Which Motherboard?
By
Back_Blast,
Posted on: 2010-07-02 09:38 in ALL ACCESS Gameplay Technical Issues Bugs
Quote:
Definitely not. You're going to pay a double for not that great of an improvement in potential visuals. Better to just buy a slightly better video card, than spending double on a setup that's more likely to fail or bugger out (more points of failure, more moving parts, more odds of something breaking).
| Also, do I really need a motherboard for two video cards? I just wanna pay for practical value/usage, not eye candy. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ShadowNate
;_; ?!?! What the heck is wrong with you, my god, I have never been so confused in my life!
|
Well to guage what you should get, what do you need? Are you settled on a CPU? What sort of memory do you have in mind? What kind of drives will you be attaching and what interfaces will they require? That sort of thing. Basically, do you have a plan and what is it? What are your must-have features?
It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.
Quote:
Bare with me, as this will be my first time building a computer and I'm learning things as I go. I'm very much a noob. |
Originally Posted by Back_Blast
Well to guage what you should get, what do you need? Are you settled on a CPU? What sort of memory do you have in mind? What kind of drives will you be attaching and what interfaces will they require? That sort of thing. Basically, do you have a plan and what is it? What are your must-have features?
|
I believe I confused a term in my post title. My apologies. I think I meant to say: "Which CPU?".
Okies...
1. CPU-Intel i5 750 Lynnfield as suggested by FatherXmas. AMD Phenom IIx4 965 or AMD's Phenom IIx6 1055T. If none of these are "really" necessary then a high end Intel Dual Core.
This is what I really want to know-which is best overall for needs/price?
2. Memory-at least 4 Gigs or, if needed, 6 Gigs. But must be DDR3.
3. Drives/Attachments-Just need a CD/DVD drive with 7200 rpm/SATA. No Lightscribe or such needed.
4. Video Card/PSU-High end GeForce to run GR well. Running Ultra-mode would be a "perk". PSU strong enough to run one Video Card.
5. OS-Windows 7 (64 bit Home premium).
Hope this helps. Thanks in advance.
Quote:
actually... Intel's I5 is the processor series that makes woof-woof noises. There's a reason there's a flood of laptops and mid-range desktops this year that are dropping I5 for AMD offerings..|
Originally Posted by HwaRang
Hey folks,
Hope all is well. I'm in the process of buying an ASUS motherboard, but I'm not sure which is really best for my needs/playstyle: 1. Games-Currently played is just COX. Future, maybe a FPS like CoD or a MMO such as DCU Online or Bioware's Star Wars. 2. Bang for the buck-looking towards future. I think Intel's i5 is marginally better than both AMD's Phenom IIx4/IIx6. I know AMD is generally better "bang for the buck". On this note, why not just build a high end dual core instead of the 3 mentioned? Also, do I really need a motherboard for two video cards? I just wanna pay for practical value/usage, not eye candy. Thanks in advance. |
Now, just for pricing, the AMD x4 955 is $160, and the x4 965 is $180.
By comparison, the cheapest Intel I5 is $180, and it's the 650 Clarkdale, and it's a dual-core.
The cheapest Intel I5 quadcore, and the only one Newegg offers, is the $195 750 Lynnfield.
So, as far as bang per buck goes, I5 isn't really bang for buck at all. It's straight out IPC isn't actually that much better than the Phenom's, due in part to the cut-cache amounts from the I7 it was built from; and you basically pay more money for less cores. Sure, a Dual-Core Clarksdale might keep up in a single application, but when you turn to multi-threading and multi-processing... it's a case of bai bai bai.
It's also not likely that the quad-core can keep up either. Case in point, here, I've got a Phenom II 965, and a Intel I7 920 Engineering Sample. The 920, if you could buy one, costs around $300. In every single game and benchmark thrown it's way, the Phenom II 965 absolutely destroy's it. Granted, the Phenom II also came out long after the I7, and has nearly an 733 mhz raw speed advantage (2.66ghz versus 3.4ghz).
Now, on paper, the I7 does have the advantage of Triple-Channel memory support and Hyperthreading: The motherboard I bought won't do triple-channel; and with 4 native cores and 2.66ghz clock speed, Hyper-threading really doesn't have much to add to the typical gameplay session. So the performance of my I7 is probably very close to where the performance of the Lynnfield I5 is going to be, ignoring other internal architectural changes as the cache and clock speed are the same between the two.
And... it's not a contest. The Phenom II is way more powerful.
* * *
Now, that being said, building a high-end dual core from AMD could be cheaper. I've got an Athlon64 6000 Black Edition sitting on a Socket AM2+ board. On paper, it has the same amount of cache as an Athlon II X2 250, but a slower HyperTransport bus (2ghz versus 4ghz on Socket AM3).
So the performance would probably be close... and in some games... well, I'll be honest, you can't tell a difference between the dual-core A64 X2 and the Phenom / I7 systems.
Would I buy an Athlon II X2 250? Oh no. The Dual-Core Phenom II 550 is only $18 more... and in the long run, it's extra cache is going to be more future-game proof.
I'd also be looking at the Athlon II X3 445. It's around $85, and while it lacks the cache... that extra core is kind of hard to pass up.
If I could get over the $100 mark, to $120, I'd be looking at the Phenom II X4 940.. Okay, it's a Socket AM2+ processor, not a Socket AM3 processor, so you do have to use the slower DDR2 memory. The Socket AM3 version is near $30 more, and the memory difference between DDR2 and DDR3 really almost pays for itself there. At the $150+ mark though,
* * *
Okay: motherboard.
Actually, I'm going to post this to get it up, THEN do the motherboard bit.
je saist,
Thank you for reply. Good stuff to know. And I forgot to mention under Memory that I want DDR3...
Thanks again.
Okay. Thanks to my browser being stupid, I lost what I was originally posting.
Short run down:
Multi-Gpu support: Not really needed. Unless you want to push high levels of detail and massive image filtering, most multi-gpu rigs are overkill. A RadeonHD 5850, for example, can be beaten by two 5770's working together; the 5770's in crossfire can actually best a single 5870 in some games; and with the 5850's original launch supply issues and retailer markups, the $320-$340 you'd spend for two 5770's was probably going to be worth it.
But, the 5850 can now be had, reliably, for under the cost of 2 5770's, and unlike two 5770's, it's not dependent on Crossfire support, so you'll get that high performance... all the time. Not just in situational events.
The 5770, on it's own, can push DX11 / OpenGL 4.0 shaders in 1920*1200, so if you are buying for future proof, it's sort of a safe mid-range bet; providing you don't mind not being able to apply high-levels of anti-aliasing.
* * *
There is a catch through when buying a motherboard with an eye to Multi-GPU support. Nvidia decided a couple years ago to abandon the AMD market, and basically won't allow AMD to support Nvidia-SLI on AMD chipsets. This is among some of Nvidia's other nasty moves, such as disabling Nvidia-PhysX when a non-Nvidia GPU is rendering the graphics.
The result is that while Newegg.com currently lists 139 different Socket AM3 motherboards with AMD chipsets, it only lists 15 Socket AM3 motherboards with Nvidia chipsets. Of those, only 5 motherboards have 2 PCIE-16x 2.0 slots. Two of those are Open-Box units... meaning only 3 Socket AM3 motherboards will do SLI:
Only one motherboard will do Triple-SLI
These boards will also only do SLI. They won't do Crossfire. So if you are looking at Multi-GPU, you'll basically have to buy an AMD motherboard with either an Nvidia chipset or an AMD chipset... and then only use multi-gpu setups from whichever vendor the chipset came from.
Intel on the other hand... well... if you buy an Intel Motherboard with the P55 chipset, many of them will do both Crossfire AND SLI.
Such as this BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI.
Basically, Intel motherboards are not the screw-over jobs they used to be. $134 for a BioStar Motherboard is actually a pretty decent amount. You basically don't have to bend over and accept a hot-red spike up the... well... you know... just because you bought an Intel motherboard.
In fact, the majority of the AMD boards are not much off that price for the same level of feature support.
So, really, the motherboard itself isn't so much a deal-breaker like it has been in the past. Granted, that is largely in-part because I7 and I5 motherboards don't need to have the memory controller wired into the board, and vendors no longer have to pass the price of that memory controller onto the end-user.
Problem is, you'll still make up that memory-controller surchage on the processor.
Basically, if you were looking to spend for ultimate performance, I'd say get an I7:
You won't get reamed on the motherboard.
You won't get reamed on the memory.
You won't get reamed on multi-gpu support if you buy a motherboard with a P55 chipset
You'll still get reamed on the processor price itself since most I7's you can buy start at $300
If you aren't looking to spend $300 on a processor alone though... Intel still hasn't quite caught up in the mid-range and low-end.
Down here were the "normal" folk buy hardware, AMD's still got the best bang / buck, although you do lose out on multi-gpu rig choices.
Well je_saist is an unabashed AMD/ATI supporter. Also we are talking desktops, not laptops.
The problem per se with the Socket 1156 Intel i3/i5 (with the exception of the i5-750) for the desktop is simply it's a dual core/psuedo quad core because of hyperthreading. In and of itself that's not bad, just comparing it to a real quad/hex core like the AMD Phenom II X4/X6 isn't really a fair comparison.
AMD is very competitive performance wise in the sub-$200 CPU segment. However all that changes with the i5-750 (2.66Ghz) and soon the i5-760 (2.8GHz) at around $200. The new X6 1090T simply can't compete price/performance wise at $100 more except on software that can use all six cores and then it can keep up with the quad core/psuedo octo core i7-860 and i7-930. Games barely use three or more cores effectively so if you're looking for a gaming CPU, an X6 is a bit of overkill.
Six Cores from AMD: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition and Phenom II X6 1055T CPU Review (X-bit Labs)
AMD's Six-Core Phenom II X6 1090T & 1055T Reviewed (AnandTech)
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T And 890FX Platform Review: Hello, Leo (Tom's Hardware)
AMD's Phenom II X6 processors (The Tech Report)
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition (bit-tech)
As for a Socket 1156 motherboard. I sort of like that fact that you can get one that can do either Crossfire or SLi at x8/x8 if the need comes up, personally I'm a single video card guy but it's a question of leaving your options open. Going from x16 to and x8 connector losses about 5% in graphics performance on a single card but that should be easily made up with the second card. Running with a single card still gives you x16 performance, just want to make that clear. Therefore for ASUS these three fit the bill with the P7P55D-E Pro also giving you USB 3.0 and SATA 6.0Gb/s ports.
But that's my opinion.
Father Xmas - Level 50 Ice/Ice Tanker - Victory
$725 and $1350 parts lists --- My guide to computer components
Tempus unum hominem manet
If you are going intel Do not go 1156 socket. 1366 X58 chipset/socket and i7 socket 1366. 1156 is a dead socket. The higher end and new 6 core intels will be socket 1366.
if you play coh dual video cards is a waste. It won't use them.
Socket 1366 is also a dead socket. Next up for the high end is Socket 2011 which supports quad channel memory, includes 40 PCIe lanes, integrated graphics (to be on all Intel CPUs), DDR3-1600 controller standard, etc. Coming fourth quarter this year.
If you don't care about multiple video cards and maximum throughput, then the current Socket 1156 performs very well with faster default memory speed and better Turbo boost overclocking when fewer cores are needed. The Socket 1156 i7-860 is as good or better than the Socket 1366 i7-930.
Don't make me bludgeon you with benchmarks.
Anyways it's not like Socket 1156 or 1366 will go away overnight. We still have Socket 775 around after all.
Father Xmas - Level 50 Ice/Ice Tanker - Victory
$725 and $1350 parts lists --- My guide to computer components
Tempus unum hominem manet
actually 1156 will be replaced sooner 2011 is due q3 of 2011...(hence the name) you still get 40 lanes with x58 and full x16 pcie 2.0 - I have two gtx 470's running x16 in a x58 Gigabyte udr3...I got that and my 930 for under 300 from Frys...and it overclocks on stock voltage to 4.2ghz..>>..
No, the Socket 1156 is being replaced with Socket 1155 (yea, I know what's one pin?) but Intel is switching for switching sake and yes, they aren't backwards or forwards compatible. It's essentially the same as Socket 1156 but for their mainstream line of 32nm CPUs where the Socket 2011 will be replacing Socket 1366 for their high end 32nm CPU line. It's also reported that Socket 2011 CPUs will start at six cores.
And the number, 2011, is the number of pins.
Father Xmas - Level 50 Ice/Ice Tanker - Victory
$725 and $1350 parts lists --- My guide to computer components
Tempus unum hominem manet
To je_saist and Father Xmas,
Wow! Thank you for your replies.
I have much to digest from the links and information you both provided. Gonna go read up...
Thank you.
they already have 6 cores in 1366. What stinks is 40 lanes in 2011?? right now sli or cross fire takes up 32 - sata 6 usb 3 and what ever else is coming down the pipe....more lanes please.
Socket 1155 (and 1156) has only 16, so it's considered an upgrade and allows them to "unify" around a southbridge set.
And it's 40 lanes of PCIe V3.0, that is twice the speed of V2.0 and four times the speed of V1.0. 40 lanes will be plenty.
Father Xmas - Level 50 Ice/Ice Tanker - Victory
$725 and $1350 parts lists --- My guide to computer components
Tempus unum hominem manet
not if I want three PICe 3.0 videocards so I can check my email at 400 fps...:P
Quote:
... and that's why I went AMD for so long. |
Originally Posted by Father Xmas
No, the Socket 1156 is being replaced with Socket 1155 (yea, I know what's one pin?) but Intel is switching for switching sake and yes, they aren't backwards or forwards compatible. It's essentially the same as Socket 1156 but for their mainstream line of 32nm CPUs where the Socket 2011 will be replacing Socket 1366 for their high end 32nm CPU line. It's also reported that Socket 2011 CPUs will start at six cores.
|
I like my 1156-based I7-860. Runs quite nicely, little cheaper on RAM, etc. But I look at the upgrade path... then I look over at the system it replaced, now four years old, and after a BIOS upgrade (full disclosure, the system didn't like the BIOS upgrade at first, started choking on drivers - to the point where I did the upgrade, then a clean install) and I can throw in a fairly recent quad core Athlon II or Phenom II. I don't see getting much *more* stretch out of it (Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe/Wireless) but I can't help but wonder where *this* system will be four years from now, upgrade-wise.
No regrets, though. It does the job quite well, and three years will be "new system" time anyway most likely.
Well the longevity of Socket 775 is an anomaly. AMD went from Socket 754 to Socket 939 (940 was a blip) to Socket AM2 to Socket AM3 in something like 5 1/2 years, primarily due to memory configuration and type (single DDR, dual DDR, dual DDR2, dual DDR3). Intel simply switched the northbridge to accomplish the same thing. If it wasn't for the CPU voltage regulator difference we could be still be running Core2 and P4/D CPUs on the same 9xx motherboards.
All that said, AMD's approach of putting the memory controller on the CPU and having a secondary bus for graphics and everything else was obviously the way to go, since Intel "borrowed" the approach as well for the Core i5-7xx, and Core i7 series of CPUs (the current Core i3/i5 dual cores are closer to the old Core 2 than the Core i7).
So as long as memory bandwidth needs change and the technology evolves, socket lifespans will be going back to every few years unless tech hits a wall.
Father Xmas - Level 50 Ice/Ice Tanker - Victory
$725 and $1350 parts lists --- My guide to computer components
Tempus unum hominem manet
Hey folks,
Hope all is well. I'm in the process of buying an ASUS motherboard, but I'm not sure which is really best for my needs/playstyle:
1. Games-Currently played is just COX. Future, maybe a FPS like CoD or a MMO such as DCU Online or Bioware's Star Wars.
2. Bang for the buck-looking towards future. I think Intel's i5 is marginally better than both AMD's Phenom IIx4/IIx6. I know AMD is generally better "bang for the buck". On this note, why not just build a high end dual core instead of the 3 mentioned?
Also, do I really need a motherboard for two video cards? I just wanna pay for practical value/usage, not eye candy.
Thanks in advance.