990FX Motherboard Roundup with Thuban and Bulldozer – A Second Wind for ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI and Biostar
by Ian Cutress on April 5, 2012 11:00 AM ESTMSI 990FXA-GD80
When considering the MSI 990FXA-GD80 as a product to purchase, it comes with its highs and its lows. On the bright side, we have a good performing system that comes with a mountain of extras in the box compared to other products, and the BIOS is a great system. However, it becomes slightly negative if you want to overclock a Bulldozer, or want any distinct control over the fans.
Users should update their launch BIOSes to F5 or later to take advantage of that new BIOS system, and flashing the BIOS is very simple through the Live Update 5 software provided. Unfortunately the BIOS does not show the user what is auto for voltages, so a little insight is needed when changing these options. There was also a minor problem with my AMD 5850 graphics cards, spinning up to 100% for a few seconds after boot, but this did not happen with my NVIDIA 580 test cards.
Performance wise, nothing stuck out like a sore thumb and the MSI 990FXA-GD80 kept up in pace with the other products we have tested.
For $195, and the bonus in the box, the MSI 990FXA-GD80 is a nice board to run at stock, or a good one to have with a Thuban based processor.
Biostar TA990FXE
As the cheapest board in our test, it was fair to assume that perhaps the TA990FXE would not amount to much when in came to a direct comparison with the other boards in this review - with $50-$100 difference, it was to be expected. On some levels of testing, it shows - the layout isn't optimal, the DPC Latency is hideous compared to the other boards, there are not many fan headers and there is an odd choice of network controller.
However, the Biostar TA990FXE came across as pleasantly surprising. The BIOS works well (even if the options are sometimes in confusing places), it overclocks Bulldozer on par or better than some of the other boards and comes with more kit in the box than expected.
Performance wise it doesn't break into the top half much when discussing CPU benchmarks, however it has a relatively decent showing in the GPU benchmarks. Essentially, this is a board for people who just need something cheap to run their processor. It fits that niche quite well, especially if you only have one GPU and need a PCI slot or two.
While the Biostar TA990FXE isn't the best board in the world, and it could use a little insight and design change to be consumer optimal, it is a cheap board that works.
Conclusion
This combination review has been a long time coming, repetitively pushed back by other releases or events. However we have now crossed through the land of 990FX, examining boards ranging from $130 to $215, and there is a lot to choose from.
Each of the boards can be separated by styling, by BIOS function, any by software utilities. As a direct minor evolution of the 8-series for Bulldozer, it does seem amazing that some motherboards really take to Bulldozer like an old friend, while others prefer it left alone running at stock speeds.
Each board can have its own minor flaws; however one major flaw comes across most of the range - about which CPU temperature sensor to believe when it comes to determining fan speeds. Using HWMonitor, on some motherboards it would report ~14ºC at idle and the CPU fan would be slow, and on others it would be around 30ºC, a more realistic number. This all comes down to whether the system will read the onboard CPU temperature, or a different sensor placed on the board specifically for reporting different temperatures.
This aside, each board has its plus points. If I was a gamer, the ASUS ROG Crosshair V Formula would be my major priority - as it was the board AMD prioritized for Bulldozer release, it is tweaked to run as best as it can. For fan control and performance, nothing comes close to the ASUS Sabertooth 990FX. The Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 took advantage of that alternative CPU temperature reading and reduced my CPU fan to off or almost off at idle, resulting in a near silent system. The MSI 990FXA-GD80 performs well with a Thuban and provides a nifty USB 3.0 bracket in the box. The Biostar TA990FXE represents full sized ATX on a budget with AMD that is easy to update. If I were to take one, money no object, then I would plunge for one of the ASUS boards.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
Mathieu Bourgie - Friday, April 6, 2012 - link
Here's hoping*john21108 - Friday, April 6, 2012 - link
I read the review and didn't see the FX-6200 getting walked over. The benches were all pretty close; the FX, X4, and the X6 all trading blows. At worse, the FX-6200 performed similar to the X4 980; at best, it would barely beat the X6 1100T.The FX looked good to me considering the X6 1100T is going for $240+ on eBay. If building new, is same performance worth an extra $70? Is it an upgrade to an X4 BE or X6, no.
estarkey7 - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
I am disappointed in this article for a number of reasons, most of all that the preface of this article had very little to do with the content at all. You start off by stating:"...despite the fact that Windows 7 (and Windows 8, natively) is now receiving updates so the operating system can understand the processor architecture a little better, and hopefully boost performance. This gives a second wind to those owning (or thinking of owning) a Bulldozer based processor, and in turn, a 900-series motherboard."
With that being a defining point of this article, where are before and afters? I and everybody else on here already know what Anand did (hell, we read this site multiple times a day!). Why should I give this platform a second look?. Your preface led me to believe that I would see benches of these motherboards before and after firmware revisions or more importantly firmware revisions and Win 7 vs. Win 8 preview.
It doesn't even make sense to run a full set of benches against motherboards with the same processor at stock speeds, as the differences will surely show in their overclocking potential and feature sets.
Do you even realize that after reading this article that every single reader of Anandtech.com learned absolutely, positively nothing about Bulldozer vs. Thurban vs. Intelxxx that they didn't already know before they wasted 15 minutes of their time?
Why not just delete it, and we'll forget you ever wrote it...
IanCutress - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
The purpose of the review was to look at the motherboards and the differences between them, not the absolute performance of the processors. Hence why this review is listed under the motherboard section rather than the CPU section, and the paragraph you quoted ended with the phrase, with appropriate pauses to create emphasis on, 'a 900-series motherboard'. The initial paragraph created purpose and the fact that there is reason to perhaps own one of these motherboards, generating the context and situation to which they are currently in.Anyway, as a regular reader of Anandtech, surely you recognise me as the motherboard reviewer for the past year or more? :)
Ian
estarkey7 - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
Ian,I let my recent bulldozer system build get the best of me!
I retract my statement. I believe my attack on you was not reasonable and served no purpose. Although I do disagree with some of the phrasing in the intro paragraph, my post was not warranted and I sincerely apologize.
Keep up the good work.
Ed
Dekkatek - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
I don't know if anyone else noticed this, but there is a galler pic of the ASUS Crosshair board with a 4 video card setup and the 4th card is not physically connected to the motherboard!http://www.anandtech.com/Gallery/Album/1843#13
IanCutress - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
Haha nice catch :) Most of those images are from ASUS' media kit for the board - I think I must have looked at it and thought they were using the ROG Xpander for four-way. Looking at the Xpander page now, it was only ever compatible on the R3E and R3F.Ian
Makaveli - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
When did you need a $1000 extreme edition cpu to be an enthusiast.I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make.
A i7 920 a 2500k or 2600k are all enthusiast cpu that cost less than $400. And all outperform AMD current line up.
It like you are trying to be like AMD before they launched BD comparing it the 990x and saying look out processor is better and doesn't cost $1000 don't make me laugh.
If you are gonna troll you better start doing a better job.
cocoviper - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
$1000? Try any CPU over $240.http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-r...
http://leapvine.com/p/1237/Intel%20Core%20i7-2600%...
CPU price ranges tend to range between $50 and $1000 in the retail market. AMD's fastest solution captures the lowest 25% of this market, leaving 3/4 of the price range, and the range with the best margins, to Intel. We all want AMD to be competitive again like they were in the late 90s/early 2000s but they simply aren't.
AMD has also officially stated they have no intention to compete in the performance / enthusiast segment. Per Anand:
"As AMD's client strategy is predominantly built around APUs, the only high-end desktop parts we'll see from AMD are low-end server CPUs. Socket-AM3+ has a future for one more generation and we'll likely see other single-socket, high-end platforms for the desktop. The days of AMD chasing Intel for the high-end desktop market are done though. That war is officially over."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5503/understanding-a...
BaronMatrix - Thursday, April 5, 2012 - link
Why doesn't anyone use the recommended GPU? If I buy an 8150, it will at least get a 6970 but probably a 7970.No wonder I left this "review site" stuff alone. I can't learn anything except that people think there are 50 CPU makers and AMD is the worst.
Good luck with that.