Micro ATX Build: Asus M5A78L-M vs ASRock 970M Pro3 - Reliability?

[toastedbread]

Hi -

I'm planning my first build - a budget gaming PC. For space reasons it has to be a Micro ATX. I want to go with the AMD FX6300, which means that my board options are limited as there aren't many Micro ATX AM3+ boards out there.

I've narrowed it down to either the Asus M5A78L-M/USB 3 or the ASRock 970m Pro3 Micro ATX.

The ASRock board is better in terms of features, and slightly more expensive, but my main concern is buying the board that will be the most reliable and last the longest.

I've checked out reviews of both the individual boards and the manufacturers and am left really confused as to which board will be more reliable.

Asus generally seems to be well-regarded as a brand, but the board itself, on New Egg, has extremely mixed reviews. About 25% of them are one-star reviews saying it failed within a year, blew up on them or was dead on arrival. Even some of the positive reviews are positive because it worked well while it lasted, which apparently wasn't that long.

On the other hand, reviews on Amazon, Reevoo, Scan.co.uk and other sites seem fairly uniformly positive with negative ratings being given mainly for lack of USB 3.0 headers or 6gb/s SATA support.

I'm at a loss for which site to trust. I'd really rather not buy a board where there's a 25% chance it'll be unreliable and prone to failure. But it seems odd that these reviews are only found on New Egg. That said, they are pretty consistent.

On the other hand, ASRock seems to have an extremely mixed reputation as a manufacturer but the board itself has mainly positive reviews on New Egg, and elsewhere too (although it generally seems a less widely-used board, so there isn't as much feedback available).

I'm honestly confused here - do I go for the more reputable manufacturer, or the board that doesn't have an oddly specific cluster of terrible reviews?

 

[giantbucket]

i don't like either of those.

Asus - good brand, but only 4pin power for the CPU and no front-panel USB3, but at least it has onboard graphics for an emergency
ASRock - i like their stuff, but rear panel is full of plain USB2 and not much else and the front-panel USB3 is in a weird far spot

i'd lean towards the ASRock, though. but i've never leaned towards the FX-series processors to begin with.


why not go intel for this? lots more mATX choices, and an i3 should be in the same price range as the FX-6300.

 

[toastedbread]

Basically because I'd really prefer the hex core. While I do intend for the computer to be a budget gaming PC as its primary function, I also do a fair bit of video editing and I'd like to be able to do that on the PC too. I don't need to but it'd be useful. And I guess that since games are shifting towards making better use of more cores, I'd also rather go for something that's at least a true quad.

Obviously an i5 would better but it's twice as expensive.

Basically I understand that I'm making a compromise choice here, but it is what it is.