Any Chance of a Crosshair Gene?

[tunksy]

has there been any word on asus developing a crosshair 990fx gene motherboard?

sorry if this is in the wrong section

[zanzabar]

i doubt that you will much love for amd with newer MBs. socket am3+ will most likely also die by the time a real upgrade to the thulban comes out. so i do not see why any one would build a overclocking board with even less appeal to the masses. the board selection is already dwindling so i would not hold hope, or move to intel as it will be cheaper and quicker than any BD.

[BeepBeep2]

If Piledriver is not full of absolute suck for gamers (Republic of GAMERS) then yes...
While ROG is tailored to Extreme Enthusiasts as well they do try to sell the brand to gamers believe it or not, and FX is a worse gaming CPU than Phenom II, which is worse than Bloomfield, worse than Sandy Bridge, worse than Ivy, etc.

[FlanK3r]

not so clearly true...FX is in some games better than PII. Not all games are not optimized (mean not only for consoles).

[BeepBeep2]

not so clearly true...FX is in some games better than PII. Not all games are not optimized (mean not only for consoles).

If you say so
Margins are slim, they trade blows at best and one is more expensive.

[zanzabar]

not so clearly true...FX is in some games better than PII. Not all games are not optimized (mean not only for consoles).

the p2 is faster single, multi threaded, power consumption, and thrashes the BD in everything when at the same clock. the only advantage that the BD has is that amd had no balls in telling OEMs to put a real PWM on all boards so they did not get the clocks higher stock on the thulban, that means that stock the BD can have a good 400-500mhz on the old chips (even though they suck up way more power at those clocks than the oced thulban)


anyways no one would build an matx gaming rig with a $200 MB and a $200 cpu (what the next gen should cost) and go amd since right now amd chips are just toys to overclock.

If you say so
Margins are slim, they trade blows at best and one is more expensive.

a used 1090/1100 costs more than the top 8120 right now so that says it all. you are looking at $175 for a fully functional thulban black edition but $145 for the 8120.

[BeepBeep2]

the p2 is faster single, multi threaded, power consumption, and thrashes the BD in everything when at the same clock. the only advantage that the BD has is that amd had no balls in telling OEMs to put a real PWM on all boards so they did not get the clocks higher stock on the thulban, that means that stock the BD can have a good 400-500mhz on the old chips (even though they suck up way more power at those clocks than the oced thulban)


anyways no one would build an matx gaming rig with a $200 MB and a $200 cpu (what the next gen should cost) and go amd since right now amd chips are just toys to overclock.



a used 1090/1100 costs more than the top 8120 right now so that says it all. you are looking at $175 for a fully functional thulban black edition but $145 for the 8120.

Oh rly?
Used price for a 1090T not much after 1100T launch was ~$175.
I sold a 1100T for $135 a few weeks ago, and it took me a week to get a buyer.

You can get a 955 or 965 new for $100 (while supplies last)...I think everyone has noticed that AMD is still producing them, several months after they set a date for last shipments.

You need to back up your claims a little with "thrashes the BD in everything", not true. Would I prefer a PII to FX for most things? Yes, but some multithreaded workloads, BD kicks PII's ass in. What do you mean about the "real PWM"? PWM on ASUS is same between CHIV and CHV, Gigabyte switched to Driver MOSFET for the sake of having all their lineup using those...UD3 retains older design seen on 890FXA-UD5...MSI doin what it always was, DrMOS...

What tells the story is how much 8150's have dropped in price. These were ~$270 at launch. I paid $260 for one...now if I were to sell it I would only get half of my initial investment and it has only been a few months.

2600Ks still sell for near launch price.

[zanzabar]

people on ebay have bid auctions up that high (could be a scam) and there are people wanting them to upgrade dying denab chips.

not diy oems like asus or GB, like dell and HP.

on the cpu speed, did you not look at the benches at launch, when clocked the same it lost.

the BD took a nose dive since no one wants them, intel is priced about the same for a k edition and smokes amd in gaming and marketing. they are on newegg right now with the 8120 going for $145 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103961 and i do not think that you could get more than $100 for a used chip unless it had some nice clock speeds that it can do.

intel is all marketing and the only thing in that segment, the 2600k and the other SB went up since they are EOL and you cannot oc on all of the 6x chipsets with the IB.

[BeepBeep2]

If you think I haven't looked at BD benches...
4.8 8 core BD vs 4.2 X6 1100T is close sometimes, trading blows.

No reason to own BD from Phenom II X6 though. No reason to own AMD anymore, 2600/3770Ks blow it away 40-80% in ST, equal or greater in MT, and I feel that is worth the price difference...when 8150 was near 2600K prices, you had to be absolutely stupid to buy one as a normal user.

[FlanK3r]

the p2 is faster single, multi threaded, power consumption, and thrashes the BD in everything when at the same clock. the only advantage that the BD has is that amd had no balls in telling OEMs to put a real PWM on all boards so they did not get the clocks higher stock on the thulban, that means that stock the BD can have a good 400-500mhz on the old chips (even though they suck up way more power at those clocks than the oced thulban)


anyways no one would build an matx gaming rig with a $200 MB and a $200 cpu (what the next gen should cost) and go amd since right now amd chips are just toys to overclock.



a used 1090/1100 costs more than the top 8120 right now so that says it all. you are looking at $175 for a fully functional thulban black edition but $145 for the 8120.

Do you an OC Phenom II 4.8 GHz at air? I think, not...You can not compare clock per clock 2 totally different architecture. Thuban is overclockable up to 4100-4200 MHz, FX up to 4700-4900 MHz average. Remember second things, FX is not true 8-core processor, but something as 8C/4CU...If you know, how tweak it, u can get example 4C/4CU and your performance in FPU is more better! I know, this is not standart situation. But FX is CPU more optimized for new software, not with old x87 code or games primary created for console (this code is very oldschool and simply). So, FX is very strong in most of multithread aplications and in single programs with good optimized code.

If it were Bulldozer as 8C/8CU, could be different story (+25% in multithreads and 10-25% single performance), still average is FX more than 15% better than PII x6. And power consumption? No, this is not true...Problem 1 was BIOS in day of reviews, some states doesnt work at 100%, next at default settings is lower than x6. I tested personaly 4 pieces of FX and there was diference up to 40W in load with the same motherboard, cooler, RAM etc...
spotreba.png

[zanzabar]

do you have others to show power consumption, cinibench dose not fully stress the cpu. and what about the same clock bench in cinibench i think the thulban did better.

[FlanK3r]

yes, will be better, but Thuban is top at 4.2, FX more, more......

example, my golden chip x6 1090T can run R11.5 at 4400 MHz, score 7.74. FX I can run at 5050 MHz, score is 8.31. Every 0.1 point in R11.5 is little big step. Better chips of FX can run Cinebench at 5200 Mhz and score is over 8.4-8.5 points at air. Not bad, I think...The problem of power consumption is difference between chips and earlier not good working BIOS at mobos.

[Barr3l Rid3r]

my FX defeats my golden thuban in every bench I tryed, I would love to see a M-ATX full featured boars in am3+ if vishera or C0 will come with thermal and power improvements as long as some better ipc and better hierarchy

[tunksy]

thanks for the reply guys I fully understand FX can be faster than P2 X6 in some cases. and I currently have a 2500k.

my question was posed because there seems to be very few products to choose from when it comes to AMD and there is almost no matx or ITX boards.

Which I think is a pretty good indication of where the company is at atm.

thanks

[tbone8ty]

lol they need to make an AM3+ micro-atx motherboard first, that means any micro-atx...currently there are none and probably wont be because of llano/trinity

[BeepBeep2]

yes, will be better, but Thuban is top at 4.2, FX more, more......

example, my golden chip x6 1090T can run R11.5 at 4400 MHz, score 7.74. FX I can run at 5050 MHz, score is 8.31. Every 0.1 point in R11.5 is little big step. Better chips of FX can run Cinebench at 5200 Mhz and score is over 8.4-8.5 points at air. Not bad, I think...The problem of power consumption is difference between chips and earlier not good working BIOS at mobos.

You think .1 point in Cinebench is big?
.2 can be gained by simple OS tweaks...shed processes and real time priority.

Flank3r, 5200 MHz Cinebench runs are usually with subambient temperatures...I can run 5100 on water cooling with 3x120mm radiator, but that is it until I get colder, mind you this is a CPU that can do almost 4.8 stable on water.

Anyway, 8.3 / 8 is a lot worse than 7.7 / 6.

What you said about making it 4 CU / 4 T too, all it does is help multithread scaling, if you can use only 2-4 threads.

[Barr3l Rid3r]

actually ther is a nice am3+ matx board there.

Have a look at GA-880GMA-USB3