Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 6 Aug 2019.
No USB 3.1 gen 2 front panel header, no interest.
Gigabyte using "Gaming X" as a nomenclature is turbo confusing - especially when the item in question is repeatedly compared to products from MSI... who use "Gaming X" for their GPU's.
Also, still struggling to see the point in these "budget" X570 boards - barring PCI-E 4.0 (which is effectively useless), they are massively cut down on features compared to cheaper X470 options, but make no difference when running Zen 2 chips. Literally, who is buying this stuff??
If it was a guaranteed extra 100Mhz with Precision Boost on X570 vs X470, I would get it...
So; Gigabyte gave us Gaming-3, 5 & 7, now we get X - instead of 10(?) - to save printing costs for one character...?
I'm thinking more along the lines of X to symbolise a rejection buzzer sound rather than a number
Is a sub-£200 X570 'board that bad a prospect, that I dodged a bullet not getting one...?
Considering how severely cut down this one is? I'd say yes. It is as barebones as your typical £60 Biostar board, except it costs almost £200 cause mostly pointless PCIe 4.
It used to be £20 cheaper and i think you can still pick it up for around £180, not sure if that's down to the weaker pound or something else, not that £20 cheaper suddenly makes it good value mind.
Ahh; OK -- the new X470 MSI unit I just installed an R5-3600 & 16GB 3200MHz RAM on will probably serve me just as well for a gnats' over half the price... for now, at least.
I would guess that a lot of people don't know that. I was asked to put a build together for a friend and looked at the X570 boards first but went with B450 due to budget. I wanted the PCIe 4.0 for future compatibility with new M.2 drives.
Separate names with a comma.