cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

3 out of 20? where is the AMD love

floe304
Level 7
I am not hating on Intel motherboards but i seriously think that AMD love is missing from the selection the 3 current mobos are all crosshair mobos (iv formula, v formula, v formula-z). now that ASUS has announced the "A88XM-Pro FM2+" for APUs will there be a ROG mobo to help give selection to AMD lovers. personally gaming mobos to me are motherboards that help open up bottle necks of cpu/gpu/hdd/ssd/rj-45 etc... So gamers or overclockers can squeeze out every little performance out. i hate how i have to miss out on the ROG family love because i like AMD. the current AMD mobos are not receiving any of the cool stuff intel boards are getting, that isnt chipset dependent.


just some Features i like to see:


Extreme Engine Digi+ II/III (future thinking)

pure Digital Video w/ eyefinity support (DVI, Display Port, HDMI 1.4a DDC, TMDS, CEC, ARC, HEC) DVI to VGA adapter

Dual RJ45 Gigabit LAN ports w/ GameFirst II/III and Link Aggregation Control Protocol (LACP) aka Port Trunking.

2x mPCIe Combo + Dual-band Wi-Fi (b,g,n,ac) / Bluetooth 4.0 +SH +EDR -LE AND option for SSD boot

T-Topology memory that can take advantage of DDR4's point to point topology AND UMA/HUMA

LucidLogix Virtu MVP / CrossLinx 3 Technology (AMD APU/discrete GPU crossfire alternative booster)

9.1 Audio Support

ROG Xonar Phoebus / ThunderFX Built in or optional bundle

Red Line Shielding, EMI Protection Cover, ELNA Premium Audio Capacitors, 300-600 OHM Headphone Amplifier

Direct Audio to HDMI

Multiple form factors (ATX, Micro ATX, Mini ITX)

Raid 0/1/5/10/JBOD (minimal internal Sata ports)

to sum up i rather have minimum amount of sata ports, PCi(e) slots to increase performance to other parts like PCIe 3.0 (16x16x16) rather then a bunch of Sata / PCIe / PCI slots using lower speeds like x4 x8 that i probably wont use. so Micro ATX or Mini ITX mobos that have fewer slots, i would think that they would free up pipelines to boost other inputs.
615 Views
23 REPLIES 23

chrsplmr
Level 18
Welcome to ROG .. Always a Pleasure to have another AMD Devotee with us.

ROG AMD .. 'we' are waiting ... patiently.c.

Myk_SilentShado
Level 15
Actually, I think ROG really should consider adding FM2 to it's line up...since the brand new A10 6800 is capable of clocks of 5GHZ and it can even handle 2133MHz RAM lol...though the little reading i've done on it so far, doesn't say anything about supporting DDR4...but I have more reading to do anyway 🙂

floe304
Level 7
i just wish there was a more ROG AMD boards like the AM3+ series and FM2+ in ATX, micro ATX, mini ITX that would be 6 mobos. micro ATX and mini ITX is getting more and more popular too. people want small cases with full size PSUs and discrete GPU all in a smaller form factor.

would be nice if mPCIe SSD & Lan was on the northbridge.

where are all the AM3+ and FM2+ mobos like this?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7023/asus-rog-press-conference-rog-maximus-vi-formula-and-impact

WarbNull
Level 7
I am with all of you. We need some more AMD mobo's.
Especially the MicroATX mobo's. I have been looking for a MicroATX for some time now for my Phenom II 1100T and the best ones we have to select from are still just using 880g or the the very few 890gx chipset MicroATX mobo's. All of which seem to be sold out or discontinued unless you get lucky on ebay which is a place I really do not want to purchase a mobo from. The pickings are very slim. It is like everyone stopped manufacturing them. I really do not want a 760 chipset mobo at this point.

It would be really nice if they made Tuf Series MicroATX mobo. Something like the Gryhpon Z87 but for AMD.
Also add the Armor Feature to some the AMD mobo's. Why that feature is only on Intel boards and none of the AMD boards is beyond me. It would be nice to know why that is.

AMD needs some more love.

HiVizMan
Level 40
I too would be happy to see some AMD love, but it is all about economics. People buy products that they perceive to be the better performance products at certain price points. Now we all know that certain benchmarks are skewed hugely in favour or Intel, but, and this is a big but the ROG Realbench that Nodens developed is based on real world stuff. It is not purpose built code for the benchmarks, that application takes real world applications and integrates them within a wrapper. Now go have a look at the league table. AMD is brining up the rear. I wish it was not so but it is. Image rendering, medie encoding stuff like that which we do day in and day out on our systems are used in the Realbench.

So the point of the thing is this, until as such time that AMD has comparable or competitive products to those that Intel produce there will not be the market forces to warrant the huge R&D expenses. The cost of producing a ROG board is not the same as the cost of producing a channel board which simply follows the specification for the chipset. It costs heaps of money. It is about making a profit, about surviving in a ever harder market. Return of investment.

Even the software that we all thing should be easily translated to other platforms is not as simple, we are talking radically and in some cases diametrically opposite engineering directions between the two platforms, Intel and AMD. The software has to interact with the hardware, and as more and more of the control of the hardware is located on the CPU more and more specific work has to be done on each platform. The stuff is not even backward compatible with the last two generations of Intel product so how is it going to be ported to the AMD side.

I truly wish it was otherwise, I really do.
To help us help you - please provide as much information about your system and the problem as possible.

HiVizMan wrote:
I too would be happy to see some AMD love, but it is all about economics. People buy products that they perceive to be the better performance products at certain price points. Now we all know that certain benchmarks are skewed hugely in favour or Intel, but, and this is a big but the ROG Realbench that Nodens developed is based on real world stuff. It is not purpose built code for the benchmarks, that application takes real world applications and integrates them within a wrapper. Now go have a look at the league table. AMD is brining up the rear. I wish it was not so but it is. Image rendering, medie encoding stuff like that which we do day in and day out on our systems are used in the Realbench.

So the point of the thing is this, until as such time that AMD has comparable or competitive products to those that Intel produce there will not be the market forces to warrant the huge R&D expenses. The cost of producing a ROG board is not the same as the cost of producing a channel board which simply follows the specification for the chipset. It costs heaps of money. It is about making a profit, about surviving in a ever harder market. Return of investment.

Even the software that we all thing should be easily translated to other platforms is not as simple, we are talking radically and in some cases diametrically opposite engineering directions between the two platforms, Intel and AMD. The software has to interact with the hardware, and as more and more of the control of the hardware is located on the CPU more and more specific work has to be done on each platform. The stuff is not even backward compatible with the last two generations of Intel product so how is it going to be ported to the AMD side.

I truly wish it was otherwise, I really do.


++HiViz .. Very, very well stated and reasoned. Much respect for both.
I must upon this and nodens efforts of overwhelming evidence sadly concur and officially quit defending 'them' until
such time they prevail, which I still have great hope and confidence they will do.

~sigh~ as so eloquently stated by our Viz .. I truly wish it was otherwise, I really do. c.

also + to Nodens .. ROG RealBench is really cool.c.

chrsplmr wrote:

also + to Nodens .. ROG RealBench is really cool.c.

Where's your entry, my friend? Looking foward to putting your name on our league standings! 😉

Chino wrote:
Where's your entry, my friend? Looking foward to putting your name on our league standings! 😉


Sorry bro .. "Not I", said the wolf.c.

edit:
i guess i should clarify this.
To some what is mine may not be much but it is all i have and claim for
myself. (all else goes and is for my family)
Although there may be little risk to my hardware in this, I just cant risk
even an outside possibility of it because that would render me ROGless ..
and well goodSir to be frank i have had to give up so much of myself
through these years (my health 'robbed' me of my monster status, to a point .. ie)
this last one i will not surrender.
if this seems pety, i am sorry .. but then we had not met 20yrs ago ..
and may never have had if not for this wonderful place called ROG.c.

HiVizMan wrote:
I too would be happy to see some AMD love, but it is all about economics. People buy products that they perceive to be the better performance products at certain price points. Now we all know that certain benchmarks are skewed hugely in favour or Intel, but, and this is a big but the ROG Realbench that Nodens developed is based on real world stuff. It is not purpose built code for the benchmarks, that application takes real world applications and integrates them within a wrapper. Now go have a look at the league table. AMD is brining up the rear. I wish it was not so but it is. Image rendering, medie encoding stuff like that which we do day in and day out on our systems are used in the Realbench.

So the point of the thing is this, until as such time that AMD has comparable or competitive products to those that Intel produce there will not be the market forces to warrant the huge R&D expenses. The cost of producing a ROG board is not the same as the cost of producing a channel board which simply follows the specification for the chipset. It costs heaps of money. It is about making a profit, about surviving in a ever harder market. Return of investment.

Even the software that we all thing should be easily translated to other platforms is not as simple, we are talking radically and in some cases diametrically opposite engineering directions between the two platforms, Intel and AMD. The software has to interact with the hardware, and as more and more of the control of the hardware is located on the CPU more and more specific work has to be done on each platform. The stuff is not even backward compatible with the last two generations of Intel product so how is it going to be ported to the AMD side.

I truly wish it was otherwise, I really do.


I have to ask this since you brought it up.

Are you saying that ASUS chooses it R&D path and Production path based on the ROG Forum League Table?
I ask because that would make no sense and be way off from the normal business practices.
If it is just an example to show that they do R&D and Production based on performance then I can understand but it points out a bit of a flaw in my opinion. The reason being is that the Sales figures of products is what normally drives R&D and Production within companies. AMD may not be leading in performance all the time but its sales figures are very good. To me some Thread that post a list of Benchmarks from some Benchmark software should in no way justify what the true numbers of a certain products success should be. I hope you do not find that rude or anything, it is just how I feel.




In any case I can understand the software side of things not being able to be developed between Intel and AMD, but what I am wondering about is why things like Thermal Armor are not being used for AMD and why there is not more of a selection of AMD motherboards to choose from. A lot of people choose AMD CPU's over Intel. These people would love to have more of a selection. Like for example more MicroATX form factor mobos for AM3+. Or say different boards that have various features that complements what AMD supports and what the customer is looking to get out of it. It is just like Intel with its various amounts features that they support and how there boards have various selections of such features. For example the amount USB 3.0 ports, which chipset is used, placement of Fan connections, and so on. Even down the the Color Scheme and look of the heatsinks.

Right now ASUS only has two Tuf and two are ROG mobos that use AMD which are listed in there products listings on there site. The rest of the Tuf and ROG mobos are Intel.
In fact ASUS only has 33 boards total for AMD and for Intel boards they have 89 listed. They really do give a good variation of choices for Intel compared to what we have to select from with AMD. I can understand Intel have more of a selection but still the amount of AMD users out there already warrants more of a selection of mobos for them. Especially when it comes to Tuf and ROG mobos. The sales figures of such AMD CPU's should be proof of that. At least that is how I see it.

Also things like the Thermal armor is a hardware design that has been R&D'ed and proven. Limiting things like the Thermal Armor to one brand makes no sense.


You know you said
People buy products that they perceive to be the better performance products at certain price points.

Well that is the very reason why People choose AMD in the first place. Good performance at a good price point. There buisness model does very well. And there sales are well more than enough to justify designing more products for them. I just hope that ASUS will start giving AMD more focus so that those of use that decide to use AMD CPU's can have a better selection. Right now ASUS has a nice selection of boards with various looks, layouts, and features for Intel, but for AMD it is just not as much as I would hope. Right our AMD selection is very slim in my opinion and with the new mobos coming out it does not look like much as well. I just hope that we will get more love. 🙂