990FX Extreme9 Software
ASRock hasn’t made any significant changes to its applications suite since last year, still including various freeware and trial software in addition to its XFast LAN, XFast USB, and AXTU. Since portions of AXTU are hardware-specific, we took a few minutes to examine its implementation on this board.
Part of its intricate hardware monitoring menu, AXTU appears to have the most accurate CPU temperature monitor this editor has seen for AMD’s current-generation FX processors. I said appears because few people know the actual core temperature: we've had issues with AMD’s thermal diode being inaccurate at any temperature more than a few degrees from its thermal threshold, and trying to take a reading from the heat spreader yields a result several degrees lower than the core.
Fan speed controls are independent for four of the five system headers.
Clock speeds are fully adjustable over a wide range, with CPU clock and voltage level adjustments verifiable in third-party programs like CPU-Z. Settings can also be saved as profiles and enabled at boot.
The OC DNA menu provides only BIOS info and secondary access to overclocking profiles.
Intelligent Energy Saver offers minor power savings via CPU voltage regulator phase idling.
ASRock’s XFast RAM provides RAM Disk functionality at no additional cost to the buyer. Though it runs under 64- and 32-bit Windows, its most interesting capability is addressing memory capacities beyond the 4 GB limit of 32-bit operating systems.
Restart to UEFI gives users quick access to BIOS, without worrying about how quickly they can hit the Del or F2 keys. Unlike competing solutions, it requires an operating system to employ.
Current page: 990FX Extreme9 SoftwarePrev Page ASRock 990FX Extreme9 Next Page 990FX Extreme9 Firmware
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
Glad to see AMD getting some love.Reply
"if we diminished most of those power differences by not installing Asus' power management software at default settings, the company would have likely matched the performance of Gigabyte and ASRock."Reply
Don't speculate! Do the tests and add it to the article so we can see what the software packages are actually accomplishing! That's why I read your site, yeah? For hard info that I can't get myself.
designasaurus"if we diminished most of those power differences by not installing Asus' power management software at default settings, the company would have likely matched the performance of Gigabyte and ASRock."Don't speculate! Do the tests and add it to the article so we can see what the software packages are actually accomplishing! That's why I read your site, yeah? For hard info that I can't get myself.I totally agree with this statement. The test should have been done and added into the article because this would of been a good representative of the value of the software. I would like to know for a fact if the software was a hindrance to the electrical efficiency of the Asus and Gigabye boards.Reply
bgunnerI totally agree with this statement. The test should have been done and added into the article because this would of been a good representative of the value of the software. I would like to know for a fact if the software was a hindrance to the electrical efficiency of the Asus and Gigabye boards.At least the power was measured and mentioned, even if it didn't get into the chart.Reply
AMD's 890FX was an excellent low-cost server platform, in its day. Great I/O, tons of PCIe lanes, 6-channel SATA3, and ECC support. All with boards and CPUs in the desktop price range that were close to being performance competitive with Intel (when they were introduced, at least).Reply
Now, AMD is just slipping too far behind. Not just on the CPU front, but like how about some PCIe 3?
I'm waiting for 64-bit ARMs to hit the desktop. That's probably the next truly interesting thing on the horizon.
Aren't the 990FX chipsets kind old?Reply
10596062 said:Aren't the 990FX chipsets kind old?
Yes, but not a lot of new things need to be offered anyways. PCIe 3.0 is just a gimmick and doesn't really give much more performance over PCIe2
falchardAren't the 990FX chipsets kind old?990FX is AMD's current "high-end" chipset for enthusiast-level desktops. AMD occasionally releases new chips (look last fall) and motherboard companies keep updating their selection of products.Reply
Old chipset, recent boards, any questions?
"Three AMD 990FX-Based Motherboards For Enthusiasts"Reply
I don't think enthusiasts would want to buy a slow CPU from AMD.
What did I miss? The ASRock has better features, including 3-way SLI, more USB3.0, an abundance of accessories, uses less power (the only positive efficiency), has higher performance, lower VRM temps; but BOTH of the other two got awards? I noted the comment about fluctuating prices, but on features alone ASRock looks like the winner. Surely it wasn't the slightly lower OC...Reply