[citation][nom]jeffunit[/nom]Though the core i7 is a crazy fast processor, it doesn't offer ECC support. That is why I just bought an amd phenom II 940. Perhaps 'gamers' don't care about ECC but only how many graphics cards they can stuff in the mb. On the other hand, IBM estimated 1 error per gig per week. So at 4gb, that is less than 2 days between errors. Perhaps that isn't noticeable with microsoft operation systems, but I keep my machines up for weeks or months at a time... My cheap asus mb not only supports ECC, but ECC scrubbing, chipkill, and more. Who cares how fast a computer is, when it crashes often?[/citation]
Maybe it's time you tried a modern system with non-ECC memory. ECC is more important for a server, but not necessary for any home or small office system. All our systems (including our 2003 SBS system) stay up for weeks at a time without errors on 4GB of non-ECC memory. We haven't had a system crash in years with non-ECC memory. And for what it's worth, we're not gamers.
I liked the article very much. I'm still partial to Gigabyte for their support, quality, options, and the fact that we haven't had any problems in a couple years now. And for my $, they're still the sexiest looking boards on the planet.
I guess I don't see the point in overclocking the memory further if it's going to be limited to what the CPU can do anyway, which all of these boards would be?! Sorry DFI, I'm still not impressed.