If the board isn't revision 2 then you could have a problem with the Quad and the ability to OC it.
Last edited by buLLet_t00th (2007-07-24 05:41:30)
It's 1333MHz FSB - that's what matters.buLLet_t00th wrote:
If the board isn't revision 2 then you could have a problem with the Quad and the ability to OC it.
If you're not going to use SLi then definetly get a P35 board, beats the 680i on most tests, and is perfect for the Quad and OC'n it.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-07-24 05:52:25)
I could say you were obsessed with the 680i , from all the informtion on benchmarks and people's experiences with the Quad and a mobo, the best is always a P35.Bertster7 wrote:
It's 1333MHz FSB - that's what matters.buLLet_t00th wrote:
If the board isn't revision 2 then you could have a problem with the Quad and the ability to OC it.
If you're not going to use SLi then definetly get a P35 board, beats the 680i on most tests, and is perfect for the Quad and OC'n it.
I'm not a huge fan of the P35 boards. Not enough stuff to fiddle about with and only available in Xfire.
That board is better featured and is great for OCing Quad cores - you are too obsessed with the P35 chipset.
Last edited by buLLet_t00th (2007-07-24 05:55:02)
That's simply not true. There is lots of variation on the benchmarks, especially between manufacturers - the MSI P35 boards run slower in most instances than the majority of 680i boards.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I could say you were obsessed with the 680i , from all the informtion on benchmarks and people's experiences with the Quad and a mobo, the best is always a P35.Bertster7 wrote:
It's 1333MHz FSB - that's what matters.buLLet_t00th wrote:
If the board isn't revision 2 then you could have a problem with the Quad and the ability to OC it.
If you're not going to use SLi then definetly get a P35 board, beats the 680i on most tests, and is perfect for the Quad and OC'n it.
I'm not a huge fan of the P35 boards. Not enough stuff to fiddle about with and only available in Xfire.
That board is better featured and is great for OCing Quad cores - you are too obsessed with the P35 chipset.
And I prefer the P35....why does that piss you off so much?Bertster7 wrote:
That's simply not true. There is lots of variation on the benchmarks, especially between manufacturers - the MSI P35 boards run slower in most instances than the majority of 680i boards.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I could say you were obsessed with the 680i , from all the informtion on benchmarks and people's experiences with the Quad and a mobo, the best is always a P35.Bertster7 wrote:
It's 1333MHz FSB - that's what matters.
I'm not a huge fan of the P35 boards. Not enough stuff to fiddle about with and only available in Xfire.
That board is better featured and is great for OCing Quad cores - you are too obsessed with the P35 chipset.
Have you used and run benchmarks on both boards? I have. I prefer the 680i.
Have you used them both?buLLet_t00th wrote:
And I prefer the P35....why does that piss you off so much?Bertster7 wrote:
That's simply not true. There is lots of variation on the benchmarks, especially between manufacturers - the MSI P35 boards run slower in most instances than the majority of 680i boards.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I could say you were obsessed with the 680i , from all the informtion on benchmarks and people's experiences with the Quad and a mobo, the best is always a P35.
Have you used and run benchmarks on both boards? I have. I prefer the 680i.
I've used the P35 for every build since they came out for eBay, the 680i I only put in if someone actually asks for it. Personally I haven't used them for an extensive time, but in my own PC I have a P35 (which might show you why I like it ).Bertster7 wrote:
Have you used them both?buLLet_t00th wrote:
And I prefer the P35....why does that piss you off so much?Bertster7 wrote:
That's simply not true. There is lots of variation on the benchmarks, especially between manufacturers - the MSI P35 boards run slower in most instances than the majority of 680i boards.
Have you used and run benchmarks on both boards? I have. I prefer the 680i.
Last edited by buLLet_t00th (2007-07-24 06:36:42)
I've used a lot of 680i, never had any issues with any of them. I've only used a couple of P35s, and haven't got my hands on one of the nice looking Gigabyte ones yet, but so far I'm not very impressed by them. Haven't had any problems with them - just don't really see what all the fuss is about and found the ones I used had fairly poor BIOS options - whereas most 680i boards have a lovely load of stuff to play with in the BIOS.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I've used the P35 for every build since they came out for eBay, the 680i I only put in if someone actually asks for it. Personally I haven't used them for an extensive time, but in my own PC I have a P35 (which might show you why I like it ).Bertster7 wrote:
Have you used them both?buLLet_t00th wrote:
And I prefer the P35....why does that piss you off so much?
I've had quite a few problems with the 680i, and hardly any with the P35. This is ofcourse down to what they've wanted in them and what I've had available to put in them, but if people want a general OC I can always push the P35 CPU that little bit further. Not to mention that the 680i is a beast in the heat department. And I've also realised that the ONLY reason to get a 680i is SLi, everything else they offer is available in a P35 board (and they're a bit cheaper aswel).
Remember this is just my personal opinion, there's no right or wrong.
I wouldn't even give someone one of those if they asked.Bertster7 wrote:
650i boards - I've had loads of problems with. Especially one of the Asus ones, but then Asus boards often have memory issues.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I've used the P35 for every build since they came out for eBay, the 680i I only put in if someone actually asks for it. Personally I haven't used them for an extensive time, but in my own PC I have a P35 (which might show you why I like it ).Bertster7 wrote:
Have you used them both?
I've had quite a few problems with the 680i, and hardly any with the P35. This is ofcourse down to what they've wanted in them and what I've had available to put in them, but if people want a general OC I can always push the P35 CPU that little bit further. Not to mention that the 680i is a beast in the heat department. And I've also realised that the ONLY reason to get a 680i is SLi, everything else they offer is available in a P35 board (and they're a bit cheaper aswel).
Remember this is just my personal opinion, there's no right or wrong.
They're good performers for the price - shame they're a bit on the unreliable side.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I wouldn't even give someone one of those if they asked.Bertster7 wrote:
650i boards - I've had loads of problems with. Especially one of the Asus ones, but then Asus boards often have memory issues.buLLet_t00th wrote:
I've used the P35 for every build since they came out for eBay, the 680i I only put in if someone actually asks for it. Personally I haven't used them for an extensive time, but in my own PC I have a P35 (which might show you why I like it ).
I've had quite a few problems with the 680i, and hardly any with the P35. This is ofcourse down to what they've wanted in them and what I've had available to put in them, but if people want a general OC I can always push the P35 CPU that little bit further. Not to mention that the 680i is a beast in the heat department. And I've also realised that the ONLY reason to get a 680i is SLi, everything else they offer is available in a P35 board (and they're a bit cheaper aswel).
Remember this is just my personal opinion, there's no right or wrong.
Ofcourse I would go with the 680i if somebody wanted a SLi board, because its obviously the best.
Last edited by Bell (2007-07-24 07:51:57)
