Looking for current AMD based MB with IDE socket & wish list

[videobruce]

I haven't upgraded since 2007, I usually don't wait that long, but my current MB has the features I like, but is now dated by processor limitations.

What I'm looking for is:

1. AMD based MB that has one IDE connector so I can easily access older IDE drives. The 970 chipset MB's don't have any IDE ports (that I found). The 990 chipset does, but I didn't really want all the other bells & whistles, namely the ability to run multiple graphic cards. The cost difference is almost 2x which is hard to justify. (I really don't do any gaming.)

2. I'm also interested in power consumption since my current nForce 7 board and non green PS is a power hog (by todays standards).

3. The other question is the processor. Is a six core worth the difference in price over a four core when used for any HDTV application?

4. Serial port or at least a header (which many have).

5. Two PS2 ports (which many have).

6. Optical and/or digital audio. (not a priority)

7. Price? I would prefer to stay under $100, but that isn't cast in stone.

8. Boot menu outside the Bios screen.

9. eSATA port.

10. No overclocking or gaming and a full size ATX board.

I know there are IDE cards, but I would on board due to concerns for drivers and possible boot issues to use that drive as a boot drive if I need to.
I'm running XP and would like to stay that way, but I understand there are hardware issues (as usual) so I may be forced to go with Win 7 (forget 8).

Lastly, brand is flexible. I was leaning towards Asus, ASRock & Gigibyte and kinda wanted to stay away from MSI, Biostar & ECS. Opinions welcome here also.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Are you willing to consider a PCIe-to-IDE adaptor, like this one...?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815158084

Otherwise IDE is going to be very difficult to find on a modern mainboard.

 

[videobruce]

No, but how much of a hassle will it be to get that setup to boot a PATA drive with a active partition without standing on ones head or similar?

For that extra $22, it gets me closer to this that has the connector on board;
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/990FX Extreme4/?cat=Specifications

The 800 series of chipsets have more of a choice, but I questioned going back one generation regarding future proofing (as much as possible).

 

[Insert_Nickname]

No, but how much of a hassle will it be to get that setup to boot a PATA drive with a active partition without standing on ones head or similar?

For that extra $22, it gets me closer to this that has the connector on board;
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/990FX Extreme4/?cat=Specifications

The 800 series of chipsets have more of a choice, but I questioned going back one generation regarding future proofing (as much as possible).

Onboard, yes, but it still relies on a 3rd party controller. Same goes for the 800-series chipsets. PATA has not been native since the 700-series southbridges. You should not have any problems so long as the card has a bootable OROM. Is there some special reason you have to be able to boot from such old harddrives?.

By the way, I'll strongly advise you to migrate to at least windows 7. XP support stops dead on April 8 2014, after which there will be NO more security patches and updates...

 

[PingSpike]

I'd go with a card. As stated there aren't native controllers anymore anyway so at least when you upgrade again in the future you can just bring the card with you. For that reason I'd go with a PCI-E card since PCI is disappearing from some motherboards these days.

They also make adapters that allow IDE devices to connect to SATA ports.

 

[videobruce]

Onboard, yes, but it still relies on a 3rd party controller. Same goes for the 800-series chipsets. PATA has not been native since the 700-series southbridges. You should not have any problems so long as the card has a bootable OROM. Is there some special reason you have to be able to boot from such old harddrives?.

What's "OROM"? How would you know it had that? Would that be in the specs?

Regarding XP, patches are not a issue, hardware support is. I understand there is a issue with SS HDD's that a separate program is needed for XP that W7 doesn't need.

They also make adapters that allow IDE devices to connect to SATA ports.

Aren't there issues with those? Aren't they 'finicky'??

 

[PingSpike]

I use a couple of them. I have one on my server's OS drive and one on my HTPC. I haven't noticed any issues. There might be some issues with optical drives that I'm not aware of though, I never tried that. There's so many of them though I doubt anyone could say they're all perfect, but mine were cheap as hell and I got them from some boat-from-china company IIRC.

 

[alexruiz]

I don't think the mobo you want exists.

On the AM3+ side I would say your best bet is the Asrock 990fx extreme4, it has native IDE and eSATA. It is north of $100 though. The gigabyte 78LMT-USB3 has IDE also, but is mATX and SB710. Same with the Biostar A960D+.

I have a Gigabyte 990FX-UD3 and using a cheap PCI-e SATA and IDE card based on the Jmicron JMB32x. It is bootable and works decent with optical drives. I was in a similar situation as you, as I still a few very good IDE DVDRWs, and ended going with the PCI-e card.


Alex

 

[SPBHM]

Onboard, yes, but it still relies on a 3rd party controller. Same goes for the 800-series chipsets. PATA has not been native since the 700-series southbridges. You should not have any problems so long as the card has a bootable OROM. Is there some special reason you have to be able to boot from such old harddrives?.

By the way, I'll strongly advise you to migrate to at least windows 7. XP support stops dead on April 8 2014, after which there will be NO more security patches and updates...

this says SB950 supports PATA

 

[BUnit1701]

Dont worry about 900 series chipsets being 'more future proof' than 800 series, it was a rename only, same chips. If you can find a board that has what you want, jump on it.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

What's "OROM"? How would you know it had that? Would that be in the specs?

Regarding XP, patches are not a issue, hardware support is. I understand there is a issue with SS HDD's that a separate program is needed for XP that W7 doesn't need.
Aren't there issues with those? Aren't they 'finicky'??

OROM stands for option ROM. Its a little piece of software that basically tells the BIOS "this is a such and such expansion card and it is bootable".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Option_ROM

this says SB950 supports PATA

I'm intrigued. AMD's website does not list PATA support on any 900 series chipset. Are you sure this isn't a motherboard specific implementation of a 3rd party controller?

 

[Cerb]

What's "OROM"? How would you know it had that? Would that be in the specs?

It's a BIOS plug-in, basically, to allow bootup from the card. However, XP will still need drivers, once the bootloader has kicked off.

Aren't there issues with those? Aren't they 'finicky'??

Sometimes, but no more so than random add-on controller cards. I seem to need to use them the other direction (old board, new drive), and have had no issues with JMicron or SIL based ones. However, I've only used a handful, and have had enough compatibility issues with computer parts in the past that I will not discount any others' negative experiences, with certain adapters, or certain parts combinations that just don't play nice.

Thing is, by 2007, Intel boards were already using add-on chips for PATA, for the most part...and now it's 2013. I would get one of these, or a similar on with moderately good reviews from somewhere else, then set SATA ports to IDE, and the drive to master/standalone, or cable select (ODDs often like cable select best, IME), if I really wanted to use an old PATA drive.

That said, why not just get new SATA drives? With SATA set to IDE mode, XP should install fine, you just won't get NCQ or hot-swap.

--

2. Go with 970 boards then, or even A75 or A85 FM2. Intels idle lower, but Trinity, Richland, and Vishera aren't bad at all.

3. IMO, no. In fact, you may want to just get an A-series, and maybe spend a wee bit on 1866-2133MHz RAM, for the IGP's sake.

4. If you need more than 1, get a card, or USB converter.
http://plugable.com/products/PL2303-DB9
That's got mfenn's recommendation (I have a couple old cards, and they still work fine, so haven't needed those). Exposed serial takes some work to find, but the headers are standard, and you have plenty of add-on options. It's a niche thing, today, but RS232 and TTL will both be around for decades to come.

5. 1 is very common, now, instead. Monoprice's PS/2->USB adapter is IBM Model M (basically AT) compatible, for a future-proof option. I have 2 of them stashed for when PS/2 ports die .

8. That's been standard for well over 10 years, now. Usually it's F12.

9. If the board doesn't have one, you can get an eSATA bracket. eSATA required more stringent voltage and current tolerances than plain SATA, but is otherwise the same (at the host controller side, anyway), and everybody's internal ports have been eSATA-compatible for several years, now.

 

[videobruce]

I don't think the mobo you want exists.

I know it doesn't, I'm just trying to get as close as possible.

It's a BIOS plug-in, basically, to allow bootup from the card. However, XP will still need drivers, once the bootloader has kicked off.

That's what I was concerned about. Does Win7 have the same need?

I'm intrigued. AMD's website does not list PATA support on any 900 series chipset. Are you sure this isn't a motherboard specific implementation of a 3rd party controller?

Maybe it's just not enabled by default unless the MB manufacture does so.

That's been standard for well over 10 years, now. Usually it's F12.

I was hoping for the boor screen to come up by itself without any button pushing as it does on mt Foxconn N570SM2AA MB. I really got spoiled by this as it makes life much easier since I have three bootable drives.
The ASUS M5A97 R3.0 is suppose to have this if I read the owners manual right.

 

[JimKiler]

OP to further through a wrench into your quest, you need to avoid any UEFI mobos and stick with BIOS based mobos. Windows Vista 64, 7 64, and 8 are the only windows OS's to support UEFI. from the wikipedia:

Microsoft introduced UEFI for x86-64 Windows operating systems with Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista Service Pack 1 so the 64-bit versions of Windows 7 are compatible with EFI. 32-bit UEFI was originally not supported since vendors did not have any interest in producing native 32-bit UEFI firmware because of the mainstream status of 64-bit computing.[44] Windows 8 includes further optimizations for UEFI systems, including a faster startup, 32-bit support, and secure boot support.[45][46]

 

[videobruce]

I stumbled across this "wrench" a couple of days ago. What I'm really concerned about is this;

Secure boot
The UEFI 2.2 specification adds a protocol known as Secure boot, which can secure the boot process by preventing the loading of drivers or OS loaders that are not signed with an acceptable digital signature. When secure boot is enabled, it is initially placed in "setup" mode, which allows a public key known as the "Platform key" (PK) to be written to the firmware. Once the key is written, secure boot enters "User" mode, where only drivers and loaders signed with the platform key can be loaded by the firmware. Additional "Key Exchange Keys" (KEK) can be added to a database stored in memory to allow other certificates to be used, but they must still have a connection to the private portion of the Platform key. Secure boot can also be placed in "Custom" mode, where additional public keys can be added to the system that do not match the private key

In 2011, Microsoft was accused by critics and free software/open source advocates (including the Free Software Foundation) of trying to use the secure boot functionality of UEFI to hinder or outright prevent the installation of alternative operating systems such as Linux, by requiring that new computers certified to run its Windows 8 operating system ship with secure boot enabled using a Microsoft private key. Following the criticism, Microsoft denied that the secure boot requirement was intended to serve as a form of lock-in, and clarified its requirements by stating that systems certified for Windows 8 must allow secure boot to enter custom mode or be disabled, but not on systems using the ARM architecture.
Other developers raised concerns about the legal and practical issues of implementing support for secure boot on Linux systems in general. Former Red Hat developer Matthew Garrett noted that conditions in the GNU General Public License version 3 may prevent the use of the GRUB bootloader without a distribution's developer disclosing the private key (however, the Free Software Foundation has since clarified its position, assuring that the responsibility to make keys available was held by the hardware manufacturer),[40] and that it would also be difficult for advanced users to build custom kernels that could function with secure boot enabled without self-signing them. Other developers suggested that signed builds of Linux with another key could be provided, but noted that it would be difficult to persuade OEMs to ship their computers with the required key alongside the Microsoft key.

Sure as hell sounds something more to go wrong.

 

[videobruce]

Gigabyte mentions a "Hybird EFI w/ DualBIOS", MSI has a "ClickBIOS II". Are these the same thing?

 

[Cerb]

Secure boot can be turned off (on x86), and EUFI firmware can be set to start loading using the legacy compatibility code first (IE, good old BIOS). The features you can't use when doing that aren't supported by anything older than Windows 7.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

OP to further through a wrench into your quest, you need to avoid any UEFI mobos and stick with BIOS based mobos. Windows Vista 64, 7 64, and 8 are the only windows OS's to support UEFI. from the wikipedia:

Why?. I have a UEFI-based Asus C60M1-I running XP just fine. Heck it even does AHCI with the proper driver. UEFI includes a BIOS interpreter for legacy compatibility, so that's no problem at all.

For vista x64 to support booting from UEFI you need an install disc with SP2. SP1 and previous install discs do not support booting from UEFI.

 

[videobruce]

You wonder why I waited this long to upgrade. :whiste:

I found one board I was almost going to go with, but it's long discontinued; Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD5

 

[Cerb]

Use adapters and peripheral controllers where necessary, and get with the times. Old SCSI truly went and died. Serial, parallel, PATA, PS/2, etc. are still here, and aren't going away (serial and parallel industrial equipment is still out there and working, serial, parallel, and PS/2 were commonly used for vertical-market input devices and printers, lots of networking equipment supports serial for management and diagnostics, and various technical hobbies still need serial ports). Except for PATA, which is on its way out (save for CF hanging on pretty good), the uses are popular enough that they don't cost much to add. But, you have to accept that you're towards an end of the bell curve, these days, and work with that. Get a motherboard with sufficient expansion for your needs, and use that expansion capability (spare PCI-e slot for a wireless card, maybe a PCI for something old, and plenty of USB ports, for instance).

 

[SithSolo1]

You wonder why I waited this long to upgrade. :whiste:

I found one board I was almost going to go with, but it's long discontinued; Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD5

E bay has a couple of them.

 

[VirtualLarry]

On the AM3+ side I would say your best bet is the Asrock 990fx extreme4, it has native IDE and eSATA. It is north of $100 though.

I would recommend this board. I have one, and I was able to boot off of a PATA HDD.

 

[videobruce]

It looks like I will go with the ASRock 990FX Extreame4.

Question; Is the the ability to have a boot menu show outside the BOS? I use multiple HDD, each with a bootable partition. My current nForce 570 Foxconn board allows this and I have gotten spoiled by it.

 

[Leyawiin]

It looks like I will go with the ASRock 990FX Extreame4.

Didn't see this thread until today but when I read the title this is exactly the recommendation I was going to give you. You don't really compromise or settle at all by choosing that motherboard - its very good.

 

[videobruce]

Questions;
1. Is there a option kin the BOS that allows a separate Boot screen outside the BIOS to change the boot order?
2. How flexible is the BIOS to isolate individual SATA ports?