Time to start shopping for a new motherboard and processor, what's hot?

[mgray1982]

Hey guys, my laptop just isn't going to be able to handle all I want from it, so I'm looking to build a new pure gaming system. While I'm good a researching and waiting till I know as much as I can before I buy, I'm quite overwhelmed right now with what's out there, not to mention my limited knowledge of current parts compatibility.

So it all starts with a motherboard and a processor, right?. I'm kinda lost on the relationship of certain components(chipset, FSB, GPU etc) and how they relate to overall system compatibility and performance. I'm used to deciding on what type of processor I want, then finding a motherboard that fits it. Now I've really only built 1 computer, so as mentioned, I need some help. I need to know how to use options like chipset and socket type to link my desired processor with it's proper motherboard. Is it the chipset that I use to match a processor to a motherboard? Or can multiple chipsets use multiple processors? What about the socket?

In other words, How do I find the proper motherboard for my desired processor?

Just by browsing Intel's site, I think I want to run Quad core, simple choice as that should last me well into the future, or should I be looking at those "Extreme" models as well as the i7? Can all those processors fit in the same type board?

I've come across the Asus Striker Extreme MB, as it sounds like it's set up for max gaming.

Lastly, I'm kinda confused about the GPU integration on these newer boards. I'm used to just picking a GPU card and plugging it in. How do these new boards with GPU integration work?

Lots of questions I know, but any help much appreciated!

[mrmaestrom]

I'll see if I can answer all your questions. Firstly, whether you go Core 2 or Core i7 pretty much depends on how much you are willing to pay for extra performance. Core i7 is around 20% faster than Core 2 (if my memory serves me), but at least double the price. Personally I would stick with Core 2, I bought my current setup 6 months ago and am very happy with performance, it's really quick and didn't cost me all that much. But if you're willing to pay for it, Core i7 is the fastest out at the moment. The other thing to be aware of is that Core i7 motherboards are a lot more expensive than those for Core 2, since Core i7 hasn't gotten into the mainstream market yet, the boards are designed for enthusiasts.

Core 2 and Core Quad are from the same family of CPUs, so they use the LGA775 socket. Basically, if a motherboard's socket is LGA775, it will take a Core 2 or Quad CPU. Core i7 takes LGA1366 - it's a bigger CPU so it needs a bigger socket.

Chipset choice can be a hard one, not because it's hard to match-up with the CPU, but because there are so many to choose from. The most popular mainstream chipset at the moment is the Intel P45, it's good value for the features you get. I personally like Gigabyte's EP45-DS3 range (you can see I picked the R variant in my signature), but the ASUS P5Q range is also a popular choice.

There isn't much choice for Core i7, you either use the X58 chipset or the X58 chipset. But that will change in a while once the CPUs come down in price and become mainstream.

I've come across the Asus Striker Extreme MB, as it sounds like it's set up for max gaming.

Don't buy-into marketing hype, a $100 board will perform as well as a $200 or $300 one. Those expensive boards are really only needed if you're into serious overclocking, which I take it you aren't. Unless they have some killer feature they're a complete waste of money. And mainstream boards can overclock well too, my Q6600 is running at 3GHz, which is a 25% overclock.

I'm used to just picking a GPU card and plugging it in.

That's just like it is. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say "integrated GPU". If you're talking about onboard graphics, included on the motherboard, then you don't need to worry about it, if you plug-in a discrete graphics card the computer will automatically figure out that the onboard chip isn't needed.

And remember - FSX isn't all that hard on graphics cards, don't buy the most expensive one thinking you'll get super-dooper performance. A more reasonably priced one will still give you good performance. Ones to look at are probably the NVIDIA 9800GT or ATi 4850, or if you want to run at a high resolution such as 1920x1200, the NVIDIA GTX260 ot ATi 4870. 4870 would be my pick of the bunch.

I think that's all, hope that helped.

Mike

[mgray1982]

maestrom, thanks so much for the insight, and keeping it in my language!

I'm completely new to Overclocking (was thinking about trying it on my notebook, but I think I'll heed everyone's warnings about doing so), so I have no experience with it, and would prefer to build a system that makes me happy without it. Although knowing I can overclock in the future is a nice feeling for when my specs get near the bottom again.

So maybe you can help me narrow things down then? From what you say (and I think I agree), Quad Core should be more than enough, especially if I get the fastest one? Then next step is finding a motherboard brand(I'm used to Asus, do you think they're good?) that has socket LGA775 right? Other than socket and chipset, what other features should I be looking out for? If I choose socket 775 on the ASUS website http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11 I'm once again overwhelmed with options. What can be so different between all those boards?

Chipset I'm still a little confused on. Is that the "setup" of how the processor connects to the RAM, GPU, Northbridge and such? How do the different choices and "setups" differ in terms of performance? I would assume the chipsets would all be the same, which would be the best/fastest configuration of the times? I guess there must be compromises within the setup, but I'm fairly new to chipset's so please help me out.

Basically right now I'm poor, and running FS9 on my notebook doesn't really allow me to have fun with it(although it's great for my real life IFR training). I pretty much have everything else needed for a desktop, I just need to upgrade my processor, which entails a new MB, and a new GPU. If I could do that all for less than $500 that'd be sweet.

[mrmaestrom]

The chipset is a certain combination of the main/core chips on a motherboard. So whether you go an ASUS or Gigabyte or MSI board, it should perform just the same because the main components of the motherboard are the same - same northbridge, same southbridge etc. Well the chips might not be exactly the same but they meet the same performance specs.

Since you want to keep it under $500 I reckon you should go for a dual core, they're quite a bit cheaper than their quad-core brothers and, in FSX, will perform just as well, since FSX can only properly utilise 2 at most. And of course FS9 can only use 1.

I'm assuming you're American so I'm going by Newegg prices, but you could use the following as a guide -

Intel E8400 - $170
Graphics card - $200-230
Motherboard - $100

The Intel E8400 is a great choice because it performs really well out of the box, and when you're up to it, you can overclock the bejeesus out of it.

Spending $200 on the graphics is right in the ballpark for an ATi 4870, which would be a good choice, but if you're only using a 22" or smaller monitor, then you could save some money and go for a cheaper card. If you've got a 24" monitor then more expensive cards become worth the extra cost.

And the motherboard. Looking at that page you linked to, you can see that Intel have a lot of different chipsets. Don't worry about VIA and SiS, their products are rubbish. And I also wouldn't worry about NVIDIA because, I think, the Intel products are better.

So narrowing it down to Intel, you can see there are a lot of different numbers. I'll briefly describe what they mean. Don't worry about the 8xx and 9xx series, although they're compatible, they're old chipsets, from the Pentium 4 and Pentium D era.

So you can see then that it's narrowed down to the 3x and 4x series, they're the ones you're interested in, since they're specifically designed for Core 2. The letter in front of the numbers (P, G, X or Q) tells you who the board was designed for. P is mainstream, G means the board has onboard graphics, so it's aimed at the home theatre or budget PC market, X is for enthusiasts and I think Q is aimed at business workstations.

So you're interested in the P series. Don't worry about the G series, Intel onboard graphics are rubbish. So now there's the P4x series and the P3x series, the 3 series was the first designed for Intel's Core 2 line, the P4x series is simply it's successor.

Hopefully you've managed to follow everything, after all that you should see why I recommend the P45 series - it's the newest and is the top of the mainstream chipsets. If you go for a P43 board it will have fewer features, since it's aimed at a more budget market.

ASUS is a good brand, I personally prefer Gigabyte because they're boards look better - cool blue PCB, ASUS ones are usually black, and therefore not as cool . Also, the Gigabyte EP45-DS3 range, except for the "L" variant, all have Crossfire, which means you can run two ATi cards at the same time. Almost all the ASUS P5Q boards don't have Crossfire. I don't have two graphics cards, but I figure it's nice to keep the option open.

So just have a look at all the ASUS P45 boards and work out which one has the best balance of features versus price for you. There is no point paying for features you don't need, so the cheapest board might be perfect for you. Since the chipset is the same the boards will be very similar, probably the only difference will be things like how many expansion slots they have, or added components for hardcore overclocking.

Oh and if you wanted to have two NVIDIA graphics cards in dual-configuration (SLI), you have to get a motherboard with an NVIDIA chipset. But FSX can't utilise multiple graphics card setups, SLI or Crossfire, so there really isn't much point.

Hope that wasn't information overload.

Mike

[mgray1982]

Perfect dude thanks! You really helped me understand this stuff! Now is there a webpage(maybe on the Intel site?) that explains all that, or do you just know all this from experience?

I pretty much followed you perfectly, except for why you didn't include the Intel X boards? I'm guessing it's because of the price?

While the main reason for upgrading is to run FS9, or FSX, and also be ready for any potential future versions. For that reason, and the fact that I could use it for other computer uses, I'm still interested in Quad Core, although price is still a factor. Maybe there are some boards(and still be in the same price range) that can take a Quad Core later on, but for now just put a Core 2 in?

Now what about RAM slots and speed? I see some specs on boards listing various speeds(533, 677, 800, 1333?), do I need to pay special attention to them as well?

Either way, I appreciate your help and insight, and will most likely follow your suggestions.

[mrmaestrom]

Like I said before the X series chipsets are for enthusiasts, they have two main differences to the P series - they should allow better overclocking, and they work better for multiple graphics cards setups. When running two graphics cards in a P-series board the second card doesn't get full bandwidth to communicate to the rest of the PC, so it's slightly choked. The X-series boards allow full bandwidth. The difference isn't all that great but if you were looking to get the absolute fastest possible then it would be the way to go.

Core 2 and Core 2 Quad are one and the same, they are the same family of CPU, Core 2 Quad is simply another variant, so any motherboard that takes one will take the other. In actual fact, a Core 2 Quad is two dual-cores put together on the one chip. It wouldn't be very cost-effective to get a dual-core now and then buy a quad later. If you really want a quad just save a little more and get it to begin with. But I still recommend a dual, they're still lightning quick. Go onto Google and search for benchmarks of games and programs you're likely to be using, and you'll probably find there is very little performance difference. Software has to be specifically coded to work across multiple cores of a CPU, and the majority aren't, while only a fraction are coded to use more than two cores.

As for RAM speeds, they don't matter much since almost any RAM you buy will be 800MHz. 533 and 667 is just slower RAM that has now been made pretty much obsolete now that 800 is so cheap. DDR2 RAM faster than 800MHz is used by enthusiasts who are willing to pay for that little extra performance, especially when overclocking.

Mike

[mgray1982]

Hey maestrom, I've been doing more reading and I'm still a little confused, mainly again with the chipsets.

Basically, why does nVidia have it's own chipset? Is it purely for SLI(why can't Intel make it? Patent?)? I'm confused because if I go to nVidia's website http://www.nvidia.com/page/mobo.html there are so many options for motherboards.

Are those just nVidia chipset's on someone elses board? Or is nVidia actually making the whole board? Why so many different chipsets? I really can't seem to sort out the differences?

Also whats the difference between the nForce and GeForce boards?

I guess what's confusing me, is what are all the different chipsets(in general, not just nVidia) trying to achieve?

[loki]

Anyone can make motherboard chipsets for Intel CPUs as long as they have a license from Intel. And Intel isn't generally going to say no to avoid anti-trust issues. ATI also used to make motherboards for Intel CPUs until they got bought out by AMD.

Due primarily driver limitations. no one can make an SLI compatible motherboard without nVidia's consent. There are no real technical reasons, though nVidia tries to claim they can't guarantee SLI would work properly on other manufacturer's motherboard designs. This is changing, however as Intel's motherboards are becoming more popular and support Crossfire (AMD's competition to SLI).

Each company will have low, mid and high end motherboard designs. With Intel you get the P35 and P45 in the low to mid-range and the X38/48/58 series at the high end.

With motherboard chipsets (all of the components used on the motherboard), Intel, nVidia and AMD generally design the chipset and then license the design to others. This is why you see Asus, eVGA, Sapphire and other companies making motherboards using the same chipset. Intel also directly sells their own motherboards. nVidia and AMD tend to let others license and sell their designs. The difference is they each try to come up with a better design.

Think of it like buying a car. You can choose between Toyota, Ford, BMW and many others rather than just having one single car model to choose from.

nForce is nVidia's line of motherboard designs, while GeForce is their video card line.

[jostytosty]

Stuff like this can really stir things up. Everybody has his own ideas about this. I've build my systems for FS only. FS needs processing power and a lot of RAM, Graphic cards are less important as in other games, but of course a fine graphics card would do nicely. This year I will go for the i7-940 + 3GB1600mhz RAM.
I will overcklock the CPU slightly to say, just 3,2 Ghz. Add an RAID array, I now have RAID 10 and will probably do that again because it's fast and safe at the same time. If money alows me to do so I might use a separate sound card, to get even more load of the motherboard. In the distant future I will try to swap the normal disks for solid state disks. But my bank manager (e.g. wife ) just told me that might no be a good idea unless prices drop by 75%