Upcoming 890FX Motherboards - Due April 26th

roadie said:
Does anyone else feel the 890GX based boards, especially those from ASUS and ASROCK give much, much better value for money (overclocking included) than the FX based boards?
Click to expand...

no, you're not alone. unless you need multiple 16x pci-e slots, the FX boards arent especially great next to the GX boards.

*hugs his asus m4a89gtd pro/usb3*
 
Loads of people have a Formula, myself included.

Also I can see one reason the extreme will be so expensive.

It uses the Lucid Hydra chip, aka SLI on 890FX
 
alexp999 said:
Loads of people have a Formula, myself included.

Also I can see one reason the extreme will be so expensive.

It uses the Lucid Hydra chip, aka SLI on 890FX
Click to expand...

I wont be doing any extreme overclocking but i do want a board that will be am3 + support mad 6 core right off the bat, i also want a board with ddr3 amd build and ati.

How much cooler does this board keep the north and south briges?
 
chaosquall said:
I wont be doing any extreme overclocking but i do want a board that will be am3 + support mad 6 core right off the bat, i also want a board with ddr3 amd build and ati.

How much cooler does this board keep the north and south briges?
Click to expand...

My NB didnt go over 50*C after having been left on overnight 10hrs Prime 95 with CPU @ 4 GHz.

Not sure how that compares.
 
james.miller said:
no, you're not alone. unless you need multiple 16x pci-e slots, the FX boards arent especially great next to the GX boards.

*hugs his asus m4a89gtd pro/usb3*
Click to expand...

Only problem I have is, other than a possibly faulty Asus 890gx, for no apparent reason they've put the sata ports not on the edge facing sideways, but stickout out of the board VERY near the ONLY 16x pci-e slot. With a bigger cooler on my 5850 it just doesn't fit in the only 16x slot, because the sata ports aren't accessible, absolutely awful design.

So i'm running in the 8x port, not exactly losing tonnes of speed, but I actually can't buy another 5850 and fit a 3rd party cooler and fit it in the 2nd slot.

The lack of £100 890fx boards is dissappointing to say the least. Chipset wise the FX should cost less than the GX to make, but AMD probably charge a premium on the FX, even so, there were plenty of 790fx and GX boards between £80-110 with only a few ridiculously overpriced £140+ boards.

Its very dissappointing that the only boards are £160+ and that some of the GX boards seem almost purposefully badly designed.
 
i want this board, where is it though? lol

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=890FX Deluxe3

890FX%20Deluxe3(Enlarge).jpg
 
drunkenmaster said:
Only problem I have is, other than a possibly faulty Asus 890gx, for no apparent reason they've put the sata ports not on the edge facing sideways, but stickout out of the board VERY near the ONLY 16x pci-e slot. With a bigger cooler on my 5850 it just doesn't fit in the only 16x slot, because the sata ports aren't accessible, absolutely awful design.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. why they chose to make the 2nd slot the 16x slot on my board i dont know, it means i cant use my 16x slot either because of cooling problems with my 5850 (i have a htpc case, its a bit cramped). If nothing else at least the performance difference is negligible lol
 
Martini1991 said:
The 890FX boards, at least the crosshair Formula are worth the premium..
Click to expand...

I can't see anything on it that makes it better than any £100 790FX boards in terms of features, other than some truly stupid stuff 99.99999% of buyers simply will not use, and a few things people won't use most of the time they use it.

I honestly can't see how its worth £65 more than a 890gx, if it wasn't "aimed at gamers" with extra special detail put into the colour scheme, nor the extra effort put into the shape of the heatsink.

Going through the list of features again, Creative sound onboard, ok its higher quality sound, if you like Creative, if Creative update their drivers when there are problems and if you like their truly horrific software. Personally I'd prefer the bog standard onboard sound over the potential for issues Creative bring.

Rog, being able to read post codes by connecting a laptop via USB, how massively useful. Their EPU/mem ok, the rest of it is all available on their £100 board. The sound is worth £5, maybe £10 more, honestly none of the other features are useful or worth, everything else, from overclocking ability, bios options, power, other than better sata connection placement and a few extra pci lanes, I'd pay £20 more for it, but a board that came without the stupid Creative sound card, the ridiculous colour coded voltage LED's, the daft software that really doesn't do much of anything, should cost the same as any other bog standard 790fx board.

More daft features don't make a better overclocking board, they give you more daft features to not use.

Personally I'm still waiting for someone to have the balls to make a bare bones overclocking only board, no IDE port, no 58 usb 2 headers, no firewire, no pci slots, a great bios and not spending money creating lots of features no one ever uses, would be great.

Even worse, because my current Asus is likely borked, and I certainly don't want to stick with it which means changing it out soon, I've got very little choice right now but the Crosshair.

The "gamer" style names and daft pretending to improve overclocking features, its almost(but not quite) as bad as a Fatality branded mobo. Can't believe the choice is soo weak at the moment.
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
I can't see anything on it that makes it better than any £100 790FX boards in terms of features, other than some truly stupid stuff 99.99999% of buyers simply will not use, and a few things people won't use most of the time they use it.

I honestly can't see how its worth £65 more than a 890gx, if it wasn't "aimed at gamers" with extra special detail put into the colour scheme, nor the extra effort put into the shape of the heatsink.
Click to expand...
That's a fair point you make and this is also the reason why most manufacturers are not bothering with creating 890FX based motherboards. I was talking to Foxconn yesterday and they made it clear that most users are interested in the 785G/890GX because of the onboard graphics and as such saw no point in manufacturing 890FX based motherboards. Saying this I wouldn't call the Crosshair IV pointless for a number of reasons.

Going through the list of features again, Creative sound onboard, ok its higher quality sound, if you like Creative, if Creative update their drivers when there are problems and if you like their truly horrific software. Personally I'd prefer the bog standard onboard sound over the potential for issues Creative bring.
Click to expand...
What potential issues will these be? There have been many people using the onboard creative chips for years and I haven't really seen any issues. Of course they will lack the quality of a proper dedicated X-Fi sound card but personally I haven't had many issues with driver support. Like an onboard graphics chip, the onboard Creative sound is something decent to have for users that just want a bit more quality without splashing out on dedicated cards.

Rog, being able to read post codes by connecting a laptop via USB, how massively useful. Their EPU/mem ok, the rest of it is all available on their £100 board. The sound is worth £5, maybe £10 more, honestly none of the other features are useful or worth, everything else, from overclocking ability, bios options, power, other than better sata connection placement and a few extra pci lanes, I'd pay £20 more for it, but a board that came without the stupid Creative sound card, the ridiculous colour coded voltage LED's, the daft software that really doesn't do much of anything, should cost the same as any other bog standard 790fx board.
Click to expand...
I'm assuming you haven't actually tried out the ROG features. The TurboV software is actually very useful in doing small tweaks without going back to bios everytime. Changes made there are applied on a Bios level which isn't something you get with other motherboards. In terms of overclocking, we actually found that the Crosshair IV managed to unlock a phenom 555 to 4 cores and overclocked it to 4ghz. A previously tested 890GX based motherboard from ASUS could only take the x2 555 unlocked to 3.4ghz so that's a tremendous achievement.

More daft features don't make a better overclocking board, they give you more daft features to not use.

Personally I'm still waiting for someone to have the balls to make a bare bones overclocking only board, no IDE port, no 58 usb 2 headers, no firewire, no pci slots, a great bios and not spending money creating lots of features no one ever uses, would be great.

Even worse, because my current Asus is likely borked, and I certainly don't want to stick with it which means changing it out soon, I've got very little choice right now but the Crosshair.

The "gamer" style names and daft pretending to improve overclocking features, its almost(but not quite) as bad as a Fatality branded mobo. Can't believe the choice is soo weak at the moment.
Click to expand...
You make some fair points but Martini1991 is right in saying that the Crosshair IV is worth the premium. Of course, it's only fitting for people who will make use of the features (I'm sure a lot of people will) but that's no reason to dismiss them. In fact if the x4 960T is released, I can see that and the Crosshair IV making a very good combo as long as the chip can be unlocked. Imagine a processor that's £100 less but can match the performance of the x6 with only a small premium added to the motherboard cost.
 
I'm with Helios1234 on this one actually.

I've got the Crosshair III now and it's definitely worth a premium over the cheaper boards. The TurboV software is very good indeed, and there's also many other bundled features such as 3dmark etc.

I also think design is important, especially if you have a windowed case. A lot of people buy hardware to show it off, and the Crosshiar IV is about 10x better looking to the other 890 boards in my opinion. Of course, looks and features aren't everything, performance is important too. The board has shown itself to be right up there with the best in this case. Check out the review by gt_junkie. Impressive clocks and so easy to get there with the board. If you're not overclocking though, it's a waste of money of course. In fact, if you're just doing small OCs it might not be worth it. But remember what site your posting on! I plan to squeeze everything I can out of my 965BE to see what the board+chip can do. When I have a bit more time though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom