• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

MSI shows next-gen Intel motherboards (9 series chipset).

ShintaiDK

ShintaiDK

Lifer
http://techreport.com/news/26334/msi-shows-next-gen-intel-motherboards

Personally I like the MiniITX. But there is hardly any news over 8 series boards. Its only very minor changes. But again, if you are to buy new, then 9 series is a good way to go. Not just for the chipset, but also the more mature LGA1150 platform development from mobo makers.

img.x
 
Why are they putting that bloody "Killer NIC" on ALL of those boards pictured?

Someone commented in another thread how NICs should be simple and common, that way they garner the widest OS support.

Will Killer NIC be supported in Windows 9? 10? Linux?

Say what you will about the perceived quality of Realtek NICs, but they are well-supported.

Edit: Other than the killer NIC issue, those boards look pretty nice.
 
Personally, I'd rather have intel gigabit LAN ports as opposed to the killer NIC personally. Has anyone found tangible benefits of the killer NIC as opposed to intel GB lan? Serious question. I've never had anything in the way of latency with intel Gb lan ports which are used on other boards.

Then again, i'm sort of an asus fanboy when it comes to motherboards, anyway.
 
Looking at these I notice a glaring flaw and a growing trend on boards. Let's assume for a moment that the top-end board is supposed to be the Gaming 9 (I think this is an accurate assumption). Why is it then that the Gaming 9 has /just/ enough room to put two dual slot video cards in a dual-GPU configuration with no gapping between them on a full-size ATX board while the Gaming 7 has an extra slot between the two 8x PCI-E slots for dual-GPU? What would motivate me to purchase a Gaming 9 over a similar MicroATX board when the slot spacing is the same? What would motivate me to purchase the Gaming 9 over the Gaming 7 or a higher-end board from another manufacturer at the top-end if I'm doing dual-GPU?

I know not everyone does dual-GPU, but I find it ridiculous that companies continue to make high-end full ATX motherboards with poor slot spacing that does not take into account the cooling requirements of dual-GPU with open-air coolers. Even their Gaming 5 and Gaming 3 have better slot spacing (although I assume on the Gaming 5 that the second PCI-E slot is probably x4 not intended for dual-GPU in x8/x8 mode). What on earth would motivate a company to fail at slot spacing?
 
Last edited:
Tristor said:
Looking at these I notice a glaring flaw and a growing trend on boards. Let's assume for a moment that the top-end board is supposed to be the Gaming 9 (I think this is an accurate assumption). Why is it then that the Gaming 9 has /just/ enough room to put two dual slot video cards in a dual-GPU configuration with no gapping between them on a full-size ATX board while the Gaming 7 has an extra slot between the two 8x PCI-E slots for dual-GPU? What would motivate me to purchase a Gaming 9 over a similar MicroATX board when the slot spacing is the same? What would motivate me to purchase the Gaming 9 over the Gaming 7 or a higher-end board from another manufacturer at the top-end if I'm doing dual-GPU?

I know not everyone does dual-GPU, but I find it ridiculous that companies continue to make high-end full ATX motherboards with poor slot spacing that does not take into account the cooling requirements of dual-GPU with open-air coolers. Even their Gaming 5 and Gaming 3 have better slot spacing (although I assume on the Gaming 5 that the second PCI-E slot is probably x4 not intended for dual-GPU in x8/x8 mode). What on earth would motivate a company to fail at slot spacing?
Click to expand...

To be fair, the gaming line aren't the "top end" boards. The top end are the big bang and stuff along those lines, the gamer boards are actually gaming oriented and extremely budget minded. If I recall correctly, the 8 series gamer boards sold at extremely low prices at launch, some as low as 115$.

With that in mind, some features may not be present but MSI has a big product stack of gamer motherboards - some have more features than others (as is typically the case with motherboards). Lots of SKUs, lots of feature differentiation. If I had to guess, there will probably be MSI gamer boards ranging from 115-200$, with features depending on the price point.

That said, i'm not really a fan of MSI boards, much more of an asus person myself. Never really cared for MSI baords, but they do seem pretty good for the price - can't really beat some of their baords considering they retail for around the 115$ range for decent features. But the features you're asking for, i'm sure MSI will offer somewhere in their product stack - probably closer to the 150$ range or perhaps their halo parts, which aren't under the "gamer" monkier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top