class" Sandy Bridge-based motherboards so loaded with features that simply installing an add-in card forced certain slots or on-board controllers to become disabled. That doesn’t sound like a solution a power user would willingly accept to us.
As of this moment, enthusiasts who need more connectivity than the LGA 1155 platform offers are left to choose between “upgrading” to one of Intel’s older LGA 1366 platforms, paying extra for a motherboard with bandwidth-sharing PCIe bridges, or shifting to a platform with more native PCI Express, a wider range of unlocked processors and prices, several times the reference clock overclocking headroom for locked processors, and a downright respectable chipset: AMD’s high-flying 990FX.
Today we consider a few of the most enthusiast-oriented Bulldozer-compatible motherboards that employ the 990FX northbridge.

| 990FX Motherboard Features | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Professional | Asus Sabertooth 990FX | ECS A990FXM-A | Gigabyte 990FXA-UD7 | MSI 990FXA-GD80 | |
| Warranty | Three Years | Five Years | Three Years | Three Years | Three Years |
| PCB Revision | 1.03 | 1.01 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 2.2 |
| Chipset | AMD 990FX/SB950 | AMD 990FX/SB950 | AMD 990FX/SB950 | AMD 990FX/SB950 | AMD 990FX/SB950 |
| Voltage Regulator | Seven Phases | Ten Phases | Seven Phases | Ten Phases | Ten Phases |
| BIOS | P1.30 (09/08/2011) | 0810 (09/28/2011) | 9/26/2011 | F6 (10/14/2011) | V11.5 (09/19/2011) |
| 200.0 MHz RCLK | 200.9 (+0.45%) | 200.7 (+0.35%) | 200.0 (+0.0%) | 200.9 (+0.45%) | 200.0 (+0.0%) |
| Internal Interfaces | |||||
| PCIe 3.0 x16 | None | None | None | None | None |
| PCIe 2.0 x16 | 3 (x16/x16/x4) | 4 (x16/x4/x16/x0 or x16/x4/x8/x8) | 3 (x16/x0/x16 or x16/x8/x8) | 6 x(16/x4/x0/x4/x16/x0 or x8/x4/x8/x4/x8/x8) | 4 (x16/x0/x16/x4 or x16/x8/x8/x4) |
| PCIe x1/x4 | 2/0 | 1/0 | 2/0 | None (See x16 Above) | 2/0 |
| Legacy PCI | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| USB 2.0 | 2 (4-ports) | 2 (4-ports) | 2 (4-ports) | 3 (6-ports) | 2 (4-ports) |
| USB 3.0 | 2 (4-ports) | 1 (2-ports) | 1 (2-ports) | 1 (2-ports) | 1 (2-ports) |
| IEEE-1394 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Serial Port | 1 | 1 | None | None | 1 |
| Parallel Port | None | None | None | None | None |
| SATA 6.0 Gb/s | 6 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 6 |
| SATA 3.0 Gb/s | None | 2 | None | None | None |
| 4-Pin Fan | 2 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 3-Pin Fan | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| FP-Audio | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| CD-Audio | None | None | None | None | None |
| S/PDIF I/O | None | Output Only | Output Only | Output Only | Output Only |
| Power Button | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Reset Button | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| CLR_CMOS Button | No | No | No | Yes | No |
| Diagnostics Panel | Numeric | None | Numeric | Numeric | Numeric |
| I/O Panel Connectors | |||||
| P/S 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| USB 3.0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| USB 2.0 | 6 | 10 | 8 | 8 (1 shared w/eSATA) | 6 (2 shared w/eSATA) |
| IEEE-1394 | 1 | 1 | None | 1 | 1 |
| Network | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| eSATA | 2 | 2 (1-powered) | 2 | 2 (1-powered by USB) | 2 (powered by USB) |
| CLR_CMOS Button | Yes | No | Yes | None | Yes |
| Digital Audio Out | Optical + Coaxial | Optical | Optical | Optical + Coaxial | Optical + Coaxial |
| Digital Audio In | None | None | None | None | None |
| Analog Audio | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Other Devices | None | None | Bluetooth Transceiver | None | None |
| Mass Storage Controllers | |||||
| Chipset SATA | 6x SATA 6Gb/s | 6x SATA 6Gb/s | 6x SATA 6Gb/s | 6x SATA 6Gb/s | 6x SATA 6Gb/s |
| Chipset RAID Modes | 0, 1, 5, 10 | 0, 1, 5, 10 | 0, 1, 5, 10 | 0, 1, 5, 10 | 0, 1, 5, 10 |
| Add-In SATA | 88SE9172 PCIe 2x eSATA 6Gb/s | 2x JMB362 PCIe 2x SATA 3Gb/s 2x eSATA 3Gb/s | 2x 88SE9128 PCIe 2x eSATA 6Gb/s 1x PATA 133 MB/s | 2x 88SE9172 PCIe 2x SATA 6Gb/s 2x eSATA 6Gb/s | JMB362 PCIe 2x eSATA 3Gb/s |
| USB 3.0 | 3x EJ168A PCIe | 2x ASM1042 PCIe | 2x ASM1042 PCIe | 2x EJ168A PCIe | 2x D720200F1 PCIe |
| IEEE-1394 | VT6315N PCIe 2x 400 Mb/s | VT6308P PCI 2x 400 Mb/s | None | VT6308P PCI 2x 400 Mb/s | VT6315N PCIe 2x 400 Mb/s |
| Gigabit Ethernet | |||||
| Primary LAN | BCM57781 PCIe | RTL8111E PCIe | RTL8111E PCIe | RTL8111E PCIe | RTL8111E PCIe |
| Secondary LAN | BCM57781 PCIe | None | RTL8111E PCIe | None | None |
| Audio | |||||
| HD Audio Codec | ALC892 | ALC892 | ALC892 | ALC889 | ALC892 |
| DDL/DTS Connect | Not Specified | Not Specified | Not Specified | Not Specified | Not Specified |
- 1 / 4
- Next
-
Latest Motherboards News
- 05/25 – Thunderbolt Will Become Key Motherboard Spec in 2H 2012
- 05/22 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 05/04 – 54 Million Enthusiast and Performance PC Gamers Globally
- 05/01 – Intel's Next Unit of Computing Rivals Raspberry Pi in Size
- 04/10 – Intel P67 Express Chipset Begins Product Discontinuance Cycle
Latest Motherboards reviews
- 04/30 – Six $160-220 Z77 Motherboards, Benchmarked And Reviewed
- 04/23 – Video Teaser: Intel's DZ77GA-70K Motherboard
- 04/17 – Overclocking: Asus Rampage IV Extreme Versus EVGA X79 FTW
- 04/08 – Intel’s Z77 Express And Lucidlogix MVP: New Features...
- 02/27 – Six $200-$260 LGA 2011 Motherboards, Reviewed

How is this relevant to enthusiast? Bulldozer is out classed by Sandy Bridge I don't care if there are a few less sata ports. If you need to upgrade your better off going with Sandy bridge and z68 or p67 or wait for SB-E and X79.
thanks 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.
nice thorough review.
but great chipsets cant offset poor CPU's.
let the amd bashing begin...
Yeah If were to buy this boards would be with a Phenom real 6 core CPU 1100T
that is the smartest choice. I think.
What about asus 990fx crosshair v formula motherboard?
I would wait till next year to decide. I still feel that windows 7 aint optimized for BD.
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!
I'm more interested in the SLI capabilities in A75 and A55 chipset boards
*sarcasm*
I bought the Sabertooth during the summer and I can attest to how amazing that board is. It's really nice, lots of features and high quality. I'm running a Phenom II X4 970BE @ 4.3Ghz on water right now. Absolutely wonderful system.
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.
Want to know if 990's abundant pci lane give significant benefit over z68 in gpu bottleneck scenario (SLI or crosfire off course).
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.
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
Fantastic guys! I have been researching which mobo to get the last 2 days for our mod... this saved me a lot of trouble. Asus it is
The Sabertooth is such a good board i love it so much. I even think its the best bang for buck out of the 990FX boards. To bad i could not give such positivism for the Bulldozer.
Hey, that my board
Sabertooth 990FX with 1055t @4.1Ghz on a Noctua D-14. Waitin around for better AM3+ chips..
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/201 [...] e_review/1
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?
you use radeon hd 6950 while there is radeon 6970 on a picture
Not bad at all!