Are these compatible?

[DeltrusDisc]

RAM: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820145224

MoBo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813131665

Will be an i7-950 CPU. Not looking for i5-2500K praise or "why the hell are you going x58?!" I'm just asking to make sure that RAM is compatible with that mobo, I'm pretty sure it is, but just wanted to make sure before I buy anything.

[vesseblah]

If you had bothered to go to www.asus.com yourself and looked for the motherboard and supported memory list there, you might've found out the same thing as I did. The list does not work right now, and it's impossible to tell 100% sure either way.

Also: Getting an i7-950 is really bad idea because i5-2500K is better & cheaper.

Also 2: Sabretooth X58 can be considered to be a failure. Benchmarks say the NIC is rather poor quality (maximum speed is around half of the gigabit it's supposed to be), and more critical problem is that if you use two video cards in SLI/Crossfire it will block all other expansion ports and you're screwed if you wanted sound card or disc controller. Neither of these are real disaster issues, but still the board is much worse than the pricetag or feature list would indicate.

[nwo]

Memory Standard
DDR3 1866/1800/1600/1333/1066

Yep, that RAM should definitely work.

[DeltrusDisc]

If you had bothered to go to www.asus.com yourself and looked for the motherboard and supported memory list there, you might've found out the same thing as I did. The list does not work right now, and it's impossible to tell 100% sure either way.

Also: Getting an i7-950 is really bad idea because i5-2500K is better & cheaper.

Also 2: Sabretooth X58 can be considered to be a failure. Benchmarks say the NIC is rather poor quality (maximum speed is around half of the gigabit it's supposed to be), and more critical problem is that if you use two video cards in SLI/Crossfire it will block all other expansion ports and you're screwed if you wanted sound card or disc controller. Neither of these are real disaster issues, but still the board is much worse than the pricetag or feature list would indicate.

A. No interest in SLI.
B. I have found the i7-950 for $200 at a local store.
C. You're the first person to really say anything horrible about the board. O.o

[Deleted]

If you had bothered to go to www.asus.com yourself and looked for the motherboard and supported memory list there, you might've found out the same thing as I did. The list does not work right now, and it's impossible to tell 100% sure either way.

Also: Getting an i7-950 is really bad idea because i5-2500K is better & cheaper.

Also 2: Sabretooth X58 can be considered to be a failure. Benchmarks say the NIC is rather poor quality (maximum speed is around half of the gigabit it's supposed to be), and more critical problem is that if you use two video cards in SLI/Crossfire it will block all other expansion ports and you're screwed if you wanted sound card or disc controller. Neither of these are real disaster issues, but still the board is much worse than the pricetag or feature list would indicate.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-t...-x58-review/20

Disagrees with you, and really I would trust this source over some internet random.

[vesseblah]

http://www.guru3d.com/article/asus-t...-x58-review/20

Disagrees with you, and really I would trust this source over some internet random.

That review does not even test the NIC, so how could it disagree with me? Only thing random here is your links.


http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/...board_review/4

The average transfer rate of the small files download test was an almost pathetic 43.3MB per second. The maximum was a more respectable 70.9MB a second with CPU usage reaching 4%.

The large files download test mimicked earlier results as the average transfer speed here was only 48.5MB a second with a peak of 66.2MB a second.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1457/11/

Benchmark Results: This is the first time in ten motherboards that there was a dramatic difference in network performance. Nine of the ten boards that we have tested have had a network throughput of 942-945+Mbits/s. The ASUS Sabertooth X58 was only 752.336 Mbits/s.


You can also find whole lot of whines in forums with quick googling about not being able to use other expansion cards with two double slot graphics cards because the PCI/PCIe ports are arranged wrong. Wasn't noted in any reviews since those don't test SLI configurations.

edit:

It's good board for generic use and overclocking if you don't plan on plugging in many expansion cards and don't care about low quality NIC, but with the few obvious flaws looking for different board is not such a bad idea.

[Deleted]

The average transfer rate of the small files download test was an almost pathetic 43.3MB per second. The maximum was a more respectable 70.9MB a second with CPU usage reaching 4%.

Problem is - they don't explain how they've eliminated the hard drive bottleneck. Nor do they explain if the transfer rates include protocol overhead, nor the MTU used in their tests. Their testing methodology strikes me as flawed.

40mb/s is something to be expected from a mechanical hard drive on smaller files - and fails to convince me of a NIC problem.

The second link does a much better job, stating both tools - configurations - measurements in megabits - in addition to leaving the impression that their results do factor in overhead. Furthermore, they also investigate the cause - linking it to being caused by the use of a PCI not-express connection, as they say is stated by Asus themselves.

[vesseblah]

Problem is - they don't explain how they've eliminated the hard drive bottleneck. Nor do they explain if the transfer rates include protocol overhead, nor the MTU used in their tests. Their testing methodology strikes me as flawed.

40mb/s is something to be expected from a mechanical hard drive on smaller files - and fails to convince me of a NIC problem.

Nice deflection there, you should've read my post bit further, down to the second benchmark where the NIC was tested with purely synthetic benchmark and did significantly worse in that than any other gigabit LAN motherboard they've tried.

Also if you had bothered to read the first link, it would've taken whole 10 seconds to find out they used SSD to read the files from, so no mechanical disc bottleneck.


The difference is not big, and for home users mostly insignificant, but I think I proved my point already for the doubters. Asus Sabretooth X58 has few well known major flaws that might be important or might be totally inconsequential, depending on what's the intended use of the computer.

[DeltrusDisc]

Nice deflection there, you should've read my post bit further, down to the second benchmark where the NIC was tested with purely synthetic benchmark and did significantly worse in that than any other gigabit LAN motherboard they've tried.

Also if you had bothered to read the first link, it would've taken whole 10 seconds to find out they used SSD to read the files from, so no mechanical disc bottleneck.


The difference is not big, and for home users mostly insignificant, but I think I proved my point already for the doubters. Asus Sabretooth X58 has few well known major flaws that might be important or might be totally inconsequential, depending on what's the intended use of the computer.

None of those things you mentioned were too glaring for me personally as I really am just looking to go from my current Intel Pentium Dual-Core E5200 to an i7-950, that alone is quite a huge jump. Speeds will be faster no matter what. The date transfer rate, from what I understand, isn't too terrible imho, as I am mostly just going to be playing WoW, probably frapsing raids/other things in WoW, and editing them into movie format. I don't see myself doing 3d texturing or w.e, model viewer, none of that. So I'm really not too sure if the problems you presented were too terrible for me personally, if you'd like to explain why I maybe should care I am open to that and will consider it if it really should matter to me. I just know, I'm going to be making a much much faster and better performing computer, regardless.

[vesseblah]

if you'd like to explain why I maybe should care I am open to that and will consider it if it really should matter to me.

It probably don't matter for you much, or wouldn't matter for me either. I just personally would not like the idea of getting pretty expensive motherboard that has some issues no matter how small if there are any viable alternatives.

[Dizey]

Those should work together fine.

Just a heads up though, Newegg has a pretty nice deal on a G.Skill kit for $95 W/Promo Code right now that you might want to consider. I can't post any links, but go to the NE site and search for:

F3-12800CL7T-6GBPI

[qw4]

It'll work, dude.

[Deleted]

Also if you had bothered to read the first link, it would've taken whole 10 seconds to find out they used SSD to read the files from, so no mechanical disc bottleneck.

Read and write. Your quote coincidentally is from a write operation - on a drive with a specified maximum of 70MB/s write speeds. Their measured top download speeds? 70mb/s. My point remains, the first article has some pretty bad testing checks by not investigating something as simple as if the drives they're using are actually capable of writing at the speeds the connection can send at. Especially since small file vs. large file produced such differences - which the NIC will not have such impact on.

Furthermore my other point remains - overhead is still not measured, which can easily add a good chunk to the total data transmitted.

[vesseblah]

Furthermore my other point remains - overhead is still not measured, which can easily add a good chunk to the total data transmitted.

I thought we were already past this stupid argument since we both agree that the second page I linked had exact enough testing methods to show that the problem is on the NIC of the board, even Asus admits it. Really don't see the point in rehashing this further or trying to grasp straws and poke holes in the other link.

[Cantii]

Read and write. Your quote coincidentally is from a write operation - on a drive with a specified maximum of 70MB/s write speeds. Their measured top download speeds? 70mb/s. My point remains, the first article has some pretty bad testing checks by not investigating something as simple as if the drives they're using are actually capable of writing at the speeds the connection can send at. Especially since small file vs. large file produced such differences - which the NIC will not have such impact on.

Furthermore my other point remains - overhead is still not measured, which can easily add a good chunk to the total data transmitted.

Well, this does have a valid point. Depending on protocols used and whether or not they're doing DC w/ crossover or going via switch or router, there can be considerable overhead (I've seen as much as 50 megabit overhead on LARGE files over both gigabit and 10 gigabit connections). However, if Asus themselves has admitted there is a problem with their NIC on the Sabertooth x58, then they know it exists and will do something to fix it.

However, ON TOPIC:

Deltrus: I have the exact same motherboard, and I have absolutely nothing but praise for it. It's packed with loads of features and overclocks like a champ while taking heat like its nothing. I mainly got the Sabertooth x58 because I live in West-Central Florida, and it gets *very* hot and *very* humid here during the summer, so this board is supremely beneficial to me.

The RAM will work with the bord, however it's not needed. Over-priced and over-hyped fluff. as Dizey has said, G.SKILL has some excellent RAM for an excellent price (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231304) - the same CAS Latency as the Corsair Dominators at a much lower price, and G.SKILL is quality RAM, too. Just enable X.M.P. in the BIOS and you'll be ready to go (that's pretty much what you have to do with all 1600MHz RAM on Intel boards).

The i7 950 also overclocks like a champ. What kind of cooler are you going to be using?

[DeltrusDisc]

I got a brand new Cooler Master Hyper 212 that's in my current computer, and of course, I should have known, nothing, absolutely nothing can lower the temperatures of my dual-core. =/

I still sit around 48-50C idling.... and then while playing WoW the CPU temperature will venture up to around 53C.... But I hear that the Hyper 212 is pro and stuff so since I literally just got it a couple weeks ago, I'll be transferring it to this new computer.

[vesseblah]

I still sit around 48-50C idling.... and then while playing WoW the CPU temperature will venture up to around 53C....

Looks almost as if the computer would be running at nearly full power all the time and there's no power saving features on at all. Or you have some grid computation thingy installed doing background math. Are you seeing any high CPU usage programs in task manager? Changed windows power savings options so that CPU runs at 100% all the time?

[DeltrusDisc]

Quite often my CPU is showing to be even at 0-5% work-load. =/

Trust me when I say, I have no fucking clue why my CPU is always so hot.

[vesseblah]

Quite often my CPU is showing to be even at 0-5% work-load. =/

Trust me when I say, I have no fucking clue why my CPU is always so hot.

Maybe CPU heatsink installed wrong, or you have CPU voltage set too high after some OC tweaks, or really really bad case airflow. Nothing else comes to mind.

[Thes]

Maybe CPU heatsink installed wrong, or you have CPU voltage set too high after some OC tweaks, or really really bad case airflow. Nothing else comes to mind.

50C isn't even hot, especially if you get 53C when doing stuff.

My old processor ran 70-80C stable.