Psalm Nuclei

Yeah it's a nice board.

From what I researched when I first got into OC'ing over the summer
was that Gigabyte and ASUS and certain Abit motherboards are the
better (if not the best) OC'ers.

Also check out Tom's Hardware website and forums as well as
Anandtech.com for reviews.

S. Smith

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:29:31 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
<meatnub@gmail.com> wrote:

>Yeah it's a nice board.
>
>From what I researched when I first got into OC'ing over the summer
>was that Gigabyte and ASUS and certain Abit motherboards are the
>better (if not the best) OC'ers.
>
>Also check out Tom's Hardware website and forums as well as
>Anandtech.com for reviews.


Yes. This chart at PCStats.com would seem to indicate that
as well.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2187&page=14

The Gigabyte boards have 3 boards in the top five for overclocking
speeds. Asus, Abit and Biostar all rank up there as well.

Thanks again for the suggestion.




- Scott Smith: scott.smith@iphouse.com
MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith

Psalm Nuclei

On Nov 21, 1:47 pm, S. Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:29:31 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
>
> <meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Yeah it's a nice board.
>
> >From what I researched when I first got into OC'ing over the summer
> >was that Gigabyte and ASUS and certain Abit motherboards are the
> >better (if not the best) OC'ers.
>
> >Also check out Tom's Hardware website and forums as well as
> >Anandtech.com for reviews.
>
> Yes. This chart at PCStats.com would seem to indicate that
> as well.
>
> http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2187&page=14
>
> The Gigabyte boards have 3 boards in the top five for overclocking
> speeds. Asus, Abit and Biostar all rank up there as well.
>
> Thanks again for the suggestion.
>
> - Scott Smith: scott.sm...@iphouse.com
> MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith

You're welcome glad to be of some kind of help!

Are you close to making a decision? I saw a lot of talk about the Asus
P5K just not sure if it takes quad core (too lazy to look it up! lol).

You can't go wrong though if you choose Asus, Gigabyte or Abit. I
chose Gigabyte also because they supposedly have better support when
it comes to mb driver/firmware updates.

Phil Weldon

'S. Smith' wrote:
| Yes. This chart at PCStats.com would seem to indicate that
| as well.
|
| http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2187&page=14
|
| The Gigabyte boards have 3 boards in the top five for overclocking
| speeds. Asus, Abit and Biostar all rank up there as well.
|
| Thanks again for the suggestion.
_____

If SLI graphics operation is important to you be aware that NONE of the
motherboards in the list have that capability. For SLI you should consider
motherboards based on the nVidia 680i chipset (see Ed Medlin's posts here
about his Q6600/dual 8800GTX overclock.)

Phil Weldon

"S. Smith" <scott.smith@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:q4v8k3lqccafn4ku2uiehfll72ugg77ppc@4ax.com...
| On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:29:31 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
| <meatnub@gmail.com> wrote:
|
| >Yeah it's a nice board.
| >
| >From what I researched when I first got into OC'ing over the summer
| >was that Gigabyte and ASUS and certain Abit motherboards are the
| >better (if not the best) OC'ers.
| >
| >Also check out Tom's Hardware website and forums as well as
| >Anandtech.com for reviews.
|
|
| Yes. This chart at PCStats.com would seem to indicate that
| as well.
|
| http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2187&page=14
|
| The Gigabyte boards have 3 boards in the top five for overclocking
| speeds. Asus, Abit and Biostar all rank up there as well.
|
| Thanks again for the suggestion.
|
|
|
|
| - Scott Smith: scott.smith@iphouse.com
| MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
|

~misfit~

Somewhere on teh interweb Psalm Nuclei typed:
> On Nov 21, 1:47 pm, S. Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:29:31 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
>>
>> <meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yeah it's a nice board.
>>
>>> From what I researched when I first got into OC'ing over the summer
>>> was that Gigabyte and ASUS and certain Abit motherboards are the
>>> better (if not the best) OC'ers.
>>
>>> Also check out Tom's Hardware website and forums as well as
>>> Anandtech.com for reviews.
>>
>> Yes. This chart at PCStats.com would seem to indicate that
>> as well.
>>
>> http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2187&page=14
>>
>> The Gigabyte boards have 3 boards in the top five for overclocking
>> speeds. Asus, Abit and Biostar all rank up there as well.
>>
>> Thanks again for the suggestion.
>>
>> - Scott Smith: scott.sm...@iphouse.com
>> MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
>
> You're welcome glad to be of some kind of help!
>
> Are you close to making a decision? I saw a lot of talk about the Asus
> P5K just not sure if it takes quad core (too lazy to look it up! lol).

I have a P5K. Yes they take quad core, yes they'll take the new 45nm Penryn
dual/quad core. In my opinion an awesome board. Mine's the P5K-E WiFi-AP
model, I wouldn't go for the bare P5K model myself, the -E model (and above)
is built on a different PCB, the same as all the top-end range. However, the
vanilla P5K seems to do /quite/ well:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mai...sus-p5k_2.html

You'll note that they say of the model I have "get a flagship product at a
very justified price". (Bear in mind it's translated into English, they mean
that it's the best deal in the range.)

Mine runs my E4500 (2.2GHz) at 3.3GHz rock solid. I bought the cheapish CPU
to last me until the 45nm quads are more affordable, maybe 18 months? Of
course I'll be keeping this board, it was with a quad 45nm CPU in mind that
I bought it.

> You can't go wrong though if you choose Asus, Gigabyte or Abit. I
> chose Gigabyte also because they supposedly have better support when
> it comes to mb driver/firmware updates.

I like Asus first, then Gigabyte. I have no personal experience with Abit so
I won't comment. (Nothing worse than people who recommend things they know
nothing about.)
--
TTFN,

Shaun.

~misfit~

Somewhere on teh interweb ~misfit~ typed:
> Somewhere on teh interweb Psalm Nuclei typed:
>> On Nov 21, 1:47 pm, S. Smith <scott.sm...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:29:31 -0800 (PST), Psalm Nuclei
>>>
>>> <meat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Yeah it's a nice board.
>>>
>>>> From what I researched when I first got into OC'ing over the summer
>>>> was that Gigabyte and ASUS and certain Abit motherboards are the
>>>> better (if not the best) OC'ers.
>>>
>>>> Also check out Tom's Hardware website and forums as well as
>>>> Anandtech.com for reviews.
>>>
>>> Yes. This chart at PCStats.com would seem to indicate that
>>> as well.
>>>
>>> http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=2187&page=14
>>>
>>> The Gigabyte boards have 3 boards in the top five for overclocking
>>> speeds. Asus, Abit and Biostar all rank up there as well.
>>>
>>> Thanks again for the suggestion.
>>>
>>> - Scott Smith: scott.sm...@iphouse.com
>>> MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/choppersmith
>>
>> You're welcome glad to be of some kind of help!
>>
>> Are you close to making a decision? I saw a lot of talk about the
>> Asus P5K just not sure if it takes quad core (too lazy to look it
>> up! lol).
>
> I have a P5K. Yes they take quad core, yes they'll take the new 45nm
> Penryn dual/quad core. In my opinion an awesome board. Mine's the
> P5K-E WiFi-AP model, I wouldn't go for the bare P5K model myself, the
> -E model (and above) is built on a different PCB, the same as all the
> top-end range. However, the vanilla P5K seems to do /quite/ well:
>
> http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mai...sus-p5k_2.html
>
> You'll note that they say of the model I have "get a flagship product
> at a very justified price". (Bear in mind it's translated into
> English, they mean that it's the best deal in the range.)
>
> Mine runs my E4500 (2.2GHz) at 3.3GHz rock solid. I bought the
> cheapish CPU to last me until the 45nm quads are more affordable,
> maybe 18 months? Of course I'll be keeping this board, it was with a
> quad 45nm CPU in mind that I bought it.
>
>> You can't go wrong though if you choose Asus, Gigabyte or Abit. I
>> chose Gigabyte also because they supposedly have better support when
>> it comes to mb driver/firmware updates.
>
> I like Asus first, then Gigabyte. I have no personal experience with
> Abit so I won't comment. (Nothing worse than people who recommend
> things they know nothing about.)

One thing: If you want to overclock *never* buy an Asus motherboard with a
name that ends in "-VM". That denotes their basic range and they have *zero*
native overclocking ability. I mention this as I see that there is a P5K-VM.
--
TTFN,

Shaun.

DevilsPGD

In message <ldc6k3t610qs2prkq8l20b61h0mon4th1q@4ax.com> S. Smith
<scott.smith@iphouse.com> wrote:

>I'm looking for a good Quad Core motherboard to support an Intel
>Q6600 CPU. Ideally one that is good for overclocking. I prefer Abit
>boards, but am open to suggestions.
>
>I currently have an Abit AW9D-Max board with an Intel E6600
>overclocked to 3 Ghz and it works flawlessly. Abit claims that
>board supports Quad Core CPU's, but from what I've been
>reading on the Abit forums, it's a bit flaky with the Quad Core
>CPU's and overclocking on that board with the Quad Cores
>just makes it flakier.
>
>Any suggestions or input is welcome.

I've got a couple Asus P5H DH that I'm very happy with, my desktop is
currently on that same CPU (Although I did replace the stock cooling,
mostly because I despise the mounting mechanism, plus I wanted control
over the direction of the fan due to my unusual airflow in my P180)

I don't overclock though.

My experience with Abit is somewhat dated (2-4 years), but I've never
been wow'd by 'em.

Howard Goldstein

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 18:18:34 -0700, DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> wrote:
: In message <ldc6k3t610qs2prkq8l20b61h0mon4th1q@4ax.com> S. Smith
: <scott.smith@iphouse.com> wrote:
:
: >I'm looking for a good Quad Core motherboard to support an Intel
: >Q6600 CPU. Ideally one that is good for overclocking. I prefer Abit
: >boards, but am open to suggestions.
: >
: >I currently have an Abit AW9D-Max board with an Intel E6600
: >overclocked to 3 Ghz and it works flawlessly. Abit claims that
: >board supports Quad Core CPU's, but from what I've been
: >reading on the Abit forums, it's a bit flaky with the Quad Core
: >CPU's and overclocking on that board with the Quad Cores
: >just makes it flakier.
: >
: >Any suggestions or input is welcome.
:
: I've got a couple Asus P5H DH that I'm very happy with, my desktop is
: currently on that same CPU (Although I did replace the stock cooling,
: mostly because I despise the mounting mechanism, plus I wanted control
: over the direction of the fan due to my unusual airflow in my P180)
:
: I don't overclock though.

I'll join you in a good word for the P5W DH. The board is like
3-4 generations behind so the pricing should be excellent. I'm below
average OC experience but that board took my old E6600 up to 3.6Ghz
stable...I did have to cook it with 1.5v though.

(B3 stepping, the chip has left this existence to pine in the fjords,
may it RIP)(it wasn't 1.5v that did it, more like the 12V that did it
thanks to naively expecting thermal tape on a BGA heat sink to
actually stick to an FET)

DevilsPGD

In message <1195778520.56024@news.queue.to> hgoldste@mpcs.com (Howard
Goldstein) wrote:

>I'll join you in a good word for the P5W DH. The board is like
>3-4 generations behind so the pricing should be excellent.

It also has a habit of just working, I've run XP, Vista, Vista-64,
2003-64 and 2008-64, the only hassle was for 2003-64 to slipstream the
SATA AHCI driver into the installer.

No massive driver struggles, which was a nice change.

SHRED

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128059

My newly built q6600 system is stable and very fast using this board.