![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
6 reasons to use a real AM3+ Mobo & Why Bios upgrade isn't
- Thread starter teletran8
- Start date
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,782
I wonder how much of this is just pure marketing BS and actual advantages... like that CPU better cooling retention module thing... looks just like pure BS to me.
Still have to really wait and see how much of a difference AM3+ vs AM3 bios update really is... especially with the top-end Asus/MSI boards.
Still have to really wait and see how much of a difference AM3+ vs AM3 bios update really is... especially with the top-end Asus/MSI boards.
i agree, none of those mb's are amd 9 series. "real am3+" is 900 series as far as i am concerned.
MacLeod
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Messages
- 8,284
I'm going to upgrade my CPU and mobo when Bulldozer gets here and toyed with the idea of buying a Crosshair IV and using it now then using the new BIOS when BD drops cause I have wet dreams about that board, but decided to wait cause I just think that if AM3 could do Bulldozer justice, AMD would've just come out and said it will be backward compatible. Since they were adamant that it would not, I gotta think the 900 series chipsets will offer some pretty cool goodies.
You do know that the socket version has nothing to do with the chipset, right? An AM2+ board can use either the 6-series, 7-series, 8-series or even the upcoming 9-series chipset. Socket version has to do with the following:
Number of power planes (single=AM2, split=AM2+, dual=AM3, multiple=AM3+)
HyperTransport clock (AM2=1GHz, AM2+=1.8GHz, AM3=2.6GHz, AM3+=maybe 3.2GHz?)
Memory Support (DDR2-800=AM2, 1066=AM2+, DDR3-1333/1600, 1866+=AM3+)
The chipset is nothing but an I/O tunnel. It is the board mfgs that discern over type of chipset.
Ocellaris
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2008
- Messages
- 19,077
I raised the BS flag when I read the bit about the retention module as well. Not having that plastic rim around the bottom lowers the CPU temp 5.4C? Really? Really?
LMAO.. I would say thats about 90% marketing BS..
This is where I called BS.. look at the picture.. Wow the holes are bigger & that helps what exactly? are the pins bigger? And the beveling on the am3 that isnt present on the am3+ pin holes would negate the rest of that statement..
Bottom line is that these are not 9xx series chipsets so they are just the same old shit with a newly colored socket as far as I am concerned.
Also if BD works in AM3 up to nearly the same performance level as it does in AM3+ (like am3 chips do in the older am2+ boards) then I wont be upgrading from my MSI 890gxm board I have now. until some new bells & whistles come out.
This is where I called BS.. look at the picture.. Wow the holes are bigger & that helps what exactly? are the pins bigger? And the beveling on the am3 that isnt present on the am3+ pin holes would negate the rest of that statement..
Bottom line is that these are not 9xx series chipsets so they are just the same old shit with a newly colored socket as far as I am concerned.
Also if BD works in AM3 up to nearly the same performance level as it does in AM3+ (like am3 chips do in the older am2+ boards) then I wont be upgrading from my MSI 890gxm board I have now. until some new bells & whistles come out.
its funny cause they wrote using large characters
it says chokes, not cpu, you know the difference right?
CaptNumbNutz
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,023
Yea...it lowers the temp of the chokes for the PWM circuitry by 5.4 degrees celsius. Looking at that picture you can see the chokes blocked by the plastic on the old retention module. That probably makes zero difference in terms of stability when overclocking. The chokes don't get near as hot as the PWM's themselves other wise they would put heatsinks on them like the pwm's. They also have an insanely high thermal limit (around 90C). It probably will make zero difference if you use a tower type heatsink.
So it is definitely marketing BS.
How new is your board though? When did you buy it and does it have a black socket? Because I think, from what I have seen, that the ONLY way anyone is going to be able to drop a Bulldozer into an "AM3" board is if they have bought that board recently and it has the black socket. Any white socket AM3 board, regardless of chipset, will be out of the question because the white socket has at least one less pin hole. Which means to me that really there is little to no difference between a black socket "AM3" board and an AM3+ board. For all intents and purposes they are the exact same thing as far as the Bulldozer CPU is concerned, no?
Unless I am getting this wrong, this is really just for people who have been buying black socket boards in the last few weeks because the reality is that all of these supposed black socket AM3 boards are actually AM3+ boards. It's all about the socket and my older Gigabyte 785g mobo wouldn't work with Bulldozer regardless of whether 785g was "supported" because it has the wrong socket. And if your 890gxm has a white socket you will find no joy either.
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,782
Asus and MSI have claimed that the Bulldozer chips they received fits in regular AM3 sockets. As has been discussed multiple times in a different thread, the number of pins in the socket do not necessarily correspond to the number of pins on the CPU, even if they're the same socket type. I believe AM3 has 941 pins, while an AM3 CPU has 938 pins.
Everything is speculation until Bulldozer really comes out, although MSI has all but stated that they're guaranteeing Bulldozer will work on some of their current AM3 models.
Everything is speculation until Bulldozer really comes out, although MSI has all but stated that they're guaranteeing Bulldozer will work on some of their current AM3 models.
Ok but what does "current AM3 models" mean precisely? Did they say that after they began producing these black socket boards or are they referring to an AM3 socket board that was produced, say, a year ago?
I just don't buy it and what's more, if that is true, if there are going to be old AM3 socket boards that will work with Bulldozer BUT only with certain chipsets, then that is even worse. AMD and the board manufacturers are going to have many, many pissed-off customers (including me) if Bulldozer works with an AM3 mobo with an 890 or 760 chipset but not a 785 chipset.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
Sure if you are retard who can't put cpu into socket properly.
Cool how many years of constant 24/7 computing do i need to recover cost of buying new mobo instead of using old one with those savings?
Cool so i could get something like 50 Mhz higher oc ?
I have mobo designed for oc of 140W X6 cpus with 8 phase power supply somehow I feel quite safe that it will be able to deliver enough juice for my non extreme 24/7 overclocking.
If you use shitty box cooler sure. I don't see how it can make huge improvement for my tower cooler in Raven2.
But it's nice to see they started using screws for mounting bracket.
For me till i see Anand or some other site measure noticable gain from using Am3+ over Am3 i'll consider all such things as marketing bullshit
TechPirate
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 79
they never claimed that Bulldozer will work in AM3 sockets, they said AM3+ .... I'm still not convinced that all AM3+ chips will be Bulldozer, so for now i'm still a skeptic until they actually use the terminology Bulldozer (unless I missed something all the "PR" shit has said AM3+)
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,782
They are referring to the AM3 white socket. So far, Gigabtye and ASRock are the only ones that have announced a completely new line for AM3+, and have decided not to support AM3+ on their current boards. Asus and MSI have decided to support AM3+ on CERTAIN AM3 boards, not all of them. For example, Asus is only doing 890GX or 890FX chipset boards, and any other AM3+ chipset would have the black socket.
In the same announcement, Asus and MSI listed AM3 motherboards compatible with AM3+ (so they say), and new upcoming AM3+ motherboards. If those AM3 motherboards are not compatible with Bulldozer, then why would they put it in the same announcement as the AM3+ boards that should be compatible with Bulldozer? Unless they're playing a huge game with us and current AM3+ boards using the older chipset will not be compatible with Bulldozer? It just doesn't make any sense from a PR perspective unless it will be compatible with Bulldozer.
from the PR perspective, they say AM3+ (not BD) people assume BD, so they upgrade quicker with these boards, Asus/MSI then only said AM3+ so no real reason to complain.....since they dont specifically say BD....whats stopping AMD from moving Deneb/Propus onto AM3+ for the low end ?
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
Go look up watts versus amps and get back to me.
Yes thank you I'd say I know the diffrence quite well after few years of studies at electronic faculty
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
MSI mentioned 32nm and making 32nm Phenom II cpus would be completly pointless when you can make 2 module/4 core bulldozer instead and for ultra low end you have possibility of single module x2 replacements.
Because everything below the FX-4000 series will be filled by Llano on FM1. AM3+ chips will be in the upper Mid-range/Performance/"Enthusiast" category, whilst the A-series chips will take over the Value and Mainstream categories.
I wouldn't be surprised for AMD to EOL a lot of Phenom/Athlon IIs come Q3.
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,782
Once again, the mention of the 32nm process almost certainly says it is Bulldozer. There is really no point to making a 32nm Phenom II, as that would take much more time and money to get perfected, which would be really pointless.
Now, the range of Bulldozer chips that would be compatible, however, is a completely different story. It can be that it can support the 6-core/3-module Bulldozer, but it might not be able to support the 8-core 4-module Bulldozers. Or it may support all AM3+ Bulldozers.
Now, the range of Bulldozer chips that would be compatible, however, is a completely different story. It can be that it can support the 6-core/3-module Bulldozer, but it might not be able to support the 8-core 4-module Bulldozers. Or it may support all AM3+ Bulldozers.
Exactly, the only way there is going to be a 32nm shrink of Deneb is in Llano, and it will only be in FM1 socket (desktops/higher-end notebooks) or FT2(?) BGA (low-end notebooks/ultraportables)
ecmaster76
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,150
Dear god I hope not. Even at 1.2 volts (hypothetically speaking) that would be 174W!!
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
To me that is a good thing for overclockers provided some motherboards were designed to deliver this much power.
FM1 (Desktop) FS1 (Laptop) FT1 (embedded and so far Zacate only) are the APU platforms.
LinkinMcOwnage
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2011
- Messages
- 103
From what I've seen, using a Bulldozer in an AM3 board only means you won't get turbo core and the power saving features. Features which I abandoned long ago as an overclocker... To each their own, and I guess that sort of thing is good for general consumer machines.
Nor, would you get the better power spec allowing for a higher overclock
+The New TurboCore is super aggressive allowing for 1GHz boosts
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1267&page=10
^ the cpu is liquid cooled but is that a good overclock on the AM3+?
Last edited:
Well that turbo could be made up in overclocks. But look at it this way. If BD comes out of the gate as the best CPU ever and the choices are to hunt down a new and hard to find motherboard, with the first ones being of the $200 variety along with the CPU vs. getting a CPU and letting the Motherboard options mature. Some people are already using $300 boards, it would be nice to know that they don't have to toss them, even if they do any ways.
Last edited:
Not gonna lie.
I read the bottom of http://www.asrock.com/news/events/2011AM3+/
The first time through I read it as: makes the chode 5.4C cooler.
I read the bottom of http://www.asrock.com/news/events/2011AM3+/
The first time through I read it as: makes the chode 5.4C cooler.
More Good News about the ASRock 890FX Deluxe 5 black socket MOBO with just an installed X4 975. If BD runs cooler than current AMD Processors, which it most certainly will, it should get 5.0GHz OC on air, of course very nice air coolers
I've had my X3 Rana unlocked to 4 core up to 4.125 GHz on just stock cooler, but that is light benchmarking, hard would have crashed it I bet on my 870. These newer ASRock boards seem to have alot of potential, and are moving into the best value+OC choices area. I know Gigabyte, MSI and ASUS are also good @ OCing, they are almost always priced higher though I believe.
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1267&page=10
I've had my X3 Rana unlocked to 4 core up to 4.125 GHz on just stock cooler, but that is light benchmarking, hard would have crashed it I bet on my 870. These newer ASRock boards seem to have alot of potential, and are moving into the best value+OC choices area. I know Gigabyte, MSI and ASUS are also good @ OCing, they are almost always priced higher though I believe.
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1267&page=10
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,782
Look how much voltage they're pumping into that processor. For that amount of voltage, I'm actually surprised they didn't hit 5 ghz. It also says absolutely nothing about 4.7 ghz stability. There is also absolutely no mention of temps, or the cooling system they're using. Any overclocking result is based directly on the CPU, especially with a BE processor. The only effect the motherboard might have on overclocking is with non-BE processors where you have to overclock the FSB, and some motherboards have an FSB limit. This article clearly did not test the FSB limit of the ASRock motherboard, and they only maxed out at 235 mhz. Not impressive considering most enthusiast boards will hit 300+ mhz. Very poor overclocking review, don't use it as a reference when making a purchase decision where you will overclock. The only thing we can say is that the VRMs didn't blow up when it hit 1.65v, but most enthusiast boards will easily hit that kind of voltage.
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,782
You trying to talk yourself out of it or sumthing?
I have a Crosshair IV that can do 4.2 ghz on a Phenom II x6 1090T at 1.45v. Why would I want a board that does 4.5 at 1.6v with a Phenom II x4 975? In both cases, the overclock is about 1ghz, but mine uses much less voltage and thus would run much cooler.
They are using a custom liquid cooling set for that overclock test
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1267&page=7
http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1267&page=7
I think it looks like a good board, and I think Crosshairs are overpriced. You can disagree IDC.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157248
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128490
the first two AM3+ motherboards to be sold!
Now all we need to do is wait for 990FX and the little SLi supported logo
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128490
the first two AM3+ motherboards to be sold!
Now all we need to do is wait for 990FX and the little SLi supported logo