Here is the link to my pcpartpicker list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/38DzS
I have the CPU, GPU, PSU, and case decided on. I thought I had the MoBo decided, until I started reading reviews of various 970's. From what I'm reading, it seems that an FX-8350 really needs a 990 MoBo, especially if you want to up the voltages for over-clocking. I need to know if the ASRock 970 that I have chosen will work for now. I would like to keep the MoBo cost under $100. I have a build budget of roughly $1k, but I'll flex $100 either way if needed.
What I'm looking for in the motherboard are: Crossfire ready, Overclocking ability, Reliability (this build will have to last possibly a couple years), and 64GB RAM capacity, but that's a dream option that isn't super important at this point.
Are there better options for the price, or should I pay more for a better motherboard?
(Oh, it's not included in the link, but I plan to run Win8.1 on this system.)
(disregard the comment about the HTML. That was me getting used to a different forum, sorry.)
Your pcpartspicker.com link doesn't work. You really need a 990fx board to do any overclocking. There really aren't any 970 boards that overclock well. The Asus 970 evo did, but you can't find it new in the states anymore. The are only two motherboards you can get 990fx with 64gb's of ram. These two Asrock boards are the only two with those features: http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-990fxextreme9 http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asrock-motherboard-990fxkiller Both of which are outstanding overclockers but are well above $100. To be honest you shouldn't be running a 8350 on anything less than a 970 evo, or a 990fx 0r 990x board. That basically means $120+.
Other options I would suggest are the Asus M5A99FX Pro and the Asus M5A99X Evo. Both are similarly priced and work well. It just boils down to what features you like for the most part.
Go with the Asus boards. Get the pro if you want to Sli or crossfire. Otherwise the evo is just as good. I have the gigabyte board and I hate it. The bios is the worst of all time. It sucks to overclock on it just because of the bios. I have a good cooler wit good temps but I don't overclock purely down to the shit bios.
the updated gigabyte vrms aren't bad, but can't take advantage of them with dat shitty uefi :( I got my board free so I can't complain that much but for new buyers, stay away.
yea I can't talk shit about a free board.... but I can definitely recommend otherwise... I had a Gigabyte board on a work computer... I overclocked it to a safe temp and the VRMs ended up frying the chip on a co-workers PC (he won't let me overclock his pc anymore, haha)... ever since I have warned against it... just personal experience biased...
and AGAIN I see you spreading garbage just like on that Intel vs AMD topic. I use the 990XA-UD3 rev 4 for over 6 months. It's the most stable motherboard I've ever seen in this price range. and YES the previous revs were really bad,rev 4 fixed every issue and it's the best motherboard in it's price range. Do your homework before you say something is not good. It's like me saying" I bought an i7 4770k and it died in two weeks,intel sucks". And if I had a better cooler than the 212 I'd push it even further and the motherboard still wouldn't even sweat
The fanboy-ism ramps up yet again ("Asus is the king of mobos", seriously, fanboy-ism is bad)... I'll chime in.
There have been issues in the past with corrupt IVRS tables with the Asus BIOS, and only with the Asus BIOS, not with the BIOS from other manufacturers. This affects the Sabertooth 990FX, the M5A99X and the Crosshair V Formula, all top of the line motherboards:
The bug prevents a guest OS from directly accessing hardware. While this might not affect every user, I am very much interested in virtual machines and I find this unacceptable. I expect that when I pay $200 on a mobo I will be able to do a PCI passthrough, god dammit.
This was my experience with Gigabyte... I ordered the original mobo, don't recall the specific model but it was a 970 chipset for a FX 6300... arrived, installed, posted... failed after two weeks... sent it back at my company's expense, they replaced it with a DOA... sent it back at my company's expense, they sent another DOA... sent that back at Gigabyte's expense... they sent me a working board... I overclocked the processor to 4.3 GHz, set it up for a coworker... one month later he says his computer won't boot.... took everything out and tested it... mobo had failed, and the CPU was fried... they wouldn't refund my purchase and I bought an Asus to replace it with... booted first time, no problems... I've used a mix of MSI and Asus boards since then... I've had a few minor issues with MSI but nothing critical, and I got one DOA on an Asus board which they replaced at their own expense...
I don't know how many computers you've built, but after you run through enough hardware, you tend to settle on something you're happy recommending to other people with good personal experiences / bad personal experiences... If you think I'm a fanboy cause I have a brand preference, then fine, I'll accept the label... I'd rather be a fanboy than deal with Gigabyte's horrible quality control and even worse customer service...
My company and I don't do any virtualization so I've never come in contact with the issue Ksajal keeps posting every time somebody recommends Asus 990 chipsets...
Anyways... glad Gigabyte fixed the issue after releasing 3 prior versions with issues... and glad you're happy with your mobo...
You seem to be mistaken, I wasn't saying that you are a fanboy because you have a preference when it comes to hardware, everybody is biased like that. For example, I've always bought Sapphire graphic cards because my first computer, that I built for myself, had a Sapphire graphics card and it served me splendidly. I am, however, quite aware that that doesn't mean that Sapphire makes the best GPUs on the market. Or that AMD has the best GPUs.
I was saying that you are fanboy because the amount of hero worship that a statement like "Asus is the king of motherboards" suggests is irrational.
I am glad that you brought up the fact that I keep mentioning the virtualization issues with the Asus motherboards. I do it because, like I've said before, it might not be relevant for you, but for people who use linux and want to have a Windows virtual machine to game on, this is extremely important. Ask on competent linux forums and you'll see people complaining about this.The fact that Asus didn't fix it, but a user did, I think makes this look a lot worse for Asus. AMD enforces full support for AMD-vi on all motherboards, and yet Asus is the only one who has problems with it. (I personally believe that this is intentional because of their past dealings with Microsoft and because nobody wants a PCI passthrough for a VM on Windows, you do that with linux, but I realize this is extremely biased from my part and I try to keep my posts as objective as I can).
People should be made aware of this problem, not be quietly swept away under the rug. If they think they should penalize this behavior, they can choose not to buy Asus mobos. Contrary to what you may think, there are other choices just as viable. If they aren't bothered by it, they can happily make their choice between the available AM3+ models that Asus sells.
