# Motherboard hunting.



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

Okay so my current board (ASUS M5A97 R2.0) is dead and I'll have $325 total soon. Is there a motherboard that has SLI on it for a max of $125 that supports AM3+ that is AN ACTUAL GOOD board? 

Also, will a 530w PSU power two GTX660OC GPUs in SLI? Or will that need an upgrade?


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 14, 2014)

Here you go!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128514&cm_re=990fx-_-13-128-514-_-Product

Second, I would not trust a 530 watt to two gtx 660 overclocked and an fx processor.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

So how big of a PSU would you think of?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 14, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> So how big of a PSU would you think of?


A good 650w+

Seasonic/Corsair/Silverstone/Evga.

Evga has been killing it with power supplies lately.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...438017&cm_re=750w_Evga-_-17-438-017-_-Product


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 14, 2014)

I'd think 650-700w.

http://www.ncixus.com/products/?usa...=220-G2-0750-XR&manufacture=eVGA&promoid=1422

Pretty nice deal


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

Awesome, thanks guys.


----------



## RCoon (Jul 14, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Evga has been killing it with power supplies lately.



You're telling me, they're currently selling the cheapest Gold rated 650W PSU in the whole of the UK, and it's not even that bad either.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 14, 2014)

The G2s are cheap and actually pretty damn good units.

The older NEX ones are pretty crappy though.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

So that leaves me with $125 short of going SLI. I MUST APPLY FOR MORE JOBS.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 14, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> So that leaves me with $125 short of going SLI. I MUST APPLY FOR MORE JOBS.


SLI is overrated. Save your money for a single nice single GPU, it will pay off long term if you're not doing anything more than 1080p for gaming.


----------



## XSI (Jul 14, 2014)

SLI 660 gtx is wonderful idea, one of the best combination (like 650ti boost sli) will outperform 770 gtx by a good margin and should be cheaper as well. One card is not always best solution.


----------



## ne6togadno (Jul 14, 2014)

why dont you sell that 660 crap you have and get http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-02gp42765kr or http://pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-video-card-gvr928wf3oc3gd
you wont need to oc them and both will work fine with 530w psu


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 14, 2014)

RCoon said:


> You're telling me, they're currently selling the cheapest Gold rated 650W PSU in the whole of the UK, and it's not even that bad either.



Their Supernova G2 and P2 PSUs are amazing.


----------



## RealNeil (Jul 14, 2014)

*http://www.amazon.com/MSI-Computer-Motherboard-Motherboards-970A-G46/dp/B0073JYZ48*

I have this with an 8350 in it. I'm using two GTX-570s in SLI ATM. 750W PSU


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 14, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> So how big of a PSU would you think of?


600 minimum, 650 to include overclocking headroom and less stress on the PSU.

I like (Like others have stated) the EVGA PSU's, Seasonic, and Rosewill (If your looking for a deal).  Corsair is also a good option but here are a couple choices I like:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817182071

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817151137

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817438022
This last one is an EVGA refurb, not sure if you want to try one of these (They are out of stock of the normal ones) because it would still come with EVGA's warranty.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 14, 2014)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157479

$129 w/ Prom Code.  I know you said $125, but for $4 more this board is just a killer deal.

If you absolutely have to stick to your budget then there is always this for $110: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130677

As for the power supply, this one is way more than enough for what you need and only $60 after MIR and Promo Code: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139051



ne6togadno said:


> why dont you sell that 660 crap you have and get http://pcpartpicker.com/part/evga-video-card-02gp42765kr or http://pcpartpicker.com/part/gigabyte-video-card-gvr928wf3oc3gd
> you wont need to oc them and both will work fine with 530w psu



You realize that SLI GTX660s will absolutely destroy both of those suggestions right?  I mean, you call the 660 crap and then suggest the 760, that is barely an upgrade...


----------



## Misaki (Jul 14, 2014)

How did you kill this motherboard?


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 14, 2014)

I'd avoid Corsair CX PSUs, there are better options for the price. Also, avoid the older EVGA NEX units, they are group regulated, so the voltage regulation is horrible under crossloads.

Other than that I'd say you, like me, have some saving up to do


----------



## Batou1986 (Jul 14, 2014)

No 970 board is good for sli or cfx the first pci-e will be 2.0 16x and the second is 2.0 8x, for whatever reason it had issues and would get stuck at 16x 4x 1.1 as well.
It bottlenecked my 6870's and general did not work well at all .

Secondly SLI/CFX is a gimmick when it does work, it works well in certain games and not so well in many others, you are much better off getting a single better gpu.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 14, 2014)

In the games it doesn't work you are unlikely to need SLI for 1080p60Hz...


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

Misaki said:


> How did you kill this motherboard?


It just kinda died. No overheating. All plugs connected and tight in.


GorbazTheDragon said:


> In the games it doesn't work you are unlikely to need SLI for 1080p60Hz...


It's for future games. I'd love to crank up the settings in Watch Dogs someday when I get it.

So I should just save up for when the 800-series comes out, huh?


----------



## 64K (Jul 14, 2014)

Well, one way to look at is that you won't need to buy a new PSU if you decide not to SLI your GTX 660.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 14, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I'd avoid Corsair CX PSUs, there are better options for the price.



You say that and then don't actually post any recommendations.  Can you find something better than the CX750M for $60, because I can't.



Batou1986 said:


> Secondly SLI/CFX is a gimmick when it does work, it works well in certain games and not so well in many others, you are much better off getting a single better gpu.



I pretty much all the demanding games SLI/CFX works extremely well.  In most indie games it doesn't work, but it isn't really needed.  So basically SLI/CFX works when it is needed and doesn't when it isn't.  They definitely aren't gimmicky.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

64K said:


> Well, one way to look at is that you won't need to buy a new PSU if you decide not to SLI your GTX 660.


True, but I want my rig to last longer in the long run.


----------



## 64K (Jul 14, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> True, but I want my rig to last longer in the long run.



Is your GTX 660 the 2 GB VRAM? If so then there may be games in the long run (like Watch Dogs) that will limit how high you can crank up the settings even though your SLI GTX 660 OC might have the grunt to handle it.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

64K said:


> Is your GTX 660 the 2 GB VRAM? If so then there may be games in the long run (like Watch Dogs) that will limit how high you can crank up the settings even though your SLI GTX 660 OC might have the grunt to handle it.


http://us.msi.com/product/vga/N660_TF_2GD5OC.html


----------



## Vario (Jul 14, 2014)

Did it die from the OC?
I'd get a high end 990FX if I were you.
Keep the 660 and wait for the 860 series. Don't bother with SLI.

How about this?
ASRock 990FX Extreme9 AM3+ AMD 990FX
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157358
review:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/ASRock-990FX-Extreme9-Motherboard/1731/1

or
GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD7 AM3+ AMD 990FX
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128508

or
ASUS SABERTOOTH 990FX R2.0
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131877


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

Vario said:


> Did it die from the OC?
> I'd get a high end 990FX if I were you.
> Keep the 660 and wait for the 860 series. Don't bother with SLI.


Like I said. All temps were pretty good. The only thing that was OC'd is the GPU.


----------



## suraswami (Jul 14, 2014)

If the board is still under warranty why not check with Asus and get an RMA?  If you get a new board back from Asus, you saved that money, sell your 660 and get a 770.  That should hold you for another 2 yrs (may be).  You probably won't need to change the PSU.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

suraswami said:


> If the board is still under warranty why not check with Asus and get an RMA?  If you get a new board back from Asus, you saved that money, sell your 660 and get a 770.  That should hold you for another 2 yrs (may be).  You probably won't need to change the PSU.


I did a dumb and lost the receipt. Unless I can print it out from Newegg, I'm kinda out of luck. It's also over two months ago when I got it so eh..


----------



## Vario (Jul 14, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I did a dumb and lost the receipt. Unless I can print it out from Newegg, I'm kinda out of luck. It's also over two months ago when I got it so eh..


Newegg you can go back quite a ways.  I bet you can get the receipt off of the Egg easily.
However I'd still buy a new board, (use Amazon, they are easier to return too if you get a DOA out of box) and then RMA old board, when you get your replacement, sell it.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

Vario said:


> Newegg you can go back quite a ways.  I bet you can get the receipt off of the Egg easily.
> However I'd still buy a new board, (use Amazon, they are easier to return too if you get a DOA out of box) and then RMA old board, when you get your replacement, sell it.


Yeah, the M5A97 R2.0 was good but I'm still not going to run with it again.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 14, 2014)

Vario said:


> Did it die from the OC?
> I'd get a high end 990FX if I were you.
> Keep the 660 and wait for the 860 series. Don't bother with SLI.
> 
> ...



He said $125 max for the board. Those definitely don't fall under that.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 14, 2014)

The UD3 is a good board for the price.


----------



## suraswami (Jul 14, 2014)

I have the UD3, its a good board, but bit tricky with OCing and S3 sleep.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 14, 2014)

suraswami said:


> I have the UD3, its a good board, but bit tricky with OCing and S3 sleep.


I'm not a big overclocker, so that helps.


----------



## 64K (Jul 14, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> http://us.msi.com/product/vga/N660_TF_2GD5OC.html



I can't know for sure where PC gaming requirements are going to be a few years from now but I do expect that there will be some games that will be limited by 2 GB VRAM even at 1080p. Maxing out all games isn't important to everyone. If that is important to you then it's something to consider. Honestly my opinion is that you should just wait on GTX 860 or GTX 870 if budget will allow after saving some more $$$. We're nearing the end of the Kepler cycle. Depending on what Nvidia sets the retail prices at will determine if they're a good value though.


----------



## Vario (Jul 14, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> He said $125 max for the board. Those definitely don't fall under that.


Not buying a second 660 for sli would give him the cash for a better mobo.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

Vario said:


> Not buying a second 660 for sli would give him the cash for a better mobo.


I don't care for godly-grade things. I just want something that works and will work for a good amount of time. Had I been wanting something big in the first place, I would've went with a Sabertooth or so.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 15, 2014)

I'd say get an intel, upgrade GPU to a maxwell or R9 300 series, and be happy.

You are probably going to run into bottlenecks on your CPU if you run 2 660s...


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I'd say get an intel, upgrade GPU to a maxwell or R9 300 series, and be happy.
> 
> You are probably going to run into bottlenecks on your CPU if you run 2 660s...


So get the ASUS RMA, sell my FX and that board, and go for Intel? What on earth is a good combo that'll work around $400? And the only bottlenecks I've had in the games I've played are GPU.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 15, 2014)

i5 4690k and a Z97-A?

Well under $400

I'd expect you will see quite a bit of bottlenecking on that 6300 (especially at stock) once you go SLI 660s or a single 870 or something like that.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

Could I get those two for $325?


----------



## Vario (Jul 15, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> So get the ASUS RMA, sell my FX and that board, and go for Intel? What on earth is a good combo that'll work around $400? And the only bottlenecks I've had in the games I've played are GPU.


Microcenter you can usually get an i5 and a decent motherboard for $300 with the combo.

If you did want to go Intel you can buy a used i7 2600k for around $180-200 and a 1155 z68/77 mobo for around $60-100.  i5 2500k can be found for $140.

There is this
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/2600k-and-asus-p8p67-pro-b3.143914/


EarthDog said:


> Up FS is a 2600K and ASUS P8P87 Pro (B3) Combo. Comes with the board and CPU only. Not sure what the max multi is on this thing or how it overclocks. I just confirmed it was working. This must go. Hopefully it is priced to sell...If not make me some offers.
> 
> *$210 Shipped.*
> $180 CPU Only.






Lightbulbie said:


> I don't care for godly-grade things. I just want something that works and will work for a good amount of time. Had I been wanting something big in the first place, I would've went with a Sabertooth or so.


A $180 990FX is not godly grade. It is adequate for long term use.  A reliable mobo is money well spent, for the FX a good VRM section helps a lot.


----------



## suraswami (Jul 15, 2014)

Without going to all those review sites, how do I check for 'bottleneck' with my current gaming system?


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 15, 2014)

suraswami said:


> Without going to all those review sites, how do I check for 'bottleneck' with my current gaming system?


Is your GPU running at 100% usage in whatever game you're playing most of the time when v-sync is off? If it's not, something other than your GPU is slowing rendering down and it would probably be the CPU in most cases.


----------



## Vario (Jul 15, 2014)

I've found that good steady minimum frame rate indicates your CPU is adequate.


----------



## suraswami (Jul 15, 2014)

Aquinus said:


> Is your GPU running at 100% usage in whatever game you're playing most of the time when v-sync is off? If it's not, something other than your GPU is slowing rendering down and it would probably be the CPU in most cases.


95% of time I play BF4 and sometimes go back to BF3 (both games of course multi-player).  Video settings are set at Auto, which defaults to all High.  Using Perfoverlay command I see the FPS ranging from 80 to 110 and occasional drop to 60's when lot of smoke, fog or too many players.  If I set to all ULTRA, FPS drops to below 60 and sometimes painful.  According to GPUZ my GPU is working hard around 90 to 98%.  Task Manager shows all 8 cores loaded and load varies from 40 to 50%.  I have enabled Mantle.

Is this a good sign?


----------



## Vario (Jul 15, 2014)

suraswami said:


> 95% of time I play BF4 and sometimes go back to BF3 (both games of course multi-player).  Video settings are set at Auto, which defaults to all High.  Using Perfoverlay command I see the FPS ranging from 80 to 110 and occasional drop to 60's when lot of smoke, fog or too many players.  If I set to all ULTRA, FPS drops to below 60 and sometimes painful.  According to GPUZ my GPU is working hard around 90 to 98%.  Task Manager shows all 8 cores loaded and load varies from 40 to 50%.  I have enabled Mantle.
> 
> Is this a good sign?


When you overclock the 8350, do you get a large bump in frame rate or is it miniscule?


----------



## suraswami (Jul 15, 2014)

Vario said:


> When you overclock the 8350, do you get a large bump in frame rate or is it miniscule?


from 4 to 4.2 I don't see any difference unless I run the built-in test, which shows I gained 1 to 2 FPS depending on which map I run it.

But OC my 7950 from stock clock 960 to 1150 gives me much better experience, smooth game play and no stuttering.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

In big games I play, it's normally the CPU hitting 50-60% and my GPU hitting 70-90%.


----------



## Vario (Jul 15, 2014)

suraswami said:


> from 4 to 4.2 I don't see any difference unless I run the built-in test, which shows I gained 1 to 2 FPS depending on which map I run it.
> 
> But OC my 7950 from stock clock 960 to 1150 gives me much better experience, smooth game play and no stuttering.


So I'd say its not a CPU bottleneck for you, assuming the built-in test shows minimum frame rate and not max fps.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

So I thought it over and I'm going to try for an Intel build. I have everything but the board and CPU. So I was thinking at least a 3570k but I have no brains when  it comes to Intel boards.
Budget for the moment is $325.


----------



## arnoo1 (Jul 15, 2014)

600watt is more than enough, just buy a good brand like corsair and make sure the psu has enough connectors for the gpu's

a single 660 uses max 140, so if u have the ti version it's maybe 160 a card
so 2x160watts +130 for most amd cpu's maybe 30watts voor mb 40watts voor fans and drives
=~460 watts


----------



## Vario (Jul 15, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> So I thought it over and I'm going to try for an Intel build. I have everything but the board and CPU. So I was thinking at least a 3570k but I have no brains when  it comes to Intel boards.
> Budget for the moment is $325.


Socket 1155 or 1150?  1150 is probably the way to go to get the latest (Devils Canyon).


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

Vario said:


> Socket 1155 or 1150?  1150 is probably the way to go to get the latest (Devils Canyon).


1155 will let me run the 3570k.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 15, 2014)

Yeah but you can get 4690k.

Unless you already have a 3570k I'd suggest going with the most current architecture. And if you do get a Z97 board now you have the potential to upgrade to a Broadwell CPU.

$325 is a bit tight for an i5 and board.

If you are not going to spend a huge amount on a board, the Z97-A from Asus is a pretty good option. Otherwise, if you are willing to go with a Z87 board, the Z87x-D3H, UD3H, and UD4H are really good boards. The build quality is great, but the feature set might be a bit bland for some people's taste, they often can be found floating around each other's price brackets.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 15, 2014)

Well I am planning on staying with a single-GPU setup. A Z87 won't bother me if a 970 ran with me perfectly fine.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 15, 2014)

The main problem with Z87 is that it probably will not support Broadwell CPUs, so you will be stuck on Gaswell as far as upgrades go. Also, you might not be able to get a 4690k to run without having another CPU (4670k for example) to flash the BIOS.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 15, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> The main problem with Z87 is that it probably will not support Broadwell CPUs, so you will be stuck on Gaswell as far as upgrades go. Also, you might not be able to get a 4690k to run without having another CPU (4670k for example) to flash the BIOS.



Not to mention there are reports of people putting their Devil's Canyon chips in Z87 boards and the board giving the chip 1.5v+ at first boot!


----------



## Vario (Jul 16, 2014)

If you are going 1155 maybe consider that used package in the classifieds, $210 for i7 2600k and a mobo
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/2600k-and-asus-p8p67-pro-b3.143914/

I have a Z77XUD3H and its CPU overclocking is great.  However It doesn't like Samsung 30nm Green Ram and the Via USB ports are flaky.  Otherwise I think its pretty good.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 16, 2014)

I'd still suggest Z97 over the older platforms. The new platform is a lot more versatile as far as I/O goes.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jul 16, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I'd still suggest Z97 over the older platforms. The new platform is a lot more versatile as far as I/O goes.


Agreed, and you can get a really good bang for the buck board(like the Z97 Extreme6) for under $150.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 16, 2014)

newtekie1 said:


> Agreed, and you can get a really good bang for the buck board(like the Z97 Extreme6) for under $150.


Well it depends how much I can sell my FX-6300 for, going by my M5A97 didn't kill that too.


----------



## Vario (Jul 16, 2014)

You should be able to get $80-100 for it on eBay, or try forum classifieds.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 16, 2014)

Vario said:


> You should be able to get $80-100 for it on eBay, or try forum classifieds.


Or try here. Time to make a heatware.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 16, 2014)

Okay so this went from trying SLI to needing a way to get a 4690k/3570k+motherboard combo. PROGRESS MY FRIENDS. THIS IS PROGRESS.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 16, 2014)

He killed his mobo on purpose...


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 16, 2014)

i woudnt be surprized if the 97 evo killed your chip. i put mine in a mates asus and it sent 1.5v even though i manually set it at 1.4. asus is horrible now. their boards die too frequently and after i have shifted to asrock my life has been better.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 16, 2014)

de.das.dude said:


> i woudnt be surprized if the 97 evo killed your chip. i put mine in a mates asus and it sent 1.5v even though i manually set it at 1.4. asus is horrible now. their boards die too frequently and after i have shifted to asrock my life has been better.


It wasn't an EVO. It was just the normal M5A97 R2.0. I also checked the core voltage on CPU-Z and AIDA64 and made sure that the core voltage was never above 1.41v. BIOS checked and everything.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 16, 2014)

mine was a revision one that i put on. thats why they were scrapped. anyway asus isnt good. stay away from them until they fix their issues.
having a top of the range motherboard but having it fail after  months -> only happens in asus.


----------



## Vario (Jul 16, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Okay so this went from trying SLI to needing a way to get a 4690k/3570k+motherboard combo. PROGRESS MY FRIENDS. THIS IS PROGRESS.



I think you will "feel" the difference, I went from Phenom II @ 4.0 to Ivy Bridge and the speed boost was very noticeable.


----------



## XSI (Jul 16, 2014)

Maybe its just me, but 2x660 sli would be much better for gaming improvement compare to platform change. Let see 10-20% improvement maybe in some cases because of new cpu+mb. Up to +90% from sli. If your goal is gaming with better fps, i would go sli.
p.s. can u borrow another 660 just to try it?


----------



## Vario (Jul 16, 2014)

XSI said:


> Maybe its just me, but 2x660 sli would be much better for gaming improvement compare to platform change. Let see 10-20% improvement maybe in some cases because of new cpu+mb. Up to +90% from sli. If your goal is gaming with better fps, i would go sli.
> p.s. can u borrow another 660 just to try it?


In the long term the CPU upgrade would be better, he would probably be able to go for another 4-6 years before a 4790 becomes too slow and obsolete.


----------



## XSI (Jul 16, 2014)

i've read the starting post. i didnt take into account his MB is broken. so in this case he needs new MB. so platform change is more relevant.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 16, 2014)

Erm a mobo change would cost less considering he can get a sli capable board and 2 vc for less than a cpu, Board and 2 vc considering intel fetches a riduculous price for something that only shows perf gain in synth tests but real world isnt better than a Sandybridge chip...


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 16, 2014)

XSI said:


> Maybe its just me, but 2x660 sli would be much better for gaming improvement compare to platform change. Let see 10-20% improvement maybe in some cases because of new cpu+mb. Up to +90% from sli. If your goal is gaming with better fps, i would go sli.
> p.s. can u borrow another 660 just to try it?


thats just dreaming dude.  you can never get more than 80% sli scaling on a good day. expect 50-70% as an average. also. nvidia cards have their sudden death issue which will mean 2x the chance of failure with SLI.

i bought a sli/crossfire board. but decided single cards are worth way more.

also when you finally upgrade from an sli you will not get back your investment as its already too old or probably broken.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 16, 2014)

I think changing to a 4690k would probably be best. I just gotta find a AM3+ board to see if my FX-6300 is dead or not.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 16, 2014)

Any news about that RMA? Asus not accepting it?


----------



## Toothless (Jul 16, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> Any news about that RMA? Asus not accepting it?


I've gotta go and check up on it. I'll do that now.

EDIT: Nope. It's over the 30-day thing so NewEgg won't RMA it.


----------



## XSI (Jul 16, 2014)

de.das.dude said:


> thats just dreaming dude.  you can never get more than 80% sli scaling on a good day. expect 50-70% as an average..


i had litteraly 100% Sli scaling in many games with 8800gt (crysis 20 one 40+ in sli, cod4 40+ one 70-80+ for sli. ut3 same. world in conflict 90+% ). it was 6 years ago. so please dont tell me they got worse over the years. if scaling is 50-70% something else in the system has an effect. so maybe i got lucky but i had wonderful experience with my sli setup. except for micro stuttrler.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 16, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I've gotta go and check up on it. I'll do that now.
> 
> EDIT: Nope. It's over the 30-day thing so NewEgg won't RMA it.


Should be able to go to the manufacturer for an RMA then. So you need to open a ticket with Asus.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 16, 2014)

XSI said:


> i had litteraly 100% Sli scaling in many games with 8800gt (crysis 20 one 40+ in sli, cod4 40+ one 70-80+ for sli. ut3 same. world in conflict 90+% ). it was 6 years ago. so please dont tell me they got worse over the years. if scaling is 50-70% something else in the system has an effect. so maybe i got lucky but i had wonderful experience with my sli setup. except for micro stuttrler.



explain this please
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2365/12


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 16, 2014)

CPU Bottleneck


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

Well my laptop charger just came in, so no more AIO bs. (Yay)


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

Okay, so a family friend might be able to get me an i7 for cheap. So now I need a motherboard that'll go with an i7 4770k/4790k with a budget of $125.


----------



## XSI (Jul 17, 2014)

"explain this" cpu bottleneck and another reason very early test even before crysis was out. i used my system with e8400@3.8 and about 6-8 month after this review.OP enjoy your new system.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 17, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> CPU Bottleneck


Yes. In doubt it. You probably haven't heard of an and tech. But their scores are as reliable as can be. Look at the test setup. Its not being bottle necked.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2014)

Anandtech make great reviews, but at least for the CoD4 one I am 100% certain it is a CPU bottleneck. The game runs on a single thread and an X6800 is far from great in single thread performance. My 3.2GHz ivy bridge CPU struggles to keep the game running at over 150FPS, so taking into account the older architecture of the CPU used in the benchmarks, and the fact that they don't seem to have overclocked it (so it runs at 2.93GHz) I would be surprised if that is not the bottleneck.

It also coincides with the fact that the lower 3 resolutions tested the SLI setup gives about the same FPS, while the single cards are already falling off slightly.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 17, 2014)

i doubt its a CPU bottleneck the core 2 duo extremes were great in their day. if there is something wrong it might be drivers. nothing else. and i doubt a good driver will make a huge difference.

you are comparing mobile CPU with desktop. which are very very different. your mobile CPU never gives peak performance because it is thermally restricted and it keeps throttling down.

and in any case newer cards arent supplied with as good drivers as before. neither are the newer games coded as efficiently.
hence 80% max at best. that too subjected to high resolutions.

since most cards can already play the demanding games at ultra at 1080p for a very reasonable price of around 200$ i dont think SLI is specially useful. not at this time.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2014)

During the tests I was running I had the CPU pinned to 3.2GHz and it was not by any means thermally restricted. Maximum temperatures in game were rarely over 65c. The only game I have played that the CPU can't maintain 3.2GHz is BF3, where I have to downclock it to 3.1GHz to avoid a TDP throttling scenario.

The x6800 is a dual core, but since ioquake is single threaded that doens't really make a difference (I think it is safe to assume that there were no background programs eating up CPU time), but given that the architecture has lower IPC than ivy bridge and runs at a lower clock speed than my CPU, on top of the possibility of other restrictions (memory bottlenecking, PCIe, etc) I would not at all be surprised if it is something other than the GPUs that is limiting the SLI (and even the singe card) setups at the lower resolutions.

Now for the OP, I would suggest getting a single card later on (GTX 870 or AMD equivalent) rather than another 660. I don't really see the point in having SLI outside the top end GPUs.

For the board I would suggest spending $15 extra and getting a Z97x-UD3H, Z97x-gaming5, or Z97-A. Even though you are not a big overclocker, it is so easy on Haswell that there is no excuse not to.


----------



## XSI (Jul 17, 2014)

"and in any case newer cards arent supplied with as good drivers as before. neither are the newer games coded as efficiently.
hence 80% max at best"
that's a good point. anyway there were few games that liked 3.5Ghz+ on the cpu 3.0 and 3.5+ had some difference.
you backed your point with proof, but that straight line with 2x8800gt surely CPU bottleneck. I think we can finish this, it doesn't really matter as OP decided to go for new platform and our sli debate is not worth it anymore.


----------



## Vario (Jul 17, 2014)

If you want to save cash and don't mind losing overclocking, sli, and other features you could go with the cheaper chipsets.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 17, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> During the tests I was running I had the CPU pinned to 3.2GHz and it was not by any means thermally restricted. Maximum temperatures in game were rarely over 65c. The only game I have played that the CPU can't maintain 3.2GHz is BF3, where I have to downclock it to 3.1GHz to avoid a TDP throttling scenario.
> 
> The x6800 is a dual core, but since ioquake is single threaded that doens't really make a difference (I think it is safe to assume that there were no background programs eating up CPU time), but given that the architecture has lower IPC than ivy bridge and runs at a lower clock speed than my CPU, on top of the possibility of other restrictions (memory bottlenecking, PCIe, etc) I would not at all be surprised if it is something other than the GPUs that is limiting the SLI (and even the singe card) setups at the lower resolutions.
> 
> ...


the clocks are straight does not mean that its running at full potential. you can lock a chip to 3GHz and it will only consume full power when it is needed not when its not under load. what happens in laptop is they lay back the load a bit. not just underclock.

also as i mentioned before mobile hardware and desktop hardware cannot be compared.

my laptop too runs a quadcore at 2.4ghz, an a crossfire of 7670m. but comparing that to real 7670 cfx is just foolish. it can only run things in high not ultra.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 17, 2014)

de.das.dude said:


> i doubt its a CPU bottleneck the core 2 duo extremes were great in their day. if there is something wrong it might be drivers. nothing else. and i doubt a good driver will make a huge difference.
> 
> you are comparing mobile CPU with desktop. which are very very different. your mobile CPU never gives peak performance because it is thermally restricted and it keeps throttling down.
> 
> ...



look at  the graph! the 8800gt sli at 1280x1024 is just a few frames higher than 2560x1600! ie it is just barely faster at 1.3 megapixels than it is at 4 megapixels! 3x the pixels to generate!

So yeah at everything up to 2560x1600 a CPU bottleneck is present. This is normal, GPU's have outpaced CPU's ever since the Voodoo, Geforce, and Radeon lines launched. So you would need a newer cpu to go with the older 8800gt sli to avoid a cpu bottleneck. That being said I don't think there is much of one at 2560x1600 at which point the single 8800gt is hovering just above 50 and the sli is hovering just above 80. 60% for unreal, ~ 50% for COD4. Drivers could make up for the difference, but I still think 80% for 8800gt sli would be max. I have seen up to 90% on my GTX 480 sli, but that's several generations more that they've had to refine it.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

There goes the main topic.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2014)

de.das.dude said:


> the clocks are straight does not mean that its running at full potential. you can lock a chip to 3GHz and it will only consume full power when it is needed not when its not under load. what happens in laptop is they lay back the load a bit. not just underclock.
> 
> also as i mentioned before mobile hardware and desktop hardware cannot be compared.
> 
> my laptop too runs a quadcore at 2.4ghz, an a crossfire of 7670m. but comparing that to real 7670 cfx is just foolish. it can only run things in high not ultra.


7670m =/= 7670... The same way the GTX 670m is not the same as the desktop 670, They are based on completely different chips.

The CPU performance of my laptop (when it is not throttling) is exactly the same as any other ivy bridge quad core with HT running at 3.2GHz. The way it works is that if there is thermal headroom it will boost from its base clock (2.4) to anywhere up to 3.2GHz. When the CPU is under load and I am not putting a very heavy load (furmark like) on the GPU the CPU runs at 3.2GHz and performs like a 3.2GHz ivy quad with HT. When there is not enough power (for example when I suck up too much power with the overclocked dGPU) the CPU will throttle to where it can fit within the power limits imposed by the BIOS


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

Thread title changed. Have fun.


----------



## XSI (Jul 17, 2014)

make some decisions: do you need sli/crossfire. plans to OC. other special features. prices going from 100-400$ so less you need cheaper you can get it


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

XSI said:


> make some decisions: do you need sli/crossfire. plans to OC. other special features. prices going from 100-400$ so less you need cheaper you can get it


No SLI/Xfire. Mild OCing. All I need is two PCIx16's and @x16/x4. One for my GPU and one for my sound card. I'll be running an i7 4770k or 4790k.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2014)

Asus Z97-A
Gigabyte Z97x-Gaming5
Gigabyte Z97x-UD3H

Those would be my top choices for a lower price board.

Maybe MSi Z97-G45 gaming or Z97-Gaming5 but they don't have sata-express which you might want for future upgrades...


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 17, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> No SLI/Xfire. Mild OCing. All I need is two PCIx16's and @x16/x4. One for my GPU and one for my sound card. I'll be running an i7 4770k or 4790k.


Challenge accepted?  Wait I may have missed something, are we looking for a Z97 board with 2 PCIE 16 lanes and a CPU for 325 bucks?  Oh wait I see now you have the CPU now need a 125 buck board.

Challenge re-accepted:

Gigabyte Z97MX gaming

Asrock Z97 Gaming Extreme3

MSI Z97 U3

My choice would probably be the gigabyte of the three.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 17, 2014)

so we're pretty much talking Z97. I like my board just fine MSI Z97-G55 SLI Then there's the other one I was looking at before I bought mine, the GA-Z97X-SLI.

ASUS Z97-P though imho it seems sata "light"

I like the color scheme on the ASRock Z97 Extreme 3 or if you're into more vibrant schemes the ASRock Fatal1ty Z97 Killer.

To put it frankly there are tons at sub 125$ Z97 boards.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2014)

Still think you should spend the extra 20 bucks on a Z97-A


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

Well I'm a bit of an MSI fan and a friend has a ton of Gigabyte stuff. ASUS is not my favorite due to my board from them just dying out of no where. And the most amount of HDD/SDDs I'll have at once is like, 3 total. Now I'll try to squeeze a bit more out for the budget so let's play it safe and say that TOP budget is $150 for a board. While having two PCIE16 lanes and phase amounts are something I need. (Higher power phases, the better) Colors... Aren't exactly on the top of my list. I don't care if my board was neon pink with flashy LEDs on it 

AsRock does have some smexy boards, though I don't know anyone personally that has one. Any reviews for AsRock?


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 17, 2014)

From what I've heard the MSi ones are about as good as Asus on intels side, but for AMD MSi boards are far more flakey.

Review database?


----------



## Toothless (Jul 17, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> From what I've heard the MSi ones are about as good as Asus on intels side, but for AMD MSi boards are far more flakey.
> 
> Review database?


Or personal reviews of the board that you currently use if you use Intel.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 17, 2014)

surprising, many people I know who are on a budget go with ASRock. On low to mid budget boards they far surpass their daddy ASUS in every possible way. You know if you're not in a rush you could just enter the TPU contest for the MSI z97 Gaming 7. You could get lucky.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 18, 2014)

I'll be ordering parts (hopefully) by this weekend.


----------



## Vario (Jul 18, 2014)

Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD3H
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JKCHDC2/?tag=tec06d-20 $140
Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD5H
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JKCHDKY/?tag=tec06d-20 $165

edit: apparently Gigabyte changed the VRM design, if that matters to you then maybe UD5H is the lowest to go on Gigabyte.
http://sinhardware.com/images/vrmlist.png


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 18, 2014)

The UD3H has an ok VRM, 8 25A mosfets, the UD5H has 12, there will not be much difference in air/water OC.


----------



## Vario (Jul 18, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> The UD3H has an ok VRM, 8 25A mosfets, the UD5H has 12, there will not be much difference in air/water OC.


I think the UD3H has a doubler, its 4 phasex2.  But you are probably right it should be sufficient for basic overclocking.  Still its not the quality of the old ones looking at the sinhw chart.

Theres the Z97 Gaming 5 
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JKCHEQ2/?tag=tec06d-20


----------



## Toothless (Jul 18, 2014)

Vario said:


> I think the UD3H has a doubler, its 4 phasex2.  But you are probably right it should be sufficient for basic overclocking.  Still its not the quality of the old ones looking at the sinhw chart.


But which is better for the price? UD3H of UD5H? I'll probably have a fan on the VRM heatsink like I did before.


----------



## Vario (Jul 18, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> But which is better for the price? UD3H of UD5H? I'll probably have a fan on the VRM heatsink like I did before.


I'd get the UD5H as its on sale but I really don't have much knowledge of 1150, just 1155.  According to sinhw, 5 has much better powerphase design.

edit: try the haswell thread
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/intel-haswell-overclocking-clubhouse.185344/

They are the experts


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 18, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> But which is better for the price? UD3H of UD5H? I'll probably have a fan on the VRM heatsink like I did before.


Get the UD5 if you want a chance at a better overclock, otherwise you should be able to get 4.5 I would say at least with the UD3.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 18, 2014)

I'd go with the Z97x-Gaming 5 over UD3H if you want a gigabyte one. At the same price you get a better PWM controller. If you are running on air or water you are not going to notice the difference between the gaming 5 and UD5H. The only real difference is that you get each phase doubled, but since you are unlikely to run into very high current scenarios you will not see any performance/stability difference.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 18, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I'd go with the Z97x-Gaming 5 over UD3H if you want a gigabyte one. At the same price you get a better PWM controller. If you are running on air or water you are not going to notice the difference between the gaming 5 and UD5H. The only real difference is that you get each phase doubled, but since you are unlikely to run into very high current scenarios you will not see any performance/stability difference.


Looks nice and supports SLI. This might be the winner.


----------



## Shambles1980 (Jul 18, 2014)

just a quick message. 
i have used a lot of asrock boards over the years and i like them. they always have all the features i need/want and are solid. i much prefer them over the more popular msi/gigabyte 
my fave boards were abit, but they are gone now. but asrock are usually decent boards for the money usually better than the same price point msi/gigabyte


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 18, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> 7670m =/= 7670... The same way the GTX 670m is not the same as the desktop 670, They are based on completely different chips.
> 
> The CPU performance of my laptop (when it is not throttling) is exactly the same as any other ivy bridge quad core with HT running at 3.2GHz. The way it works is that if there is thermal headroom it will boost from its base clock (2.4) to anywhere up to 3.2GHz. When the CPU is under load and I am not putting a very heavy load (furmark like) on the GPU the CPU runs at 3.2GHz and performs like a 3.2GHz ivy quad with HT. When there is not enough power (for example when I suck up too much power with the overclocked dGPU) the CPU will throttle to where it can fit within the power limits imposed by the BIOS


thats what i have been saying. that he cant compare desktop to his laptop performance


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 18, 2014)

Personally I'm not a fan of ASrock's current colour scheme, it is a bit too flashy for me, but the boards are from what I've heard pretty good.



de.das.dude said:


> thats what i have been saying. that he cant compare desktop to his laptop performance


I'm not comparing a GTX 670m to a desktop 670... I have always compared it to a desktop 560, which it actually performs quite similarly to.

My whole point is that considering the specs of the X6800, the 80 or so FPS bottleneck seems like around where it would settle for the CPU.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 18, 2014)

lets give it a rest shall we. its been derailed too long.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 19, 2014)

Going with the Gigabyte GA-Z97X Gaming 5 for the board. Currently $145.

Getting an i7 4770k for $175. 

I'm $5 under budget.

And I finished all of my GED tests today.



Today is a good day.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 19, 2014)

GED=General EDucation?

Aww that's cool. I'll be off to England for my IBs at the end of this month so no gaming after that :<


----------



## Toothless (Jul 19, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> GED=General EDucation?
> 
> Aww that's cool. I'll be off to England for my IBs at the end of this month so no gaming after that :<


A GED is basically a highschool diploma.


----------



## Vario (Jul 19, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Going with the Gigabyte GA-Z97X Gaming 5 for the board. Currently $145.
> 
> Getting an i7 4770k for $175.
> 
> ...


Congrats and if all goes well you will find that to be a very fast setup.


----------



## Locksmith (Jul 19, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I'd avoid Corsair CX PSUs, there are better options for the price. Also, avoid the older EVGA NEX units, they are group regulated, so the voltage regulation is horrible under crossloads.
> 
> Other than that I'd say you, like me, have some saving up to do



i 2nd that, my old 4870x2 blew the sh!t out of a 800w corsair quad rail.

now using silverstone 1kw with a replaced fan after 3 week of using it.. lol


----------



## Vario (Jul 19, 2014)

Seasonic 600 watt bronze (M12 II) is a good option, usually about $50.  That's what I have (Silencer Mk3=M12 II)


----------



## Toothless (Jul 19, 2014)

Vario said:


> Congrats and if all goes well you will find that to be a very fast setup.


I couldn't sleep last night about it. I went from a Athlon II X4 620 to a FX-6300 and now to a 4770k. HUGE upgrades.


----------



## Vario (Jul 19, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I couldn't sleep last night about it. I went from a Athlon II X4 620 to a FX-6300 and now to a 4770k. HUGE upgrades.


Well you got a sweet price on the i7.  You should be good for the next 4-5 years with that thing.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 19, 2014)

Vario said:


> Well you got a sweet price on the i7.  You should be good for the next 4-5 years with that thing.


Just an upgrade from my GTX660 and I'll be in the cool club.


----------



## Vario (Jul 19, 2014)

290 is on sale at newegg


----------



## Shambles1980 (Jul 19, 2014)

gtx 660 isn't a bad card


----------



## RealNeil (Jul 19, 2014)

*This ASUS R9-280X OC* was on sale earlier today for $219.00

Just looked and it's sold out. (no wonder)


----------



## Toothless (Jul 20, 2014)

Not looking for a GPU unless someone would like to donate something that's more powerful than my GTX660.


----------



## RealNeil (Jul 20, 2014)

Sorry, just read post #130 and you had said something about a GPU upgrade,...........

I have one of the ASUS R9-280X GPUs and it's pretty sweet.

The i7-4770K is gonna be awesome.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jul 20, 2014)

I would of saved cash and gone with a 4670K


----------



## Shambles1980 (Jul 20, 2014)

but then you always have that "i wonder how much better the 4770k would have been" in the back of your mind lol.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 20, 2014)

Well I can go with either the 4770k or the 4790k. Reason I'd go with the 4770k is because it OC's better than the 4790k. Or so I've seen.


----------



## Vario (Jul 20, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Well I can go with either the 4770k or the 4790k. Reason I'd go with the 4770k is because it OC's better than the 4790k. Or so I've seen.


Thats not really true, the 4790k is better.  4790k overclocks like ivy bridge. The average 4770k doesn't get much over 4.4ghz.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 20, 2014)

Vario said:


> Thats not really true, the 4790k is better.  4790k overclocks like ivy bridge. The average 4770k doesn't get much over 4.4ghz.


I might just go with the 4790k. I just hope my 530w PSU can handle the hotness.


----------



## Vario (Jul 21, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I might just go with the 4790k. I just hope my 530w PSU can handle the hotness.


Yes get the 4790k.
You have nothing to lose, the 4790k is atleast as good as the 4770k.
Don't be too focused on clock speed either, the modern Intel architectures are so fast clock speed only makes a difference in benchmarks.  Theres not much noticeable real world difference between 4.0 and 4.5ghz.


As far as power supply, you should be fine if the power supply is high quality. You could probably run a 660 and 4790k on 450 watts.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 21, 2014)

Vario said:


> Yes get the 4790k.
> You have nothing to lose, the 4790k is atleast as good as the 4770k.
> Don't be too focused on clock speed either, the modern Intel architectures are so fast clock speed only makes a difference in benchmarks.  Theres not much noticeable real world difference between 4.0 and 4.5ghz.
> 
> ...


It's a Raidmax.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 21, 2014)

Vario said:


> Thats not really true, the 4790k is better.  4790k overclocks like ivy bridge. The average 4770k doesn't get much over 4.4ghz.


Eh I hate to disagree with you but I really do not see the 4790k as being a better overclocker than the 4770k.  The only difference is it runs a bit cooler than the 4770k, but both have been able to achieve roughly same clocks on average from what ive been reading (up to 4.8) because it is still Haswell.

But I would get the 4790k over the 4770k because lower temps are better in the long run and its better for people running on air.

Also I would not worry about your PSU with that setup, you should not have any issues with power.


----------



## Vario (Jul 21, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Eh I hate to disagree with you but I really do not see the 4790k as being a better overclocker than the 4770k.  The only difference is it runs a bit cooler than the 4770k, but both have been able to achieve roughly same clocks on average from what ive been reading (up to 4.8) because it is still Haswell.
> 
> But I would get the 4790k over the 4770k because lower temps are better in the long run and its better for people running on air.
> 
> Also I would not worry about your PSU with that setup, you should not have any issues with power.


Good luck getting 4.8 on average with either.
Reasonable expectation is 4.4 to 4.5.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 21, 2014)

Well maybe I'll get a lucky chip. I know that my FX-6300 sure hated me.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 21, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Eh I hate to disagree with you but I really do not see the 4790k as being a better overclocker than the 4770k.  The only difference is it runs a bit cooler than the 4770k, but both have been able to achieve roughly same clocks on average from what ive been reading (up to 4.8) because it is still Haswell.
> 
> But I would get the 4790k over the 4770k because lower temps are better in the long run and its better for people running on air.
> 
> Also I would not worry about your PSU with that setup, you should not have any issues with power.


From what I gathered from OCN it seems like the 4790ks average around 200-300MHz higher than the 4770ks, even when many of the 4770ks were delidded and the 4790ks were not.

About that, I'd still delid a 4790k, the stock intel stuff is still crap...


----------



## Shambles1980 (Jul 21, 2014)

hope you like whichever one you chose. and i hope that to you its a noticable and worth while improvment. 
bench marks frame rates resolutions.. all that stuff isnt really that importaint once you sit down and use your pc. and aslong as your happy you spent the right ammount of money for the right performance increase then your golden.
the i7-4770k did seem like a good price though. so hope you get a goof price on the 4790k if you decide on one of those. 
if i had the money to spend. i would get the 4790k 
not to savvy on them. but as they are the same chip the tj max should be the same so the lower temps should be a determining factor. (over clocking or not) atleast they would be for me.
even if you just set all the core boost multiples to single core usage turbo speeds the lower heat will help. just hope you get one that like to run on low voltages and even if you dont i dont think you will be dissapointed. although you may have noticed a bigger step coming from a x1xx chip rather than a x3xx i still think it should be quite a bit faster. 

also i hope you actually have a need for it "or atleast something you WANT to do that it should allow you to" because thats one thing that can always make you happy. "it does what you wanted"


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 21, 2014)

Vario said:


> Good luck getting 4.8 on average with either.
> Reasonable expectation is 4.4 to 4.5.


4.7ghz is what I see a majority max out it, I see another good chunk at 4.8 but that's about it.



GorbazTheDragon said:


> From what I gathered from OCN it seems like the 4790ks average around 200-300MHz higher than the 4770ks, even when many of the 4770ks were delidded and the 4790ks were not.
> 
> About that, I'd still delid a 4790k, the stock intel stuff is still crap...


On air yes because of lower temps, but besides a few minor upgrades which allow some better voltages its the exact same chip so the overclocking has not really changed.  They are just better for temps without delidding because of the better TIM.  Most places I see still top out on average the 4.6-4.8 range same with the 4770k (albeit this is achievable on air now).


----------



## Toothless (Jul 21, 2014)

Shambles1980 said:


> hope you like whichever one you chose. and i hope that to you its a noticable and worth while improvment.
> bench marks frame rates resolutions.. all that stuff isnt really that importaint once you sit down and use your pc. and aslong as your happy you spent the right ammount of money for the right performance increase then your golden.
> the i7-4770k did seem like a good price though. so hope you get a goof price on the 4790k if you decide on one of those.
> if i had the money to spend. i would get the 4790k
> ...


I'm paying $175 for either one..


----------



## RealNeil (Jul 21, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I'm paying $175 for either one..



Same price?

Then get the 4790K and forget about delidding it. It's a little faster of the two, and both are gonna be screamers compared to the 6300.
$175.00 is a good price. 

Hell, buy them both and sell one of them for more,............


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 21, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> 4.7ghz is what I see a majority max out it, I see another good chunk at 4.8 but that's about it.
> 
> 
> On air yes because of lower temps, but besides a few minor upgrades which allow some better voltages its the exact same chip so the overclocking has not really changed.  They are just better for temps without delidding because of the better TIM.  Most places I see still top out on average the 4.6-4.8 range same with the 4770k (albeit this is achievable on air now).



even if they both max out the same, the fact that the 4790k only gained 4 watts of tdp at 500MHZ higher clock shows the better bin. You wouldn't purposefully choose an inferior bin would you?All to end up with a hotter less efficient version of the same thing? That doesn't make any sense. There's no reason for anyone buying new to get choose the 4770K over the 4790K unless there is a significant price difference.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 21, 2014)

Well either way I'm not going to be able to run the board/CPU until after the 31st. I'm going to see my biological mother for a little under two weeks after not seeing her for 14 years.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 21, 2014)

yogurt_21 said:


> even if they both max out the same, the fact that the 4790k only gained 4 watts of tdp at 500MHZ higher clock shows the better bin. You wouldn't purposefully choose an inferior bin would you?All to end up with a hotter less efficient version of the same thing? That doesn't make any sense. There's no reason for anyone buying new to get choose the 4770K over the 4790K unless there is a significant price difference.


15watts according to Toms Hardware but thats besides the point.  I previously said that gettings the 4790k over the 4770k now is an obvious choice unless price difference is significant.  However the chip still overclocks to the same levels which needs to be noted espeically considering some people have considered buying this as an upgrade.  I am stating out that you will probably not get any different overclock on average chip to chip except when considering air cooling.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 21, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> 15watts according to Toms Hardware but thats besides the point.  I previously said that gettings the 4790k over the 4770k now is an obvious choice unless price difference is significant.  However the chip still overclocks to the same levels which needs to be noted espeically considering some people have considered buying this as an upgrade.  I am stating out that you will probably not get any different overclock on average chip to chip except when considering air cooling.


I don't trust Tom's Hardware like I used to. They'll review something and completely miss the point of said product they reviewed. But I'm going by what you guys are saying and honestly. As long as the board I was helped to pick out can handle the 4790k + a little OC'ing in the later days, then I'll be fine. I do know my next "big" upgrade will be a PSU and GPU bump because I know that the 4790k will hold for a good amount of time. I've seen people still rocking the 1stGen i7s and a friend still runs a Non-K i7 2600. If they can rock a chip for such a long time, so can I.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 21, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I don't trust Tom's Hardware like I used to. They'll review something and completely miss the point of said product they reviewed. But I'm going by what you guys are saying and honestly. As long as the board I was helped to pick out can handle the 4790k + a little OC'ing in the later days, then I'll be fine. I do know my next "big" upgrade will be a PSU and GPU bump because I know that the 4790k will hold for a good amount of time. I've seen people still rocking the 1stGen i7s and a friend still runs a Non-K i7 2600. If they can rock a chip for such a long time, so can I.


Go for it, its a good choice and a better choice seeing as you can get one that cheap.  I was just meaning if you were choosing (I orignally interpreted you had a 4770k only for 175 and not 4790k choice).  The motherboard selections you have been given are all excellent and should last you quite a long time.  With the way things are going, your probably going to be able to keep your motherboard and processor for 4+ years.


----------



## Toothless (Jul 21, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Go for it, its a good choice and a better choice seeing as you can get one that cheap.  I was just meaning if you were choosing (I orignally interpreted you had a 4770k only for 175 and not 4790k choice).  The motherboard selections you have been given are all excellent and should last you quite a long time.  With the way things are going, your probably going to be able to keep your motherboard and processor for 4+ years.


I could probably push for 6 years but then again. I gotta fill out 20 job application forms due to me getting my GED right after I applied for them all.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 21, 2014)

TDP doesn't mean anything...

And yes, I'd think it will be able to hold on for 6 years without much trouble. I just pulled the i5-4440 out of my brothers rig and replaced it with a 4GHz E7200, and he can't notice the difference.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 21, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> 15watts according to Toms Hardware but thats besides the point.  I previously said that gettings the 4790k over the 4770k now is an obvious choice unless price difference is significant.  However the chip still overclocks to the same levels which needs to be noted espeically considering some people have considered buying this as an upgrade.  I am stating out that you will probably not get any different overclock on average chip to chip except when considering air cooling.


They don't appear to check the 4770k at similar frequencies, odd. The review overall is not in the formal tone you'd expect. At any rate tdp isn't power draw. Looking the reviews on this site  the 4770k at 4.2GHZ (200MHZ lower than the turbo speed on the 4790k) The load temps are quite high even on the best air coolers. 

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Thermaltake/NiC_C5/6.html

Then looking at someone who did a more clock for clock comparison the results are pretty interesting.

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...devils-canyon-fix-haswells-low-clock-speeds/2

Power consumption is pretty much equal until higher frequencies where the 4770k starts to need more power per clock if ever so slightly. 
Heat is astounding 9C at low clocks 18C at higher clocks. 

This will affect longevity and how long you can maintain certain clocks. While devils canyon isn't more capable max clock wise, the efficiency has improved significantly. 

So yeah if you have a 4770K park there for a while, but don't consider it at all if you're buying new.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Jul 22, 2014)

I'd still delid both. But as the reviews say, there is no point in getting a 4770k if you can get a 4790k


----------



## RealNeil (Jul 22, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Well either way I'm not going to be able to run the board/CPU until after the 31st. I'm going to see my biological mother for a little under two weeks after not seeing her for 14 years.



14 years! Congrats on that and I hope it goes well.



Lightbulbie said:


> I've seen people still rocking the 1stGen i7s and a friend still runs a Non-K i7 2600. If they can rock a chip for such a long time, so can I.



I still have an i7-870 and a i7-2600K. The 870 is still pretty darn fast and the 2600K really games well,......still.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

So I have some news about my board and whatnot. I contacted ASUS finally and they had me

-Take out and put back in the battery

-USB bios flashback

-Boot with minimum requirements

Waiting for a call back. Smells like it'll be an RMA due to the three year warrenty.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 8, 2014)

So wait this is the old AM3+?


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

Yeah, the M5A97. They said they would call back.. That was 30 minutes ago.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 8, 2014)

How old's the board?

Hope you get your $$$


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

XSI said:


> i had litteraly 100% Sli scaling in many games with 8800gt (crysis 20 one 40+ in sli, cod4 40+ one 70-80+ for sli. ut3 same. world in conflict 90+% ). it was 6 years ago. so please dont tell me they got worse over the years. if scaling is 50-70% something else in the system has an effect. so maybe i got lucky but i had wonderful experience with my sli setup. except for micro stuttrler.



Yeah, I don't really know what he is talking about. I see 90%+ scaling in games all the time when I look at SLI reviews. What i found the other day looking at 780 SLI reviews is the scaling gets better the higher the resolution is, but obviously that is pretty self explanatory.

@Lightbulbie

Go with a 4690k and MSI Z97 Gaming 5

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130770&cm_re=MSI_z97-_-13-130-770-_-Product


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 8, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Yeah, I don't really know what he is talking about. I see 90%+ scaling in games all the time when I look at SLI reviews. What i found the other day looking at 780 SLI reviews is the scaling gets better the higher the resolution is, but obviously that is pretty self explanatory.


So SLI is less effective at higher framerates? Don't exactly see how that works.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> So SLI is less effective at higher framerates? Don't exactly see how that works.



No, its less effective when there is less load per GPU. At lower resolution, there's less load on the GPU, and it becomes and issue of CPU bottleneck.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 8, 2014)

So basically at lower resolutions you were running into a CPU bottleneck... That aside, I'd expect SLI/CF to perform/scale the same regardless of resolution, as long as the FPS is kept below potential CPU/memory bottlenecking.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Yeah, I don't really know what he is talking about. I see 90%+ scaling in games all the time when I look at SLI reviews. What i found the other day looking at 780 SLI reviews is the scaling gets better the higher the resolution is, but obviously that is pretty self explanatory.
> 
> @Lightbulbie
> 
> ...


I'm paying $175 for a 4790k..

Also! The last phone call with ASUS. They said they would call me back after about 5-10 minutes. This was last night and still no call... I did give them my correct number so... Lol.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I'm paying $175 for a 4790k..
> 
> Also! The last phone call with ASUS. They said they would call me back after about 5-10 minutes. This was last night and still no call... I did give them my correct number so... Lol.


 
And? Its no like you need a very high end board. Overclocking comes to your CPU most of the time.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> And? Its no like you need a very high end board. Overclocking comes to your CPU most of the time.


The extra threads will come in as very useful with the things I do.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> The extra threads will come in as very useful with the things I do.



What does that have to do with anything? We are talking boards here, not whether or not the threads will be useful.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> What does that have to do with anything? We are talking boards here, not whether or not the threads will be useful.


But I already picked a board.


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 8, 2014)

How did the meet with your mother go? (since you mentioned it in post 152)

You'll like the 4790K a lot. The i7 parts are worth the extra money if you can afford them and $175.00 is a steal of a deal.

I hope you get that RMA from ASUS. Maybe you should call them if they haven't called you. 
You know the old saying,......"The squeaky wheel gets the grease"


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> But I already picked a board.



Oh the Gigabyte Gaming 5. Good board then. 

Also to note on a previous post of yours about 4790k and if your PSU can handle the heat? Not really sure what you mean about that, but heat of the CPU has nothing to do with whether or not a PSU can handle it, as heat doesn't have much to do with the CPUs power consumption. 4770k runs just as hot if not hotter depending on the chip you get, than a 3770k, but consumes less power.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

RealNeil said:


> How did the meet with your mother go? (since you mentioned it in post 152)
> 
> You'll like the 4790K a lot. The i7 parts are worth the extra money if you can afford them and $175.00 is a steal of a deal.
> 
> ...


I'm now living with my mother.. I now have full insurance coverage which is good because I'm diabetic (Type 1)
I have my own room and my own bed after not having either for the last three years.

AND I GET TO ANNOY MY LITTLE SISTER FINALLY. WOOOOT. But thank you for asking~

ASUS had me do a few troubleshooting things and now I gotta get a hold of them. The last call was supposed to call back but never did..



MxPhenom 216 said:


> Oh the Gigabyte Gaming 5. Good board then.
> 
> Also to note on a previous post of yours about 4790k and if your PSU can handle the heat? Not really sure what you mean about that, but heat of the CPU has nothing to do with whether or not a PSU can handle it, as heat doesn't have much to do with the CPUs power consumption. 4770k runs just as hot if not hotter depending on the chip you get, than a 3770k, but consumes less power.


"Heat" was meaning to power usage. Like if my PSU had enough wattage.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I'm now living with my mother.. I now have full insurance coverage which is good because I'm diabetic (Type 1)
> I have my own room and my own bed after not having either for the last three years.
> 
> AND I GET TO ANNOY MY LITTLE SISTER FINALLY. WOOOOT. But thank you for asking~
> ...



If it was able to handle the FX6300 or whatever AMD chip you had before, it can handle the 4790k.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> If it was able to handle the FX6300 or whatever AMD chip you had before, it can handle the 4790k.


Because the FX is a 95w and the i7 is aaaaa.... 90w? 87w? I forgot.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 8, 2014)

With a 660 he won't run into any problems. Remember, it's not the TDP that matters, the actual power consumption can be much higher. OCed i7s (4.7GHz/1.3v) can run in excess of 150w (in stresstests), and  a 6300 has no trouble drawing 200w from the PSU.

As far as Z97 boards go, there are plenty of the lower end boards that can't handle overclocks. Take the Z97x-SLI. Many of Gigabytes 4 phase 8-series boards used IR3553s, which are far better mosfets than the ones used in the 9-series boards. 4 Phase is adequate with 40A mosfets, but the 25A SiRA12s need 6 or more phases to do well.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Because the FX is a 95w and the i7 is aaaaa.... 90w? 87w? I forgot.



That is the TDP rating of the chip, not actual power consumption. The overall system power consumption is about the same between the 6300 and 4790k, so if your PSU was able to handle it before, it shouldnt have an issue now.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

So the board I picked will be good enough for everything, correct?


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 8, 2014)

I think that it will be fine. Good choice,......


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Because the FX is a 95w and the i7 is aaaaa.... 90w? 87w? I forgot.




Get your head out of the sand and get your facts straight before posting...




MxPhenom 216 said:


> What does that have to do with anything? We are talking boards here, not whether or not the threads will be useful.



he is naive.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 8, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> i5 4690k and a Z97-A?
> 
> Well under $400
> 
> I'd expect you will see quite a bit of bottlenecking on that 6300 (especially at stock) once you go SLI 660s or a single 870 or something like that.


A 6300 won't bottle neck any single gpu . .and sli is not worth it at this point. .
Get a ud3 mobo save what's left for the next decent gpu out or at that time get a cut price deal on a titan ,that's  my honest opinion.
Should have read the whole thread but the Op has been ill advised here his cpu didn't bottleneck anything, its marginally slower in some games but a sic gpu would have added more fps then an i7 will.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 8, 2014)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> A 6300 won't bottle neck any single gpu . .and sli is not worth it at this point. .
> Get a ud3 mobo save what's left for the next decent gpu out or at that time get a cut price deal on a titan ,that's  my honest opinion.
> Should have read the whole thread but the Op has been ill advised here his cpu didn't bottleneck anything, its marginally slower in some games but a sic gpu would have added more fps then an i7 will.



Did you not see the price he is getting the 4790k for though?


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 8, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> I'm paying $175 for a 4790k



I would love to get that deal myself.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2014)

I'm pretty happy with snagging the i7 for such a good deal.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 9, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Did you not see the price he is getting the 4790k for though?


Add mobo cost then subtract performance gained =near zero point , his 6300 was not limiting his gfx card and he would have gained a bigger smile swapping a 660 out for a titan or R9 290 and gameing would have actually improved,, still his ipc is better now eh, he'll be able to super pi the shit out of his old cpu but thats about it.
I won't post here in this thread again then lightbulbie its pissing in the wind anyway so sorry to have bothered your eyeballs


----------



## Toothless (Aug 9, 2014)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Add mobo cost then subtract performance gained =near zero point , his 6300 was not limiting his gfx card and he would have gained a bigger smile swapping a 660 out for a titan or R9 290 and gameing would have actually improved,, still his ipc is better now eh, he'll be able to super pi the shit out of his old cpu but thats about it.
> I won't post here in this thread again then lightbulbie its pissing in the wind anyway so sorry to have bothered your eyeballs


1. I had a budget.

2. Add in the costs if ASUS wouldn't RMA. That's 90/320 dollars used already. Even if I sold my 660 I'd only have $330 for a new GPU and a more stable PSU.

3. I multitask and multiclient on games and that 6300 would bottleneck my RAM. (Not be able to use all 16GB like I had hoped)

4. The i7 will set me up for greater things down the line. I'm planning on saving up for a new PSU/GPU later this or next year.

5. As for gaming? I'm perfectly happy with my 660 and how it runs. I ran a GT 220 before I got this and I'm still feeling the upgrade.


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 9, 2014)

Also, you could probably find a second 660 like the one you already have and run a SLI setup. It wouldn't be earth shattering, but it would be better.

The i7 will chew through things a lot faster than the FX-6300 will. 

That said, there is nothing wrong with the FX-6300, or FX chips in general. I have one of them on the shelf that I never used. (just plugged it in to make sure it worked, seemed pretty snappy too) 
I also have an ASRock 990FX Extreme4 for it.
One of my gamers is an FX-8350 with a pair of GTX-570s in SLI. It's working mighty fine.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 10, 2014)

Hey Lightbulbie I hope you dont burn up your new mobo like you purposfully did your last one


----------



## Toothless (Aug 10, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> Hey Lightbulbie I hope you dont burn up your new mobo like you purposfully did your last one


Why would I do that? I made sure that all temps were good. Even put a fan over the VRM heatsink.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 11, 2014)

You know what part of it failed?


----------



## Toothless (Aug 11, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> You know what part of it failed?


Nope, gotta wait til tomorrow to call ASUS back up.


----------



## Breew (Aug 11, 2014)

Lightbulbie said:


> Nope, gotta wait til tomorrow to call ASUS back up.




late to the party.. 

I just moved from a 955 [ oced to 3.8] and a 660 card on a gigabyte 990 ud3 board to a fx board [fm2+ and the new 88 series chip set with an athlon x4 760] switching to the new chip and board cost me about 230 and had money left over to get [and got a good deal for 16Gb of] 1866 memory so for about 350 i got all the new boards features , which included a good working usb3 with boost speed and it runs faster then regular usb3 but hasn't caused problems like my 990 usb 3 ports did at times.  i am happy with it and it now has been running for about 4 months on a 24/7 use [house server and my game unit] its been a touch more reliable so far. was given a rma replacement ps [antic earthwatts 750 free so who am i to argue] the system with 4 hds 1 ssd 760k cpu 660gpu 16Gb mem and water cooling 12v pump [its not a normal wc pump but a circulation pump with really!!! good head] the full system power draw is running about 400 max at full gaming and with a second 660 gpu it ran only 480 max.. so  i am happy the system is lightly oced to run 4.2 GHz vice 3.8 base and in turbo it runs 4.6 vice 4.1 base.. the vid cards are not oced.. and temps are outstanding running 48C in full on gaming on the cpu .  Got everything other then water cooling parts from Newegg.. and most of the WC stuff from performance pc.. the pump was acquired thru http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CSZ3CFA/?tag=tec06d-20  sorry if this isn't allowed to be shown.. but its a great pump have 4 of them running more then 8 hours a day and have had the best service from them. my total system cost not including case and software is about 580 625 range.. with wc and 3 hard drives. As you are on a budget i understand that.. if i can help get you better prices by pointing you to places and or deals just let me know ill be glad to help and i have no connections to any of these places other then as a customer like you.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 11, 2014)

Breew said:


> late to the party..
> 
> I just moved from a 955 [ oced to 3.8] and a 660 card on a gigabyte 990 ud3 board to a fx board [fm2+ and the new 88 series chip set with an athlon x4 760] switching to the new chip and board cost me about 230 and had money left over to get [and got a good deal for 16Gb of] 1866 memory so for about 350 i got all the new boards features , which included a good working usb3 with boost speed and it runs faster then regular usb3 but hasn't caused problems like my 990 usb 3 ports did at times.  i am happy with it and it now has been running for about 4 months on a 24/7 use [house server and my game unit] its been a touch more reliable so far. was given a rma replacement ps [antic earthwatts 750 free so who am i to argue] the system with 4 hds 1 ssd 760k cpu 660gpu 16Gb mem and water cooling 12v pump [its not a normal wc pump but a circulation pump with really!!! good head] the full system power draw is running about 400 max at full gaming and with a second 660 gpu it ran only 480 max.. so  i am happy the system is lightly oced to run 4.2 GHz vice 3.8 base and in turbo it runs 4.6 vice 4.1 base.. the vid cards are not oced.. and temps are outstanding running 48C in full on gaming on the cpu .  Got everything other then water cooling parts from Newegg.. and most of the WC stuff from performance pc.. the pump was acquired thru http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CSZ3CFA/?tag=tec06d-20  sorry if this isn't allowed to be shown.. but its a great pump have 4 of them running more then 8 hours a day and have had the best service from them. my total system cost not including case and software is about 580 625 range.. with wc and 3 hard drives. As you are on a budget i understand that.. if i can help get you better prices by pointing you to places and or deals just let me know ill be glad to help and i have no connections to any of these places other then as a customer like you.


Well the plan is to get the 4790k and drop that in. I already have DDR3 16GB 1866mhz memory and my 660 is pretty good. I'll then save up for a high-end 700-series or wait for the 800-series to come out. I have a well paying job in my close future so everything should work out.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Aug 11, 2014)

I'd think that by the time you'll be looking for a new card they will be starting to roll out the GM200. I doubt that's much more than 10 months out at this point.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 11, 2014)

GorbazTheDragon said:


> I'd think that by the time you'll be looking for a new card they will be starting to roll out the GM200. I doubt that's much more than 10 months out at this point.


That's the plan.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Aug 11, 2014)

How many times are you going to have to call Asus? When I RMA'd my gtx470 to them, it was a single email and RMA instantly. Maybe its different with motherboards or their tech support has gone to shit.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 11, 2014)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> How many times are you going to have to call Asus? When I RMA'd my gtx470 to them, it was a single email and RMA instantly. Maybe its different with motherboards or their tech support has gone to shit.


Called three times and I'll have to call again when I can get some quiet time. It's just bs.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 14, 2014)

UPDATE: Looks like they'll approve the RMA but as my hearing is shot right now. I'm waiting so I can give them the correct address because the last call was so bad due to my hearing being so bad right now so.. GOOD NEWS.


----------



## RealNeil (Aug 14, 2014)

Email them.


----------

