| ASUS F1A75-M PRO FM1 Motherboard |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Motherboards | |
| Written by Hank Tolman | |
| Monday, 11 July 2011 | |
|
Page 13 of 16
Street Fighter IV BenchmarkPC-based video games can depend heavily on the CPU if the attached GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) is less powerful, or the graphics settings are configured so low that they create no strain on the video card and must rely purely on system processing speed; a phenomenon known as CPU-dependence. The opposite is true when the video game has a powerful video card installed, and can handle all graphical demands without receiving assistance from the CPU. Benchmark Reviews has proven consistently that, with a high end GPU in use, frame rates are not often noticeably impacted by changes in processor or RAM. Capcom's Street Fighter IV is part of the now-famous Street Fighter series that began in 1987. The 2D Street Fighter II was one of the most popular fighting games of the 1990s, and now gets a 3D face-lift to become Street Fighter 4. The Street Fighter 4 benchmark utility was released as a novel way to test your system's ability to run the game. It uses a few dressed-up fight scenes where combatants fight against each other using various martial arts disciplines. Feet, fists and magic fill the screen with a flurry of activity. Due to the rapid pace, varied lighting and the use of music this is one of the more enjoyable benchmarks. Street Fighter IV uses a proprietary Capcom SF4 game engine, which is enhanced over previous versions of the game. In terms of 3D graphical demand, Street Fighter IV is considered very low-end for most desktop GPUs. While modern desktop computers with discrete graphics have no problem playing Street Fighter IV at its highest graphical settings, integrated and mobile GPUs have a difficult time producing playable frame rates with the lowest settings configured. While PC games are generally playable regardless of CPU, the Street Fighter IV game is surprisingly dependent on the CPU. That is why it is included here.
Let's take a look at some video transcoding tests next.
|
|
Comments
How is that a con ?
Their inclusion adds functionality. It may be a function you have no need for , but it is there.
HDMI, DVI + D-Sub.... your logic... I dont need HDMI or DVI so it is a con that they have those ports.
That makes no sense at all.
The funny thing is, almost no one uses CRT monitors anymore and LCD monitors are inherently digital. If you have an old VGA LCD then you are losing twice since you signal has to be converted to analog to go through the cable, then back to digital to be read by your monitor.
If you see it as a Pro, then good for you. I see it as a con. That's just my opinion.
-Hank
Thanks for review, I found it very informative.
PS--Don't feed the trolls.
Passmark 7.0, where it's second place only to the i5.
PCMark Vantage Music test, where the score is extremely low.
Either there's an error in the graphs, or these results should be investigated.
As for the CPU tests in Passmark 7.0, those are correct too. It might have a lot to do with the fact that the "northbridge" was moved onto the die so communication between the CPU and other parts of the system is dramatically increased. Check out the Cinebench results, too. You have a 2.9GHz CPU that is very close to the same performance as a 3.2GHz CPU. A lot has changed with the architecture and different tests will respond in different ways to those changes.
Nice review. And one question i can't understand here, on z68 and so on:
if 1st PCIE is x16 and 2nd is x4, with XFire and 2 dedicated video boards, it will work in x8/x8? or only in x16/x4? that means no AFR like?
Thanks a lot in advance for anyone's answer.
Michael.
I was wondering wether the F1A75-M PRO is a MB that you would personally buy for its value? Would you recommend any other MB's for around the same price, for I am in a jolly of a pickle in choosing the optimal MB. I would be using it for video processing, video games, and etc.
Thanks in advance,
Mosi.
1st of all, take my advice w/ a grain of salt. My pov could be biased, or at least not entirely fitting your needs.
my 1st choise is usually Asus, no matter is AMD or Intel. but i do respect Gigabyte, MSI, EVGA and i do believe AsRock is a good value.
Remember, in entry/main level big brands usually will charge u extra just for the brand. I mean in entry/main u DO have alternatives. otherwise, the MB is ok, BUT:
before, a little philosophy about video boards (GPU). i always pick a MB w/ BOTH SLI and XFire. cause never now when i'll switch between NVidia and AMD-ATI and which will be my pick in dual GPU boards. But with those new CPU w/ integrated video, philosophy may change a little. if its AMD CPU, we should go AMD GPU. the video in 3850 amd cpu it's way more powerful than intel i3, even i5 competition. but the CPU is below i3 2100 a little. not much. anyway your MB of choice despite it has 2 pcie slots, it will work in x16/x4 mode only AFAIK! so 2 discrete AMD board, even XFire scale better than SLI, will not be a perfect choise if u plan, i repeat, to go w/ 2 discrete graphic boards. but if u don't the MB u've picked is OK. but the
F1A75-V EVO will work on x8/x8.
this whole GPU discussion it's about hardcore gaming (let's say metro2033) at big resolutions. Today a top/near top AMD GPU will handle with no problem but in a year or some, maybe u,ll need more power and the future proof solution is to get yourself a 2nd GPU and bam! u're "safe" for another 1-2 year.
!!! if u planned this way BUY A GOOD PSU, at least 750W. never underestimate the PSU!!!
If it's A, the processor should be fine, I mean the biggest, A8-3850, and u'll have to invest more in RAM (8G at least) and in powerfull HDD's: use RAID 0 with 2 HDD FULL 7200, not GREEN. i' working with Velocyraptors and older Raptors (all 10 000 RPM). if u have enough money, go SSD, BUT, u should pick powerfull and big ones which cost u a lot. A good solution COULD be Hybrid SSD-HDD new harddiscs, but i didn't dig enough to recommend this. Anyway, for video editing u should work in a RAID 0 config with 2 HDDs.
if it's B, video rendering, IMO the processor it's on the limit, i rather go if AMD with a 6 core proc (likeX6 1100T) skt AM3+. or intel starting on i5-2400.
in amd variant u'll not have integrated video in CPU, but u have to decide what fits your needs.
So your MB choise is very decent for the money, just be sure 'll use just one discrete GPU.
Both series from intel i3 and amd A IMO are for laptops and decent desktops. but that's all. told u in he beginnig i'm a little biased towards hardcore games and video editing. And in high end the choice is, unfortunately, only one.
It's hard to recommend, in the end the amount of $ make the difference. and the needs. and the management, and little things, and so on :)
And i don't pretend my pow is perfect. no way. Everyone feel free to upgrade it.
Good luck
If you are using this for high-end gaming or video processing, you should probably go with a completely different setup. The A series processors aren't meant for high end performance. They compete with the i3s. I'd go with a H67 for price and an i5 and a good discrete GPU for better performance, unless Bulldozer comes out soon and we can see how they perform.
10x Hank for forming me that MB's like that are ONLY x16/x4 and NOT x8/x8 too. for a vast majority of user it's ok. for me is BS.
Back to your toughs about Mozyz rig: as i saw, he hasn't enough money and my assumption is that he's only on the beginning on the road in video editing (escuse if wrong, but let's say a few cuts and transitons + a titler for youtube). and maybe medium gamer and so on. So, my philosopy was just don't go top of the top when u don't know the differences and just testing the path. Otherwise, i just made a config for a friend, video editor but with no much $ to spend: yes, it starts with i5.
nice day.
-Hank
Try DVI/HDMI Cable. It works but powerdvd downscale about 10%, totalmedia theater 5 work find but no sound in few ISO.
Any one try 3D bluray playback with HDMI 1.4 in this motherboard?
Windows7 64bit/Asus F1A75-M pro/AMD 3650
Thanks.