«

»

ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer AM3+ Motherboard Review

PAGE INDEX

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

PCMark 8 Benchmark

PCMark 8 is designed to be an extremely realistic benchmark that takes actual tasks that are commonly used in different environments and testing them, then compiling the results and assigning a score. During the PCMark 8 tests, worksheets and documents are opened, edited, and saved. Music and videos are played. Video conferencing is simulated. An internet browser is opened and runs through a series of pages and requests. The tests cover the gamut of tasks that are commonly associated with home use, work use, and creativity based usage.

FX_8370_PCMark_8One of the advantages that the AMD processors had in this particular test was their ability to use the R9-280X GPU and OpenCL to help out. This is, in part, the very beginnings of what AMD envisions in their heterogeneous compute future. Whether that is the sole reason that the AMD FX-8370 and FX-8370E outpace the i5-4670 in the home and creative suites is up for interpretation. Even with the OpenCL support, the i5 still pulls out a win in the work suite.


SKIP TO PAGE:

<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

13 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. Tom J

    The FX-9590 results in AIDA might be because of throttling – I think that Fatal1ty board is only rated for the 125W CPUs, not sure if it does any downclocking or anything for the 220W FX CPUs (the 9590 and 9370 aren’t officially supported on that board). It’d be interesting to hear what the temperatures were on that 9590 during those tests.

  2. johnniedoo

    Excellent review, my thoughts were similar to TomJ on using the 9 series AMD in this board. Being a high density glass board, maybe less susceptible to the temp warping, but doubt it- not being an engineer or even close. I knew there was a board made by ASRock that was certified for the 220W processors though. that and only the Gigabyte UD7, I think.
    Seeing that the 9590 was included in the testing did catch my eye though. and for just over $100 new is an even greater eye catcher. Am needing to upgrade a couple of AM3 boards since I can not find any new Phenom II 4 or 6cores retailing anymore. Not even sure how long this AM3+ will last for my FX processors . thanks again for a great review.

  3. TourDeForce

    Interesting review, but it seemed to quickly morph into a processor comparison rather than the motherboard review indicated.

  4. Rich

    No benchmarks with an m.2 SSD installed??!! Like, what are the boot times, program load times compared to other systems with an SSD connected to SATA This is one of the few AMD boards with m.2…. come on guys!

    1. Olin Coles

      While you’re at it, rant about how car review magazines never test all the different tires available for that model. The M.2 slot on this board supports SATA 6 Gb/s M.2 cards, so it would perform pretty much the same as other SATA 6Gb/s SSDs. The only difference would be if a M.2 PCI Express Gen2 x2 card is used, which could reach 10 Gb/s. Of course, the sky is the limit for what is tested, and then it becomes an SSD review. See here: http://benchmarkreviews.com/category/comprehensive-product-reviews/computer-hardware-reviews/pc-storage/

  5. WAEL

    They are, of course, PCIe 3.0 slots???? mine is 2.0 and on ASROCK site they wrote : 3 PCIe 2.0 x16, 2 PCIe 2.0 x1 . maybe you got a new Rev ?

  6. INTESTINAL

    Fatal1ty Killer,supports processor TDP 220W? As demonstrated in the test FX9590

  7. Kennith Jay Rosenthal

    They actually are NOT, of course, PCIE Gen 3.0 slots.

  8. DJ Estioco

    I’ve been reading around and I thought the 990FX Killer isn’t compatible with the 9590 FX? I’ve bought both and it said the CPU isn’t on the Mobo Support List? Am I doing something wrong?

  9. Gemma

    Great review, great board! I like the look of the gaming series motherboards, they look better than the extreme or overclocking series.

  10. Caring1

    Still a nice board, and I happen to like the inclusion of PS2 ports on the rear for the keyboard, if you’re whining about lack of USB ports when there is that many, you are doing it wrong.

  11. Michael

    It’s not pcie 3.0 it’s only 2.0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*