MSI 990FXA Gaming Versus ASRock 990FX Killer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
An important distinction between the boards (one that I found out myself when building a rig recently) is that the 990FXA supports 220W processors (in my case, the FX9590) while the ASRock board only supports processors up to 180W.
 
One of the more useful data points here is that a 500W PSU shut down when its input exceeded 500W; that means it isn't good for its label, as it should be able to provide 500W of output, which in an 80+ gold PSU would be something like 562W on the input.
 
Are there any enthusiast mATX boards based on this chipset? A couple of years ago, I was looking and the pickings were slim. I'd like to see some considerations for smaller builds.
 
PROOF READ.. The overclocking results are obviously not right because they are way too low and labeled as A10-7850K results.. Please fix ASAP..
Click to expand...
Fixes are submitted. I was writing this review and the ASRock Mini ITX review at the same time, so sorry for the mix up. The overclocking data is still valid, and the method for overclocking was correctly described. This processor could probably have reached Thomas' previous results if I omitted Prime95 errors.
 
For anyone considering this board, do not expect to be able to set up drives in RAID 0 with any of the newer SSDs. I have a 990FX board and have gone through two exchanges and have determined with AMD that the board does not support my 850 EVOs.
 
Eh, I'd have a hard time putting down that money for an FX chipset. I went with a really cheap board when I put together my 8320 build which kept the processor and mobo cost to a little bit over what an intel motherboard alone would cost.
 
I know the Phenom II class cpus are old, but in all seriousness they are still remarkably good (gaming performance) when compared to most of the FX-series cpus. Since you reviews the 990-series motherboard, would it be possible to include the Phenom II in an updated review and include a few game benchmarks too?
 
AMD really needs to update their chipsets for the FX line... 990 is a dinosaur. I have now and thought i was on an archived page when i saw a review about these boards... intel will cost a bit more but in the efficiently alone you will make you money back. I put my computer on for 45 mins and it heats my office.... but that could also be the 590 doing that too.
 


Thanks for fixing it quickly.. Your overclocking results are extremely low.. I suspect something is wrong as 4.5Ghz should be an easily attainable overclock without much fuss with a FX-8350 on boards with 8 phase and 8+2 phase VRMs, I really was expecting more like 4.7Ghz.. What were your overclocked temps and did you turn off APM and other power management when you overclocked?
 
i have a 990FX board from gigbyte, with dolby digital and the same 950southbridge, (that i got for free from a friend) and i absolutly hate its guts, so much so i cant bare to look at it i buit it into a on of those "back screen projected TV's" from like the 70's. and use it as a streaming/storage device.
now why on earth would anyone invest in a new outdated AM3+ system just cause it has 2 lans now and better sound " amp " is not worth it. they didnt even try to upgrade the PCI slots to 3.0.
how is sound suppost to win anyone over?
you can buy a better chip and cheaper board from intel (that is not outdated) and still be better off have dual nic and prolly even better sound.
e.g skylake 6400 and asrock p4s board TTcost 393.
and the 990fx chipsets overheat horribly when you try to OC i would prefer a 970cs over a 990fx... thoughts please explian how this changed anything over say the last 2 years with amd? and 990fx
 
i have a 990FX board from gigbyte, with dolby digital and the same 950southbridge, (that i got for free from a friend) and i absolutly hate its guts, so much so i cant bare to look at it i buit it into a on of those "back screen projected TV's" from like the 70's. and use it as a streaming/storage device.
now why on earth would anyone invest in a new outdated AM3+ system just cause it has 2 lans now and better sound " amp " is not worth it. they didnt even try to upgrade the PCI slots to 3.0.
how is sound suppost to win anyone over?
you can buy a better chip and cheaper board from intel (that is not outdated) and still be better off have dual nic and prolly even better sound.
e.g skylake 6400 and asrock p4s board TTcost 393.
and the 990fx chipsets overheat horribly when you try to OC i would prefer a 970cs over a 990fx... thoughts please explian how this changed anything over say the last 2 years with amd? and 990fx
Click to expand...

From your lips to gods ears. 100 is the max they should be charging for any FX board.
 


You are either looking at the most expensive Intel boards or are cheaping out on the board a lot. I paid $300 for my current motherboard, by choice, but I could have easily gotten a decent Z87/Z97 board for $100 at the time.

Either way it is hard to justify buying anything right now with Zen coming out shortly and it being a DDR4 setup with hopefully a new SouthBridge because the SB950 is just not that good. I have a 970 setup with the SB950 on my wifes machine and she has a Samsung 850 Evo. My older Intel 520 performs better than her Samsung 850 Evo and it is supposed to be the opposite.
 
As koffeeshop77 clearly indicates, the elephant in the room is that buying a 990FX board today makes almost no sense unless it is to replace a dead/inadequate board in an existing AMD system. Zen may or may not change that, but until we know (i.e. there are benchmarks), I believe that existing benchmarks would support the assertion that any new system built today should almost universally be Intel.
 
What I would have liked is something investigating that M2 slot. How would this board fare using the 950 EVO in that form factor? From the ASRock site it appears that this board may support NvMe, would have been nice if you could have tried that out.
While all the arguments continue let me just say that I am quite happy with my 8320 which runs the games I enjoy playing quite satisfactorily. That is what a gaming box is supposed to do. Intel benchmarks do not provide me with a sufficient increase in performance to justify the upgrade expense. At this point even if the next gen AMD product provided a real step up in performance I don't know that it would justify the expense until such time that the games I play would require it. I think that is the concept that a whole lot of folks miss out on. I do have a MSI 970 that appears to be on its way out so these boards are indeed worthy of some serious interest on my part.
It would also be nice to see y'all use some of the recommended parts. For example in your CPU picks you prefer the 8320 to the 8350 and 850 EVO or Sandisk to Mushkin. Even the RAM and card you used is not close to what your own picks are. I just really don't understand the whole purpose of a review of gaming motherboards that actually doesn't involve playing a game or using the kinds of peripherals that you recommend.
 

Agreed. "Good enough" can make a LOT of sense, if more than that is much more expensive. Although I would not recommend an AMD system today in almost all cases, similarly I don't believe I could recommend scrapping one either. Although it is not my primary machine, my FX-8320 on a R1.0 Sabertooth should be a perfectly viable home system for many more years.

 


My 2 FX8350 systems are starting to show their age after 3 years and will be the next ones to get upgraded. They are used as gaming systems and starting to lag and one rendering which it still does fine.
 
The comment earlier about the Phenom II series got me to remember that I am still running on a 955 and have only upgraded the GFX card and memory in such an age. True, I don't play games as much now as I used to but I still like it to be as bling-y as my GFX can push. I find that my 955 is never the bottleneck. Most of what I do these days is work related, multiple remote desktops, VPNs, VMs, vLANs etc. and I find the 955 doesn't struggle there either. I will upgrade soon and pending something decent from AMD in the near future it will be intel this time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom