Conclusion

Average performance is a key factor in many purchasing decisions, although we take a more balanced approach.

Asus has clear performance leadership, but is it the best motherboard choice? Let’s consider our options.

With a performance “disadvantage” of less than one-half percent, the MSI 790FX-GD70 provided superior graphics card slot spacing and overclocking compared to the M4A79T Deluxe. MSI’s motherboard is also slightly less expensive and includes several added features, such as dual-Gigabit LAN and support for three more SATA devices.

But both Asus and MSI have some trouble in the area of cable header placement, with audio and FireWire connections in the lower-rear corner that are nearly impossible to reach with the cables of top-panel ports. Additionally, both companies have neglected the stubborn Windows XP market for which floppy drives are occasionally useful, by putting the floppy header beneath the lowest expansion slot.

With a performance deficit of less than a tenth of one percent compared to MSI, the Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P also had the highest CPU overclock and the best cable header layout. The only disadvantage is its use of only two PCIe x16 slots, but the remaining slots don’t steal any pathways from the x16 slots. Thus, it could be a better board for anyone considering one or two dual-GPU graphics cards, rather than three or four single-GPU units.

Finally there’s the DFI LANParty DK 790FXB-M3H5, which is nearly average in every way except priceit’s around 20% cheaper than other 790FX Socket AM3 solutions, and could be the basis for a reduced-cost gaming system.

MSI’s best-in-class features make the 790FX-GD70 a top value among the three most expensive boards, but most of our editors would probably choose the Gigabyte MA790FXT-UD5P for its cable header placement.


  • Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment
  • Content also available in:
Sponsored links
Talkback
Anonymous 22/04/2009 13:52
Hide
-0+

It would be interesting to see how much AM3 processors improve over AM2+ especially come the next gen of graphics cards. Is the jump to AM3 boards worth the extra upgrade from AM2+? Im currently using a X2 6000+ but im doubtful that jumping to AM3 processors is worth it atm especially for gaming. My next upgrade will probally be the processor to prevent bottlenecking since my 4870 manages 22" easily but Id preferably like to get a mobo with 2X 16XPCIe lanes.

Anonymous 22/04/2009 13:52
Hide
-0+

It would be interesting to see how much AM3 processors improve over AM2+ especially come the next gen of graphics cards. Is the jump to AM3 boards worth the extra upgrade from AM2+? Im currently using a X2 6000+ but im doubtful that jumping to AM3 processors is worth it atm especially for gaming. My next upgrade will probally be the processor to prevent bottlenecking since my 4870 manages 22" easily but Id preferably like to get a mobo with 2X 16XPCIe lanes.

Merlanni 22/04/2009 21:08
Hide
-2+

I am going to switch back to AMD even if they perform less than intel. Why? I am not going to buy a motherboard for every processor. Who knows how many pins the next processor of Intel has. Upgrading is a major reason to choose a platform. Besides I do not need the power of i7 to game on a 20"

aevm 22/04/2009 22:20
Hide
-0+

LOL, I doubt even Intel knows. It used to be 1160, but then they removed 4 pins in October and now they're talking about LGA1156. Anyway, point taken, the i5 CPUs won't work in either LGA775 or LGA1366 boards.

aevm 22/04/2009 22:36
Hide
-0+

That Gigabyte board sounds perfect for somebody who might want 9 hard drives and a burner, because it has 10 SATA ports. I was looking for such a thing. This paragraph:

Quote :
We have no layout complaints, but builders should be aware that all four of the MA790FX-UD5P's add-in SATA ports (white) share a single PCIe pathway through the JMicron JMB363 controller, for a maximum combined throughput of 250 MB/s. That’s far short of the 1,200 MB/s combined bandwidth that four 3.0 Gb/s ports are theoretically capable of supporting.


is a bit scary, but in fact it's not a problem IMO. Even if you happen to copy a huge file from HDD 7 to HDD 8 (both on the JMicron controller), you still get over 100 MB/s bandwidth for each, and that's pretty much the average read/write rate of the WD Caviar Black 1TB. That is, there's no bottleneck after all.

Comments are closed on this page.
Sponsored links
Ad
Ad

Best offers

The Motherboards Articles and reviews
Sponsored links

Newsletters