| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/10/2008 9:48:14 PM | For those who think of upgrading to the next generation processiors the best mother board thatis out now is the K9N NEO V3 from MSI.
I is certified for windows vista and is for AMD 64 Athlon x2 wich is compatable for the new AMD Phenom .
it has 1000mhz fsb supoports am2 amd athlon 64x2/athlon 64/sempron processor according to there site they will handel the phenom as well.
Dual-channel DDR2 800 4 dimms for dual channelddr2-800/667/533 up to 8gb addressabity.
pci,
support 3 pci v2.3 slots
pci express 16x
support 1 pcix16 and 2 pcie x1 slot
sat a2
support 4 sata2 devices up to300 mb/s
audio
support 7.1 channel hd audio
usb 2.0
support 10 usb 2.0 high speed ports
gigabit lan support 10/100/1000 ethernet connection
well iam a proud owner of and i love it but this is the way to go if you want to get a good board | |
|
| |
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/12/2008 2:23:06 PM | MSI makes good boards, however the lack of DDR 1066 makes this board a bit weak.
I'd personally look at the Gigabyte GA-MA790FX-DS5. Solid state caps for longer life, DDR-1066, eSATA, RAID 0,1,0+1, JBOD, on an AM2/AM2+ socket.
However, buying into AMD hardware right now isn't a good idea. Intel's E8500 (Dual core) is performing as well/better than AMD's Phenoms (Quad core)... Nevermind the new 45nm Hi-K Penryns they just put out. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/12/2008 8:02:58 PM | I always believe if your happy with what u got then go for it .
this board is compatable for the phenom wich is good i have always been a amd person just like my cars i was always a chevy person not a found on road dead -ford lol
but intel and amd depending what u r using it for if u want better gamming i choose amd regardless look at the xbox 360s the processiors in them are not from intell or amd there from IMB so what im saying is that if u go on to youtube this board is on the top list of better board on the market now . | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/12/2008 8:06:30 PM | | and no you can install any pci exspress card in there it has a agp and a pci exspress slots so it was made for those who can use there older parts if need be . and most board dont have that option so this one i like | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/12/2008 9:14:02 PM | first, "and no you can install any pci exspress card in there it has a agp and a pci exspress slots so it was made for those who can use there older parts if need be . and most board dont have that option so this one i like"
It still doesn't have an AGP bus. These use a technology often called "AGP Express" which, as the name does not imply, puts the AGP card on the PCI (see: NOT PCI-Express) bus. In turn, most AGP cards will take a sizable performance hit. It's also more stuff to break, but that's beside the point.
"but intel and amd depending what u r using it for if u want better gamming"
Current benchmarks do not support this at all. Feel free to nose around TomsHardware, you'll see what I mean.
"i choose amd regardless look at the xbox 360s the processiors in them are not from intell or amd there from IMB"
Yes, the 360 uses a PowerPC processor. However, the 360 also isn't running an OS, and more importantly it's not even x86 based, so your argument here makes no sense. PPC computers aren't made anymore, the last were the G5 macs.
"so what im saying is that if u go on to youtube this board is on the top list of better board on the market now ."
Eh. I like to form my own opinions, not take them from what some guy said on youtube. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/12/2008 11:14:37 PM | im not here for a debate or a argument what im saying is that MSI has been around a very long time they are a very dependable boards i very rare see problems with the boards i did have a biostar befor it lasted 1 year it started failing the only boards i deal with and my buddy thats owns a computer shop is MSI,BIOSTAR,A BIT, board's.
but it seems that the MSI has sold more then the other's all together like i said it all depends on what u want maybe there are some who rather use msi then what u have.
Or maybe there are some who like the board u have it all depends on what u want i rather stick with amd they are a very good company i never once had a amd processor fail on me i been using amd for many years. and i injoy my work with computer's i build them all the time. but to each is own right | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/13/2008 3:14:25 AM | from what i know about computers, i would never trust anything based solely on its brand. one product could be the most dependable product ever built, but their next could be a complete disaster. or vice versa. just look at the cap problem a few years ago, that effected so many manufacturers it wasn't even possible to avoid it unless you just didn't buy anything at all.
i also wouldn't buy a product just because it had a ton of "features", because the real test is how well those features perform, and to what degree they don't perform as well as others. i mainly buy products that have only the features i want, and nothing else. it makes it hard shopping, but usually that tactic has served me well. and on an even more personal note, i wouldn't buy anything that wasn't intel based. i don't think that amd has the resources and quality control that intel does. thats completely opinion based, and you can argue it all you want.... and i can argue right back. but the fact is, intel owns the cpu/chipset market, and amd has been playing catchup since day one, and they still haven't come out ahead, and that should tell you something. every other company that made quality products has ended up on top. gpus? nvidia completely dominate the scene, but onl after the voodoo cards killed matrox and ati, but then ati came back with enough to compete with a competitor that didn't exist before (nvidia), and now look at them. amd on the other hand seems to enjoy being #2, and i wouldn't purchase from a company that can't/won't strive for more.
oh, and if you're going to bring up ibm... you do realize that apple dropped like like a sack of bricks, right? and for who? intel. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/13/2008 12:39:27 PM | "i never once had a amd processor fail on me i been using amd for many years."
In 3 years of retail PC repair, I've seen one CPU naturally fail. It was a Cyrix.  CPU failure is very rare for both companies.
AMD was actually ahead in the 64-bit race. the AMD64 platform was superior around the release of the third generation Venice cores (Advanced processes, low power use, low heat), but that was about the last time AMD really had a clear victory.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I dislike AMD, I've bought plenty of their products as far back as the AMD K5 series. I'm just pointing out that currently, Intel has a massive lead in performance, so I wouldn't suggest buying into AMD tech right now until they make some radical changes to their platform.
Apple's switch to Intel was inevitable. IBM wasn't spending enough time and money on R&D, and Apple likes fast COOL processors for their designs. This was causing several of their product lines to lag behind and stay with the older G4 processors since the G5s were impossible to cool in certain systems. Compare the noise of a dual G5 mac pro to the current 2008 octos. (I'm using one, so I can vouch for this... quietest computer I've owned ever; and it's a dual quad O.O)
The cap issue still plagues PCs, but mostly only cheaper companies are still producing motherboards with weak/underrated caps. Jetway is a huge offender, as well as abit, biostar, and ECS on their cheaper boards (Though, anything SiS based is garbage even with good caps *cough*K7S5A*cough*). All boards are susceptible though, short of ones built with solid state caps. Best thing you can do to combat it is use a UPS with AVR technology, and buy a good quality PSU. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/13/2008 1:18:47 PM | | Best to do some research, just because it's a name brand doesn't mean much anymore. Usually I do 5 to 10 hours of thinking and research. Lately I can careless about top of the line high performance crap since I don't play games. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/13/2008 3:17:03 PM | | like all major companys they do good for a while and drop some companys think they do better if they amurge with another like hp and copaq Amd had made some realy good processor's and granted they are doing good but the war has began and we shall see the out come in many years to come .some like intell some other's amd but it depends what you want and if u r happy with it .i rather stick with the boards i use abit is another good comany they make realy good boards . | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/19/2008 3:25:00 PM | WHY.. do you think dividing a 1000 mhz front side bus between 2 processors to get 500 mhz a peice is ANY THING TO BRAG ABOUT ???
YOU WOULD ONLY GET 1000 PER PROCESSOR IF IT WAS A QUAD PROCESSOR BOARD.... WHICH IS READLILY AVAIABLE FOR YEARS NOW....AND IS A MUCH BETTER BOARD THAN A 2 PROCESSOR BOARD.... and you only have to run 2 in a 4 to get the REAL 1000.... DOH
and besides.... it doesnt BOOT WINDOWS ANY FASTER ...UNLESS YOUR SMART ENOUGH TO HAVE GONE INTO THE BOOT CONTROL PANEL AND CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS "BOOT WITH 2 PROCESSORS.." lololololoolol...........
AND LIKE ITS PREDECESSORS... YOU WILL NEVER GET THE 8GS OF RAM TO
REGISTER... IT WILL SEE 7 AND FAIL TO USE THE REST... JUST LIKE THE BOARDS TODAY ..THEY TAKE 4, BUT YOU GET 3, AND THATS IT... THE FULL OPEN PIPE COSTS THEM TOO MUCH TO MAKE, YOU GET THE CHEAPED OUT PIPE... BUT AGIAN IF YOU USE A QUAD BOARD WITH 2 PROCESSORS YOU DONT HAVE THOSE PROBLEMS....
remember ... what they tell you you get, and what really works ARE ALWAYS 2 DIFFERENT THINGS...
what you want in a board FIRST IS STABILITY.... if its not stable, nothing else matters
| |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/19/2008 4:51:06 PM | Let me preface this post with the assumption that you're using processor and core interchangeably. While I wrote this post to be correct either way, please don't correct me. There are 4 socket systems out there.
WHY.. do you think dividing a 1000 mhz front side bus between 2 processors to get 500 mhz a peice is ANY THING TO BRAG ABOUT ???
Your post seems rather agitated, but your remarks are incorrect. Multi-processor systems have separate FSB segments, and do not run at half speed.
YOU WOULD ONLY GET 1000 PER PROCESSOR IF IT WAS A QUAD PROCESSOR BOARD.... WHICH IS READLILY AVAIABLE FOR YEARS NOW....AND IS A MUCH BETTER BOARD THAN A 2 PROCESSOR BOARD.... and you only have to run 2 in a 4 to get the REAL 1000.... DOH
This makes even less sense. Your previous statement implies that the FSB would be split evenly between processors. While it is incorrect, following your previous logic it would be 250 per processor.
More importantly, 4 processor systems are not always better than a 2 proc setup. The E8500 proves this, as it's currently beating Phenoms in various benchmarks. More processors only help in applications that use more than 2 threads at 100% of a CPU, which are fairly rare currently. There are advantages in many places, but not everyone needs them. Sometimes, a single or dual proc system with fast cores will product a better result than four slower ones.
and besides.... it doesnt BOOT WINDOWS ANY FASTER ...UNLESS YOUR SMART ENOUGH TO HAVE GONE INTO THE BOOT CONTROL PANEL AND CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS "BOOT WITH 2 PROCESSORS.." lololololoolol...........
This is news to me. The only multi-proc setting I'm aware of for booting is the BOOT.INI flag /numproc, which lets you turn OFF extra processors. Microsoft also doesn't have any documents to support your claim either.
AND LIKE ITS PREDECESSORS... YOU WILL NEVER GET THE 8GS OF RAM TO
REGISTER... IT WILL SEE 7 AND FAIL TO USE THE REST... JUST LIKE THE BOARDS TODAY ..THEY TAKE 4, BUT YOU GET 3, AND THATS IT... THE FULL OPEN PIPE COSTS THEM TOO MUCH TO MAKE, YOU GET THE CHEAPED OUT PIPE... BUT AGIAN IF YOU USE A QUAD BOARD WITH 2 PROCESSORS YOU DONT HAVE THOSE PROBLEMS....
This has nothing at all to do with the number of processors. the ~3gb ram ceiling is a limitation of all 32-bit operating systems (They can only address 2^32). 64 bit operating systems can address 2^64, which is around 17.2 billion gigabytes (16 exabytes). Your board may have other limitations due to current ram technology, slots, and the chipset, but none of these are at all related to the processor.
Also, please try to be civil. Intentional or not, your post sounds hostile. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/20/2008 11:57:32 PM | FireSlash is 100% on the money!!! although not very ept with raw electronics, as I read a tidbit in another thread that made no sense, he seems to know exactly what he's talking about with computer devices. It's not often I get the opportunity to agree completely with a poster, I agree completley here and couldn't have typed a better response myself.
jeepguy, your response makes no sense at all and negates any and all logic present on todays mainboards. the new mainboards are NOTHING like the old dinosaurs you are obviously used-to. the registers are different, bank addressing is different, and the list goes on.
MSI make great mainboards, and they make the best graphics cards hands down, but you have to be willing to pay to play with those bad-boys!
GigaByte make great mainboards, not any better than MSI tho, cuz they come off the same assembly line, same with ECS, another great mainboard, and theres 4 others that all come from the same plant, not gonna get into that tho. all are equally great, but all have slightly different features and capabilities, reaching out to a different audience.
Intel is blowing AMD away right now, for how long, who knows, but presently, its all Intel. a faster FSB means nothing. AMD has always used a faster FSB to compensate for the lack of cache. an Intel will do more with 800MHz than AMD will do with 1066MHz becasue it has 4 times the cache on-die than the AMD has. AMD needs the extra bus speed to keep the cpu fed with data. the intel with larger cache has a higher burst rate than AMD, meaning the processor can be fed data at a much higher rate than the AMD. an AMD has to work harder than an Intel to get the same job done. It hasn't always been this way, but at present, it is. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/21/2008 6:29:44 PM | Hands down best budget AM2+ motherboard is the ECS A780GM-A AM2+/AM2 AMD 780G. At newegg it is $79.99 and comes with a $10 mail in rebate.
Has built in DX10 video graphics, has 5 Sata ports on board which is impressive for a mATX board, eSATA, 1gb lan, both AM2 and AM2+ chips like the new phenoms, official 1066 DDR2 support and is very upgradeble. Oh also has an HDMI port as well for your high definition needs.
Now ofcourse it isn't necessary next gen since AMD next gen Chipsets will be the "Shanghai" 45nm quad, 6-core and 12core chips that fully support Hypertransport 3.0, DDR3 and 10.1 DX (with built on chipsets).
But if you want to get an AMD that is upgradeable for a few years and don't want to spend a lot of money then I would definitely suggest this board.
I would also suggest you wait just a tad bit. Intel and AMD are involved in a pricing war and it won't be long before you will be able to get a Phenom X4 9850 black edition for under $200. Many have already gotten the new 9850 black edition well over 3ghz per core. Now I will admit it can't compete with Intel current quadcores but that is fine. Just wait till pricing is competitive and you will be able to build a low level gaming system for under $480 easily. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/21/2008 8:35:25 PM | Buying into AMD is a complete waste of money right now. It's unfortunate since I was a huge AMD fan for a long time. But the current intel systems are very reasonably priced -- quite competitive actually -- and completely blow the AMD's out of the water.
I personally dumped AMD with my new setup and decided to run an e6750 clocked at 3.3ghz.
You will also find out that processors barely ever run at their full potential at this point. Your real bottleneck is hard drive speed. Ram/CPU speeds have far surpassed what a hard drive can spin at. And the latest hard drives -- solid state... are very expensive and buggy at best, so not a great buy either.
But really, for very little extra, you are way better off running an Intel setup. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/23/2008 1:04:13 AM | forgot to mention... OS is a large factor in CPU/Mainboard/Memory selection as well. if you intend on running any flavour of Windows Vista, forget the mainboard and cpu from either manufacturer, just save the money and buy an abacus, its faster - ROFLMFAO-I only have 1 PC left, a fully custom Acer notebook with SSe3 APIC, its a Intel powerhouse, Core 2 @ 3.2GHz/800MHz FSB (fresh off Intels testbench) with 4GB 800MHz matched DDR2 memory, running dual-boot Mac OSX, not a Hacintosh, its true Mac running unpatched retail OSX Leopard with Ubuntu Beryl on second boot device, I love the speed, try and find a faster PC - I dare ya, and the visual elements of the Beryl enhancement are second to none.
If you run a copy of your favorite Linux Distro, it doesn't really matter which CPU you get, they both scream with that OS.
Jeep Guy; do you even have a clue WHY only 3 of 4 gigs will register? I doubt it... I will start by enlightening you before you have an aneurism or something over there... from a pro to a beginner/novice <- thats you lol - 3 of 4 will register IF you have a 768MB Graphics card and a 32-Bit processor UNLESS you change your bank addressing sceme, which is not easy to do. 32-bit memory addressing can only support a max memory of 4GB, that includes ALL dedicated memory on board. 64-bit can support upto 16EB, or 15 plus graphics. this is due NOT to a hardware limitation but to the standard addressing scheme used in the 32-bit systems. you can change this. my machine has 4Gig of DDR2 and all 4 Gig are registered and functional PLUS a 1024MB NVidia graphics card - that totals 5.25 Gig of memory on a 32-bit scheme. don't ask how to do it, I won't tell you because its obviously a procedure wayyy outta your league.
I am NOT a Microshaft sheep, tho I am MCSE-MCSA certified, and smart enough to stay away from that virus laden crap code written by a bunch of mules. the only company I know of in the software business thats brags about features and usability, making billions from clients and they still feel the need to charge more than its worth, AND it performs as well as a turtle in the rabbit race. and they claim SP1 to address some speed issues... who done the benchmark? the blind guy with no hands in their R&D Dept?!
I'll stop now, starting to rant, I hate Microshaft products, but then again, don't we all? 
Apples aren't fruity, they're sweeeeeeeet! | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/23/2008 2:40:52 AM | CN is 100% correct.
The amount of memory available on a 32bit box is:
4GB - Memory reserved for memory mapping expansion cards.
Of this, the biggest reservation is likely to be your graphics card memory.
eg: 4Gb - 640MB graphics card = 3.4GB available - other cards. (eg: 64MB XRAM on Xi-Fi sound card)
On another note.
I find Vista SP1 reading the total amount of memory instead of the amount of memory it's addressing to be more confusing to users, because you have people that have 4GB of ram in their pc thinking Vista SP1 is addressing the whole 4gb of ram when it isn't. at least before, people were getting a true reading of how much Vista is really using. Now Vista SP1 is giving people a false sense that they are really using the whole 4gb of ram when they're not. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/24/2008 11:09:45 AM | my question is what are people going to do when they pull windows xp of the selfs this year i heard rumors that there will be no more updates supporting that os im glad i upgraded to vista i have the sp1 came up as a update i have no problems with vista what so ever my mother board is made for vista as well msi has come a long way in there products and they have always made good stuff .
but this board dose offer a lot and i love it i understand abit makes good boards to .+ | |
|
| |
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/25/2008 1:03:15 PM | | but untill then 2 years will pass what next do u think it will turn out like windows 98 befor xp to be no longer supported by microsoft ?it could happend every thing has turn over to beta now . lets hope the microsoft knows what they are doing . | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 4/25/2008 1:14:47 PM | | Windows 7 will be out by then. Microsoft is totally rethinking Windows 7 from the ground up. In a recent interview with Steve Ballmer they looked at why XP is such a success and where they went wrong with Vista and he stated that they want to combine the reliability and compatibility from XP and the safety and security from Vista and incorperate them into Windows 7. So it sounds like Microsoft is taking the best features from their previous OSes and putting them into Windows 7. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 6/28/2008 3:02:55 PM | i know its been a while but msi has come out with another board vista ready and for am2 am2+ as well the nice feature this board has is on board video a 8300 not bad i will fill u in when i buy this board next wich im building .
i will put some videos up on youtube and myspace i will send the link when i have the board this comming month .msi has come a long way and has been around for a long time so stay tune . | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 6/29/2008 3:17:47 AM | Dude... why are you advertising products like this? An onboard 8300 would be a dicey proposition for HD content, let alone any actual 3D processing.. Do they pay you money to do this? I am not sure what the rationale behind it could possibly be otherwise.
Before I purchase tech, I look at a range of reviews and benchmarks from reliable sources and then go looking. Some dude who thinks onboard 8300s are pretty flash is not a reliable source and I would urge others to go the reliable source path instead. | |
|
| for those who are looking in to a good mother board
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:12:04 AM | Intel has the lead on performance and performance/price. They managed to get it back when they finally ditched Netburst (Pentium 4) and started using the Core architecture. It's going to take a lot for AMD to catch up again, but they may be able to do it. Intel chip with nVidia chipset and graphics is probably the best combination for gaming right now, though my X2/nForce 570/GeForce 7600 runs anything I play on it just fine.
On the other hand, AMD isn't completely out just yet. The one place Intel can't quite get to is the server market - last I remembered, Xeon's didn't scale to 4 or 8 cores near as well as Opterons do. Also, AMD still has the advantage in Low-Power (Wattage, not performance) systems. Both processors and chipsets run cooler than intel's versions. While you may not be able to get quite as powerful of system, which either companies chips are good enough for a task (media center maybe), the more interesting factor is price and cooling, it's a lot easier to keep a lower wattage chip cooler.
AMD's other advantage is with the Open-Source community. Since AMD bought ATI, their Linux drivers have changed a lot, and they are given a lot more information to the community so that the open-source versions of their drivers can be a lot better as well. While that may not matter much to the processor, it's a good reason (in my opinion anyways) to support one company over the other. Though Intel has been doing good with their graphics chips too, they can't hold a candle to the ATI graphics chips. | |
|
Home
login 
