Latest Forum Posts

Latest News Posts
Coming Soon!
Social
Go Back   Techgage.com > Archives > Reviews and Articles

Reviews and Articles Discussion for Techgage content is located here. Only staff can create topics, but everyone is welcome to post.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-16-2010, 01:02 AM   #1
Rob Williams
Editor-in-Chief
 
Rob Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 13,350
Default Gigabyte 890FXA-UD5

In the market for a dual-GPU capable AMD motherboard, and one that's capable of achieving some huge overclocks? Gigabyte has you covered, with its 890FXA-UD5. In addition to having native SATA 3.0 support, USB 3.0 support can also be found, along with 4 PCI-E x16 graphics slots, a near-perfect board design and good pricing.

You can read the rest of my review here and discuss it here!
__________________
Intel Core i7-3960X, GIGABYTE G1.Assassin 2, Kingston 16GB DDR3-2133, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 2GB
Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD (OS, Apps), WD VR 1TB (Games), Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H70 Cooler
Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.11. 3.12 Kernel)

"Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter
<Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.


Rob Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 03:26 AM   #2
Greg King
I just kinda show up...
 
Greg King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,086
Default

Solid read. I don't know if I could personally justify shelling out almost 200 dollars for an AMD board but it does look like a good mobo. Gigabyte makes quality boards and if you're an AMD guy, with the price of their processors, I suppose this purchase could be a no brainer and the 890 chipset appears to be a good one.
__________________
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
- Carl Sagan

Primary:
Intel i7-5960X | ASUS X99-Deluxe | 16GB Crucial DDR4 | Intel 730 240GB SSD | Crucial M4 256GB SSD
WD 1TB Black x1 | 2 x EVGA 770 GTX Superclocked SLI | Corsair H110 Water Cooler
Corsair 750D | Windows 8.1 x64 | Dell 2410 x 3 @ 5760x1200

ESXi Host:
Intel i5 3570 | ASRock Pro4-M | 24GB Patriot DDR3 | WD 250GB | QNAP NAS iSCSI Shared Storage
Greg King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 06:16 AM   #3
Doomsday
Tech Junkie
 
Doomsday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: KHI, PAK
Posts: 1,559
Default

one st00pid question! If i buy a sata 3.0 mobo, will i be able to use my current HDDs on sata 3.0s and get the benefits of sata 3.0?!?
__________________
PSU: Corsair AX850 - Case: Cooler Master HAF X - CPU:Core i7-2600k - Cooler: Cooler Master V6 GT - Motherboard: Asus Z68 Maximus IV Extreme Z - Memory: Corsair Vengeance 8 GB-1600Mhz - GPU: AMD MSI R6970 Lightning - HDD: WD Caviar Black 1TB, Seagate 2TB Barracuda Green - SSD: Intel 520 Series 120GB - K/B: Razer Lycosa Mirror - Mouse: Logitech G700 - MouseMat: Steel Series 4HD - LCD: Asus VG278H 27" - Speakers: Creative Inspire M4500 4.1 - Headset: Logitech G35 7.1



"Do not look at a man's prayers nor his fasts, rather, measure him by how well he deals with others, the compassion he shows his fellow man, his wisdom and his integrity" - Umar Ibn Al-Khattab



Last edited by Doomsday; 07-16-2010 at 06:23 AM.
Doomsday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 11:56 AM   #4
Tharic-Nar
Techgage Staff
 
Tharic-Nar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomsday View Post
one st00pid question! If i buy a sata 3.0 mobo, will i be able to use my current HDDs on sata 3.0s and get the benefits of sata 3.0?!?
Nope . You can use a SATA 1 or 2 hard drive in a SATA 3 socket, but it won't increase your bandwidth. Mechanical drives can only just stress a SATA 1 socket... and that's with the help of the on-board cache. SATA3 is purely for SSD's and high speed HDD cache.

So yes, you can use your drives in the slots, but no, you won't get a speed increase.
Tharic-Nar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 01:14 PM   #5
Anon
Guest Poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Poor OC

You needed 1.6v to reach 3.9GHz?!? This says nothing about the chip or the board, just that this reviewer knows nothing about overclocking. Terrible!
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 02:07 PM   #6
Greg King
I just kinda show up...
 
Greg King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 2,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anon View Post
You needed 1.6v to reach 3.9GHz?!? This says nothing about the chip or the board, just that this reviewer knows nothing about overclocking. Terrible!
Issuing a blanket statement like yours, that the reviewer knows nothing about overclocking, isn't quite fair. He clearly states that this is his first foray into overclocking with the 890FX chipset. Even if you disagree with the overclocking results, perhaps even the methodology, there are still plenty of benchmarks in this review to point out the general performance of this board, it's merits and short falls. You can't discredit the 40+ motherboard reviews by this reviewer simply because you don't like the way he got to those clocks.
__________________
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
- Carl Sagan

Primary:
Intel i7-5960X | ASUS X99-Deluxe | 16GB Crucial DDR4 | Intel 730 240GB SSD | Crucial M4 256GB SSD
WD 1TB Black x1 | 2 x EVGA 770 GTX Superclocked SLI | Corsair H110 Water Cooler
Corsair 750D | Windows 8.1 x64 | Dell 2410 x 3 @ 5760x1200

ESXi Host:
Intel i5 3570 | ASRock Pro4-M | 24GB Patriot DDR3 | WD 250GB | QNAP NAS iSCSI Shared Storage
Greg King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 05:21 PM   #7
Rob Williams
Editor-in-Chief
 
Rob Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 13,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg King
I don't know if I could personally justify shelling out almost 200 dollars for an AMD board but it does look like a good mobo.
It's true, $200 is a lot to ask for when the CPU costs about the same, or less. But, it is filled to the brim with features, so for those who want AMD, it's a great choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tharic-Nar
SATA3 is purely for SSD's and high speed HDD cache.
Agreed, and even then the difference is going to be hard to see, except with synthetic benchmarks. I think we're reaching a point there where an SSD is "too fast"... where we can't tell the difference between 300MB/s and 600MB/s. Of course, that will change once SSD's replace HDD's for storage purposes, at which point the higher speeds would be noticeable, given we'd be copying files all over the place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anon
You needed 1.6v to reach 3.9GHz?!? This says nothing about the chip or the board, just that this reviewer knows nothing about overclocking. Terrible!
There's a difference between my 3.9GHz and another site's 4.2GHz... mine is stable. I am willing to bet that the majority of 4.0GHz+ overclocks out there are -not- LinX stable, and whether I'm right about using it or not, that's all I care about. If a CPU craps out during a LinX run, which is about as hardcore as it gets, then I don't consider it stable. I -could- have reached a clock higher than 4.0GHz, but what's the point when it you might BSOD during a game or something else?

I'm still willing to believe that our sample is less-than-stellar, so I might hit up AMD for a fresher one. The problem with engineering samples is that they sometimes aren't entirely on par with retail chips. I saw that even with the Core i7-980X, where many people are going well beyond 4.0GHz, our max stable was 4.05GHz.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg King
Issuing a blanket statement like yours, that the reviewer knows nothing about overclocking, isn't quite fair.
It might not be fair, but what would you expect from someone who's likely never visited the site before, nor read the words around the overclocking screenshot that explained the situation?

If all people want to see are unstable overclocking reports, they're going to have to go elsewhere. I firmly believe that stable is what matters, and if we can't achieve a stable overclock at over 4.0GHz, then we're not going to pretend that we did.
__________________
Intel Core i7-3960X, GIGABYTE G1.Assassin 2, Kingston 16GB DDR3-2133, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 2GB
Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD (OS, Apps), WD VR 1TB (Games), Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H70 Cooler
Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.11. 3.12 Kernel)

"Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter
<Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.


Rob Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 06:26 PM   #8
Anon
Guest Poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Poor OC

Sorry Rob but anyone who has OC'd a Phenom II knows that they scale better with temperature than voltage. Literally every C3 stepping chip I have worked with (20+) has been able to reach 3.8GHz using 1.4v or less, and those were all 955s and 965s. Thuban scales even more easily than this. You fail, and your silly "stability" argument doesn't hold water - I can run any test you'd like on my 965 C3 at 4.2GHz using the same voltage you needed for 3.8 and pass it - this is just pathetic, you clearly don't know what you're doing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 07:11 PM   #9
Rob Williams
Editor-in-Chief
 
Rob Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 13,350
Default

First, there are few things quite as lame as out-right flaming someone while cowering under an anon tag.

Second, your argument has a gaping hole in it. You are comparing quad-core overclocks to that of a six-core processor. Anyone with real overclocking experience would realize that as the core count increases, so does the difficulty in receiving a high-end stable overclock. Why? Because some of the cores might not be quite up to par as the others. We saw this especially when moving from dual-cores to quad-cores, and like-wise, from quad-cores to six-cores. We see the effect less today, though, thanks to improved build processes.

Are you familiar with LinX? It's a benchmark that's designed to stress a CPU even harder than it needs to be. In some regards, it's an unrealistic benchmark, but I like running it so that I can tell our readers with absolute certainty that our overclock was 100% stable. Have you run LinX on your 4.2GHz overclock? Not that I don't doubt it might succeed. As I mentioned, six-cores have proven a bit of a challenge to achieve high overclocks and retain stability. I had that even with Intel's six-core, topping out at 4.05GHz.

Regardless, if all you're going to do is come around and flame the results, and me, why not get a life and take your elite overclocking self somewhere else? You're the first person I can recall that's come around to flame our overclocking results, so I think we're doing something right.
__________________
Intel Core i7-3960X, GIGABYTE G1.Assassin 2, Kingston 16GB DDR3-2133, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 2GB
Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD (OS, Apps), WD VR 1TB (Games), Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H70 Cooler
Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.11. 3.12 Kernel)

"Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter
<Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.


Rob Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 07:17 PM   #10
Anon
Guest Poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Poor OC

Not really a gaping hole when Thuban clocks much easier than Deneb C3 on the same cooling and motherboard quite consistently for anyone who knows what they're doing. Take a look at some results by *real* overclockers before you spout off your ignorance. I'm Anon because I didn't deem your shitty forum worthy of taking 30 seconds to sign up. I will now leave as you have requested since you can only repeat the same ridiculous 'arguments', have a nice life with your pretend 31337 skillz and knowledge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 07:43 PM   #11
Rob Williams
Editor-in-Chief
 
Rob Williams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlantic Canada
Posts: 13,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anon
I'm Anon because I didn't deem your shitty forum worthy of taking 30 seconds to sign up.
If "I didn't deem your shitty forum worthy of taking 30 seconds to sign up." is equivalent to "I'm a major pussy", then sure, that's understandable. But the fact of the matter is, the default name for those who haven't registered is "Unregistered", which means you chose to remain anonymous. So, don't go acting like you would have had to go out of your way to use a real name, or even a moniker that you likely use on a bunch of other forums. You're a coward, plain and simple.

People like you do make me feel a lot better about myself, though, because I can only imagine that you are unhappy with yourself and want to take out the hatred on others. Why else would you be so nonconstructive and just flame people because their results don't quite live up to your ultra-high levels? You wouldn't... it wouldn't make sense to.

I've stated my case, and you've continued to flame and be rude. It's absurd, and childish.

But, I'm wasting my breath. You left, so you're not going to see this anyway.

*rolls eyes*
__________________
Intel Core i7-3960X, GIGABYTE G1.Assassin 2, Kingston 16GB DDR3-2133, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 2GB
Kingston HyperX 3K 240GB SSD (OS, Apps), WD VR 1TB (Games), Corsair 1000HX, Corsair H70 Cooler
Corsair 800D, Dell 2408WFP 24", ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Gentoo (KDE 4.11. 3.12 Kernel)

"Take care to get what you like, or you will be forced to like what you get!" - H.P. Baxxter
<Toad772> I don't always drink alcohol, but when I do, I take it too far.


Rob Williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
None

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GIGABYTE at CES 2011 Rob Williams Reviews and Articles 3 01-12-2011 02:58 PM
Gigabyte P55-UD5 Rob Williams Reviews and Articles 3 09-30-2009 01:34 PM
Gigabyte EX58-UD5 Rob Williams Reviews and Articles 17 04-17-2009 08:25 PM
Gigabyte GA-X48T-DQ6 Rob Williams Reviews and Articles 11 09-24-2008 10:31 AM
Gigabyte GA-X38-DQ6 Rob Williams Reviews and Articles 15 12-28-2007 03:45 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:06 PM.