Choosing a Motherboard for a Middle-End Machine (Socket AM2)

As of November 2007

With this article we start a series devoted to analyzing the motherboard market. In our tests we are used to rating certain technical features of motherboards and evaluating their appropriateness for the user group targeted by the board's manufacturer itself. However, the market distinguishes its own bestsellers that are sometimes quite different from what the tests and specifications alone may suggest. In our opinion, it is quite interesting to find out, which boards have actually become popular. To discuss the reasons and, perhaps, discover certain trends. As always (but especially in this case) we are waiting for comments and suggestions from you, dear readers.

As we all know, to uncover the full potential of the newest quad-core AMD Phenom X4 and FX processors one should install these into Socket AM2+ boards based on AMD 790FX, 790X and 770 chipsets. However, it is also known that the new processors can be installed into Socket AM2 boards as well (for more information about Socket AM2+ features and compatibility please see the review of Biostar TF560). In brief, we may say that the general distinguishing feature of Socket AM2+ is its support for HyperTransport 3.0 bus and additional energy-saving technologies. Moreover, Socket AM3 processors, which on top of the aforementioned capabilities support DDR3, are also compatible with the current CPU socket. Actually, of all possible combinations only installing Socket AM2 and AM2+ processors onto boards with the future Socket AM3 is not supported. The simple reason is that they cannot operate with DDR3 memory.

In any case, for those willing to build (or buy) a top performance system based on a new processor, up to 4 graphics cards in the Quad CrossFire mode, DDR2-1066, and other high-end features, a corresponding enthusiast board with the highest functionality possible would be a natural choice. However, users with less extreme demands will be able to install 4-core CPU without the mandatory expenses related to replacing the motherboard. They will actually be able to get the full expected increase in performance of their applications.

The same is especially true for the middle-end segment of the market. Dual- and triple-core Phenoms, which are expected to be released in the beginning of 2008, even theoretically can not loose anything due to the lack of HyperTransport 3.0 support and other Socket AM2+ special features. Therefore, the choice of board for such a processor will be determined primarily by cost and functionality of a specific model. Naturally, as the market becomes saturated by Socket AM2+ boards, moreover, by boards that have certain advantages due to newer chipsets, the users will turn to those newer boards. Despite that, a couple of successful Socket AM2 models may stay on the market in such circumstances. It is even more likely, since the current Athlon 64 X2 are not going to be rushed off the shelves. Considering that they have strong competitive capacity in comparison to equal in price Intel processors, they will complement the Phenom series "from below" for quite a while.

For comparing it is actually recommended by AMD to take overall configuration cost into consideration, or at least the cost of the CPU-motherboard pair. Clearly, the idea originates from AMD (in contrast to Intel, for example), because for quite some time now AMD boards of equal functionality have had lower prices in all market segments. In some cases (comparing boards with integrated graphics, for example) the disproportion is pronounced. The approach itself, though, looks reasonable. Any CPU, even the greatest one, ends up installed into a specific computer. While for the most part the same components can be chosen in any case, motherboard has to fit the specific platform.

However, let us not jump to universal generalizations that are prone to exceptions (we must leave some subjects for the future analytical articles too). Instead, we shall have a look at the situation in a quite specific segment of the market, which according to statistics is popular among our readers. This segment includes inexpensive boards ($70-100) with rather broad capabilities for expansion. They offer reasonable overclocking support (enough to be used on a CPU with good overclocking potential, but without resorting to extreme methods like raising voltage above the safe limits or non-standard cooling). In addition, these boards provide decent functionality of their own, thanks to the usage of modern chipsets (and, to a lesser degree, external controllers). In other words, let us consider what is currently relevant as a foundation for an "average" individually built computer.