ASUS Crosshair V Formula 990FX Motherboard

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you are considering a new socket AM3+ motherboard, you might want to give this ASUS Crosshair V Formula 990FX review at Overclocker Club a look.

ASUS then takes the base of the chipset and throws their own spin on it giving you a board that is designed to take you to virtual battle. The 990FX chipset is designed to support up to 5.2GT/s HyperTransport 3.0 interface speeds and multi-GPU graphics. The chipset is optimized for multicore CPU systems including the Sempron 100 series, Athlon II series, Phenom II series and the upcoming FX series processors including the Bulldozer eight core series. The AM3+ socket features AMD Turbo Core Technology 2.0 and supports the new 32nm manufacturing process.
Click to expand...
 
Looks nice. I want one but can't justify it till we see some Bulldozer benches.
 
Vegas P11 said:
Looks nice. I want one but can't justify it till we see some Bulldozer benches.
Click to expand...

AMD will need 8 cores to compete with intels 4 core 2600K, this is from all the slides that have been leaked, i hope AMD does better than i think they will. If 8 cores are needed to keep up with intels 4 core cpu, and AMD supposedly has 2 cores per core, to make it 16 threads, 16 threads are needed to beat 8 thread intel, which 4 of them are hyper thread, more like a quarter of a real core. My point is if AMD needs 8 cores, then intel will win hands down because of all the non multi threaded apps and games, 90% of all games still utilize 2 cores, some do 4 cores, and thats it. Oh and Sandy Bridge EX is around the corner, that will make it deja vu all over again, intel winning the performance crown. The 2600K also overclocks to 4.8ghz on almost every single chip. This is not to smash on AMD, but i dont like the idea of 8 cores needed to keep up or with 4 cores. Thats like saying i will race you with my honda civic, it has 16 engines, vs your 1 engine lambo, it will beat you, but i needed 16 engines to do it, just doesnt make sense to me.
 
AMD is like Viserys Targaryen getting molton gold poured on top of his damn head(clutch Game of Thrones reference).....stepping issues....delay after delay, this board is like a damn Golden Calf, put it on the shelf for 6 more months and worship it till the return of the exalted one....the -Bull-dozer.
 
This will be the basis of my new build. Hopefully Bulldozer will be out by the time I'm back state-side this fall.
 
An 8 pin & 4 pin power connector at top, I guess this makes those annoying PSU's that include 2 cables not so annoying anymore.
 
This is just a thing of beauty! I am really wanting one of these but Im waiting to see more about the upcoming Sabertooth board Asus is putting out. Thats what will likely be in my case when it comes out.
 
Nice looking board, but yes, will wait for BD before doing anything.
mt2e said:
AMD is like Viserys Targaryen getting molton gold poured on top of his damn head(clutch Game of Thrones reference).....stepping issues....delay after delay, this board is like a damn Golden Calf, put it on the shelf for 6 more months and worship it till the return of the exalted one....the -Bull-dozer.
Click to expand...
The rare double-simile with a spoiler mixed in. *clap* *clap* *clap*
 
lathode said:
An 8 pin & 4 pin power connector at top, I guess this makes those annoying PSU's that include 2 cables not so annoying anymore.
Click to expand...
That means I can use my old HX520 to just power the motherboard and cpu, and buy an AX1200 just for the video cards!
 
maxius said:
???
Click to expand...
My HX520 has both a 4-pin and 8-pin EPS connectors. I was saying that I could dedicate ~500w of power just to the CPU, and buy an AX1200, or even a new HX1050 to power GPUs (especially since that lovely Asus ROG MARS II GTX 590 or the Sapphire 6970X2 both come with 3 8pin PCI-E connectors.

Don't mind me, I'm being silly. :D
 
interesting all the reviews i've seen the of 990fx chipset, they don't even try for ddr3 1866.
 
ebduncan said:
interesting all the reviews i've seen the of 990fx chipset, they don't even try for ddr3 1866.
Click to expand...
Because, it can only be done if you either overclock to 233MHz with the DDR3-1600 multiplier, or you run a Zambezi.
 
Do you think they could have got the CPU socket and DIMM slots a little closer together?
 
Dan_D said:
Do you think they could have got the CPU socket and DIMM slots a little closer together?
Click to expand...
I wonder, is that lack of distance a concession of using a PGA socket vs LGA? Maybe it is just that AMD's IMCs can't handle very long traces. If there is anyone with knowledge on this matter, could you please enlighten me?
 
JMccovery said:
I wonder, is that lack of distance a concession of using a PGA socket vs LGA? Maybe it is just that AMD's IMCs can't handle very long traces. If there is anyone with knowledge on this matter, could you please enlighten me?
Click to expand...

Its basically due to signaling constraints with Hypertransport. It's been this way since the socket 754 days. Of course back then heat sinks were much smaller and we only had to deal with the heat load of single core CPUs. But with modern AMD chipset based boards I've found each one of them to totally suck with regard to heat sink mounting. The memory slots are just too close and this creates space issues with most higher performance memory modules. In the MSI 990FXA-GD80 review I couldn't mount a Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme which is unacceptable to me in any enthusiast motherboard. I ran into clearance issues which were so bad I'd have been forced to run two modules in single channel mode. :eek: This was with both Corsair Vengeance and Corsair Dominator memory modules. That Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme heat sink is practically the benchmark standard by which all other air coolers are judged despite being long in the tooth. The Corsair A70 is just slightly narrower, but clearance are still tight because Corsair wrongly chose to adopt the standard clip style heat sink mount using the stock mounting bracket rather than a bolt-through method. This created clearance issues installing the top / front fan. Also, you are forced into a very specific heat sink orientation due to the fact the mounting holes are asymmetrical.

Working with that board, the push / pull setup would have either blown the CPU's heat onto the graphics card (which I can assure you a GTX 480 does not need) or the graphics card heat would be pulled onto the CPU heat sink. Again, the CPU doesn't need that and as far as I am concerned socket AM3 / AM3+ are terribly outdated designs which need to be replaced. I know everyone loves AMD's socket longevity and backwards compatibility, but such things often create additional problems by maintaining that so called convenience. At the very least, the DIMM sockets need to get moved farther away and the mounting holes need to be changed to a symmetrical design.

Due to the space constraints, I hate everything but water cooling on AMD CPUs these days. I'd have used a water block on the last board I reviewed but it sprung a leak (fortunately before I mounted it to the board) and I couldn't get a replacement locally. I'll have a water block for the next article and articles after that, but frankly, I'm still dismayed that anyone tolerates the constraints of AMD board design beyond those that water cool. Some of the best heat sinks and fan combinations are either incompatible with the AMD platform or they have to be used with an orientation that is less than ideal, often blocking the use of one or more DIMM slots. Its a totally unacceptable design in 2011 in my opinion. I really wish AMD would have used the Bulldozer / Zambezi release as an opportunity to rectify this issue, but sadly they believe that backwards compatibility is a more useful selling point than making boards / platforms that aren't a pain in the ass to cool.

In contrast, Intel made sure that their IMC could handle reasonably long trace paths before implementing such a change in their CPU / Chipset lineup.
 
Last edited:
I had to flip over the fan and mount it on the backside on the my sig rig. The damn 8 foot tall ramsinks where hitting the bottom of the fan so I put it on the other side of the Hyper and have it pulling air through. Temps are almost exactly the same but Dan is right, they need to change this.
 
Dan_D said:
Its basically due to signaling constraints with Hypertransport. It's been this way since the socket 754 days. Of course back then heat sinks were much smaller and we only had to deal with the heat load of single core CPUs. But with modern AMD chipset based boards I've found each one of them to totally suck with regard to heat sink mounting. The memory slots are just too close and this creates space issues with most higher performance memory modules. In the MSI 990FXA-GD80 review I couldn't mount a Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme which is unacceptable to me in any enthusiast motherboard. I ran into clearance issues which were so bad I'd have been forced to run two modules in single channel mode. :eek: This was with both Corsair Vengeance and Corsair Dominator memory modules. That Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme heat sink is practically the benchmark standard by which all other air coolers are judged despite being long in the tooth. The Corsair A70 is just slightly narrower, but clearance are still tight because Corsair wrongly chose to adopt the standard clip style heat sink mount using the stock mounting bracket rather than a bolt-through method. This created clearance issues installing the top / front fan. Also, you are forced into a very specific heat sink orientation due to the fact the mounting holes are asymmetrical.

Working with that board, the push / pull setup would have either blown the CPU's heat onto the graphics card (which I can assure you a GTX 480 does not need) or the graphics card heat would be pulled onto the CPU heat sink. Again, the CPU doesn't need that and as far as I am concerned socket AM3 / AM3+ are terribly outdated designs which need to be replaced. I know everyone loves AMD's socket longevity and backwards compatibility, but such things often create additional problems by maintaining that so called convenience. At the very least, the DIMM sockets need to get moved farther away and the mounting holes need to be changed to a symmetrical design.

Due to the space constraints, I hate everything but water cooling on AMD CPUs these days. I'd have used a water block on the last board I reviewed but it sprung a leak (fortunately before I mounted it to the board) and I couldn't get a replacement locally. I'll have a water block for the next article and articles after that, but frankly, I'm still dismayed that anyone tolerates the constraints of AMD board design beyond those that water cool. Some of the best heat sinks and fan combinations are either incompatible with the AMD platform or they have to be used with an orientation that is less than ideal, often blocking the use of one or more DIMM slots. Its a totally unacceptable design in 2011 in my opinion. I really wish AMD would have used the Bulldozer / Zambezi release as an opportunity to rectify this issue, but sadly they believe that backwards compatibility is a more useful selling point than making boards / platforms that aren't a pain in the ass to cool.

In contrast, Intel made sure that their IMC could handle reasonably long trace paths before implementing such a change in their CPU / Chipset lineup.
Click to expand...

agree its annoying.. just means corsairs going have a lot of new H50/60/70 buyers when bulldozer is released :p. i don't think they will mind. heck maybe its time heatsinks get redesigned anyways. its more or less the same design thats been used for the last 4-5 years. i'm sure a company could sit there and work out a design that allow's the stock AM3 mounting bar to fit in any orientation. i mean hell all they need to do is take out 1 heating pipe. its not like its a huge design change nor will it drastically effect the performance of the heatsink anyways. the problem is heatsink manufactures just stick to the generic rifle design everyones been using for years instead of coming up with something innovative or different.
 
Last edited:
And I'm awfully confused...

Apart from the colors, what are the differences between this board and the Sabertooth?
 
Zarathustra[H];1037361317 said:
And I'm awfully confused...

Apart from the colors, what are the differences between this board and the Sabertooth?
Click to expand...

At the least I see intel LAN on the Crosshair and Realtek LAN on the Sabertooth.
 
Crosshair V has X-Fi audio vs Realtek on the Sabertooth also. And of course the ROG connect on the Crosshair V, which allows you to use a second computer (laptop, netbook, second desktop) to access the BIOS and do your overclocking, and save those settings on the second computer.
 
So what happened to all the 990FX boards? The Sabertooth hit and stayed on Newegg for a few days but now its totally disappeared from the face of the earth. The only AM3+ boards out there are the 890FX offerings.
 
MacLeod said:
So what happened to all the 990FX boards? The Sabertooth hit and stayed on Newegg for a few days but now its totally disappeared from the face of the earth. The only AM3+ boards out there are the 890FX offerings.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen of the 990FX boards, that's a good thing. They are having tons of teething issues. Though I'm not sure the problems are related to the chipset specifically. (Especially since the chipset is a rebadged 890FX.)
 
fave bit from the review
The 990FX chipset was built to base the new eight core Phenom II processors we are patiently awaiting and offers some high end features for the gamer and enthusiast alike.
Click to expand...

go 8 core phenom II go :)
 
Dan_D said:
From what I've seen of the 990FX boards, that's a good thing. They are having tons of teething issues. Though I'm not sure the problems are related to the chipset specifically. (Especially since the chipset is a rebadged 890FX.)
Click to expand...

For crying out loud. So first the processors aren't working right and now the mobos are flaking out. This is almost comical.
 
MacLeod said:
For crying out loud. So first the processors aren't working right and now the mobos are flaking out. This is almost comical.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind I've only worked with two 990FX chipset based boards at present. Both were horrid and it may be that some are better than others, but the two I've used are the only ones I have to go on.
 
You must not be too far off base bro cause nobody has any boards out despite reviews being up and them being on their websites. If it were one or two brands I wouldn't say so but when every manufacturer has not only just not released them but pulled them from the market, something is up.
 
MacLeod said:
You must not be too far off base bro cause nobody has any boards out despite reviews being up and them being on their websites. If it were one or two brands I wouldn't say so but when every manufacturer has not only just not released them but pulled them from the market, something is up.
Click to expand...

its a possibility but if you were a board maker and the new MB you've just released doesn't have the intended cpu to pair it with, i'd constrict supply as well. why not give your customers (retailers) a chance to off-load old stock (800 series MB) while waiting for the new cpu to drop.

or perhaps you are right, there is a intel'esk chipset fuckup waiting to happen.
 
Hmm..

I remember reading somewhere that the Crosshair V Formula only has Hypertransport 3.0, but the Sabertooth has Hypertransport 3.1.

I don't know the significance of this, or even if it is correct or not, as I can't seem to find the information again.

Also, when you say the Crosshair V Formula has X-Fi sound, is it an actual EMU20k2 chip, or is it one of those lame X-Fi software implementations with a Realtek chip?

Personally, I am holding out for the MSI 990FXA-GD80. I know it didn't test well, but the article suggests that it may be BIOS related, which I am hoping is correct and it will be fixed down the line. I like the expansion slot layout on that board better than either of the ASUS alternatives, which is why I am waiting.

I'd buy an MSI 990FXA-GD80 today if I could...
 
X-Fi with Asus has always been software implementations with a Realtek chip. As far as I know, no manufacturers use an actual x-fi chip, or a sound card that doesn't use Realtek.
 
Tsumi said:
X-Fi with Asus has always been software implementations with a Realtek chip. As far as I know, no manufacturers use an actual x-fi chip, or a sound card that doesn't use Realtek.
Click to expand...

Gigabytes G1.Assassin and G1.Sniper boards have actual EMU20k2 chips on them. The G1.Guerilla only has a Realtek chip on it though.

...but then again these boards are in a completely differnt price class.
 
Tsumi said:
X-Fi with Asus has always been software implementations with a Realtek chip. As far as I know, no manufacturers use an actual x-fi chip, or a sound card that doesn't use Realtek.
Click to expand...

There are a few out there, but most of your mainstream and enthusiast class boards all use either the Realtek ALC889 or ALC892.

Zarathustra[H];1037367833 said:
Gigabytes G1.Assassin and G1.Sniper boards have actual EMU20k2 chips on them. The G1.Guerilla only has a Realtek chip on it though.

...but then again these boards are in a completely differnt price class.
Click to expand...

And for the same money you could purchase a $300 board and an actual X-Fi board to go with it. I'm not saying that's a better solution, but it's a viable alternative. You aren't really gaining anything (except maybe an extra expansion slot) by going with an integrated X-Fi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top