Weekly Poll: #1: Motherboard/ CPU price split for new build?

[enzo matrix]

This is the first weekly poll.
This was the initial thread and I would ask that anyone interested in posting an idea about future polls, please post them on this thread, which I will check before my next poll.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/285589-28-weekly-poll

This weeks poll will entice discussion around motherboard quality versus purchasing a slightly more powerful CPU or if the value of an expensive motherboard is worth the cost.

In general, what ratio should be spent on motherboard/CPU in a computer build where the CPU and motherboard will add up to ~$400?.
-Use modern day motherboard quality at pricepoints in general for comparison
-Please leave brand flamewars out.
-Vote for one in each section. You have two votes
-Discuss your outlook of the importance of the motherboard on the system and why or if someone should compensate their CPU for a better motherboard, considering the cheap motherboard has the basics of bios options, a decent chipset, 4/6 memory slots and the amount of expansion slots the person needs.

 

[Blckhaze]

Men need more power than they know what to do with and as soon as they know what to do with it, they're ready for more....

 

[moody89]

Interesting poll - I've always been of the thinking that a high performance CPU and a solid, reliable motherboard is the best combination. Personally I wouldn't spend as much on the mobo as I would on the CPU but then I don't really overclock either.

 

[enzo matrix]

I've noticed that quite a number of people have voted for the more expensive motherboards, even for an average joe; I am interested in their reasoning.

 

[Scotteq]

Good question - Made me think a little. 😛

For Enthusiasts/overclockers, I voted $160mobo/$240 CPU, and lean towards a 50/50 split. Said 50/50 may be achievable depending on what is on sale, and when; and with the understanding that an Enthusiast would either already know, or would take the time to educate themselves as to the differences available to them at the time.

The reasoning being that the (hopefully) better mobo would provide a the more stable environment and have the Bios adjustability necessary to push greater overclocking efforts.

***
A more casual user/builder will likely not avail themselves of the added adjustability, nor push the system quite as hard. So I weighted towards a (slightly) better processor and more basic Mobo.



****

(Personally, I'm kind of nuts and tend to "(over?)spend now" in order that said system would serve better/longer. Basically, I'm knowledgable enough about my own personality that I know - if a bug gets into my head that I want "X" thing for "Feature 2" - then that thought festers until I end up spending the money twice. And that usually ends up costing more than if I had just gone whole hog the first time.)

 

[loneninja]

I personally have never spent $400 on a cpu/motherboard combo, most I've spent is about $300. However I did vote and went with $120 board for the enthusiast and $80 board for the average joe. $120 is plenty for a good AM3 board with all the features I need. Than that average joe would get a cheaper board since you can find good mATX boards around $80 since you won't need great OC abilities or crossfire, and it'll enable them to get the best cpu possible.

 

[o1die]

I live near frys, and $200 will get you a decent combo. But I often spend less than $75 for a mid range cpu and low end board.

 

[runswindows95]

I would do $100 on the motherboard and $150 max on the CPU. I don't need anything high end.

 

[xaira]

for the average joe, i dont recommend a high end board, sold a high end oard to an average joe who didnt know how to set ram timings and in his intelligence bought high end overclocking ram, told me he wanted his money back because my board is unstable got it back today and now it wont even power up, average joe needs something cheap that will set everything for him automatically, once the average joe gets into the bios on a high end board, its over