Discussion in 'Processors and motherboards Intel' started by heymzey, Jan 22, 2012.
ASrock one of course. Best on that list.
We can't guarrantee support for Ivy Bridge as that's dependent on the manufacturer releasing a compatible bios. The only way to guarrantee support is to wait for the next chipset to be released. Any Z68 board is capable of supporting Ivy Bridge....but will require a compatible bios.
We are only a handful of months away from IB launch, can you hold out till then?
Firstly asus p67/z68 boards already have a bios update for ivy bridge.
Also all of those support pci-e x16 on a single and atleast pci-e x8 when two pci-e slots are used, they also support cf/sli.
Also you won't see much if any loss with current graphics cards with pci-e 2.0 at 8x, this has been shown in many reviews, also with ivy bridge the pci-e will be updated to pci-e 3.0 so even though it will run at 8x it will have have almost double the bandwidth of pci-e 2.0 anyway (8 GT/s vs 5 GT/s).
So you really have nothing to worry about as far as pci-e bandwidth/link width is concerned if you intend to use an ivy bridge cpu.
You would have to find a board with an NF200 chip to get 2 x16 slots.
That's the same thing BlackZero said in his post.
And here's a couple of reviews showing this
here's a screenshot from the last review.
If using pci-e 3.0 in cf, simply assume each card gets pci-e 2.0 bandwidth and going by that and the above chart you'd notice that there's almost no difference.
well if you read the note below the benchmark and pickup on the fact that pci-e 3.0 offers twice the bandwidth of pci-2.0 so effectively what's 8x on pci-3.0 is 16x on pci-2.0 in dual configurations.. and I hope you understand that pci-2.0 x16 does not bottleneck dual 7970's? seeing as you were eager on a pci-e 3.0 board and you only get pci-e 3.0 with ivy bridge I thought it was quite obvious what I had posted and you would understand it?
this is exactly what all the reviews you say you read up on show..
I use a lot of software that takes advantage of the HT feature such as handbrake for media encoding which offers upwards of 30% more performance, for gaming though there's 'currently' not much difference, though who knows what will happen in the future, and as I tend to keep a processor/system for a couple of years; I prefer to be future proof and generally buy the best processor (reasonably priced) when upgrading.
Ask yourself what features you'll use.
Do you need the extra USB ports? etc?
Odds are, the answer will be 'no', and the sensible choice will be the asrock.
But seriously, go through the exercise of adding up what connections you need.
Odds are, you need less than all of those boards offer.
No difference with dual SLI, it's first when you use 3 cards or more where you see the difference.
Should be a good board.
Asrock -> ASUS P8Z68-V/GEN3 :
Realtek Ethernet -> Intel Ethernet
1 -> 0 PS/2 port
4 -> 6 USB 2.0 plugs
2 == 2 USB 3.0
5 -> 6 audio plugs
8 -> 6 USB 2.0 headers
0 -> 2 USB 3.0 headers
2 == 2 PCI
2 == 2 PCI-E 1x
2 -> 3 PCI-E 16x (albeit @x4, not recommended for SLI/Xfire because it will probably cause stutter. Would be 'ok' as a stand-alone graphics port)
- Real difference is the extra x16 port @ x4, for non-SLI/Xfire-graphics use.
- A few extra USB ports.
- Some would say too bad for the PS/2 port, as it's more nerd-core than USB for keyboard.
The asus gives you a few more options.
I would just make sure you will use them, to warrant the +47.5% in price.
The asrock in your original link.
The symbols are comparisons.
I'm showing you the differences.
Left is asrock
Right is asus
-> is a change from left to right.
== is just saying that it's the same between the two.
USB has a few categories (onboard vs headers. 2.0 vs 3.0), so I not only listed the changed categories, but also the unchanged categories.
I'd pick Asus over ASRock anyday. But then I'd pick Gigabyte over Asus anyday as well.