Asus P5Q-EM G45 mATX motherboard
Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:12 pm
Discussions about Silent Computing
https://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/
https://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=51045
The Alpine 7 Pro works quite well for us with the E7200. On another motherboard I couldn't even get the fan ramp up I turned the fan off completely and let the temperature skyrocket. The heatsink stayed barely warm with the fan at 4V, even when we overclocked to ~3Ghz.silo wrote:nice mobo, but that Arctic Cooling Alpine dsnt seems to work, in my experience
Well, that certainly depends on what you're looking for.Aris wrote:This will likely go down as the last best socket 775 board before its replaced by socket 1366
Why not?MiKeLezZ wrote:And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.
Maybe, Intel mATX motherboards are all crap then!MiKeLezZ wrote:Best INTEL mATX motherboard to date.
Two very good recommendations! I'd love to see those as well!!Mats wrote:I'd really like to see a comparison between G45, 9400, and G31/G41/P4M900 together with a low power graphic card.
MikeC: Any chance we'll see a nVidia 9400 review soon?
I vote for one of these to be reviewed:Strid wrote:G31 for the win.
Only two SATA. BIOSTAR G31-M7 TE is a better option.QuietOC wrote:I vote for one of these to be reviewed:Strid wrote:G31 for the win.
TUL TG31-M2 $36 AR with free shipping
Foxconn G31MV-K $42
I believe these are identical motherboards both made by Foxconn. Only 2 phase CPU VRMs. No quad core support. If you really want the lowest possible power draw these (or something similar) should be it.
I am using a 8800GTS with it. That's why it is a great mATX, not for his average power consumption (but not by any means high!).Mats wrote:Besides being a bad overclocker, the P5Q-EM disables the IGP if you put a card in the x16 slot, even if it's not a graphic card, see page 6 in the thread I linked to.
I don't know if that's common though.
Data corruption, stability, drivers.Mats wrote:Why not?MiKeLezZ wrote:And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.
If were going to start going down the motherboard review road, i think it best to stick with reliable manufacturers. Like Asus, Abit, Intel, MSI, Gigabyte. Price isnt everything, you usually get what you pay for when it comes to computer components. You buy cheep and you get cheep quality.QuietOC wrote:I vote for one of these to be reviewed:Strid wrote:G31 for the win.
TUL TG31-M2 $36 AR with free shipping
Foxconn G31MV-K $42
I believe these are identical motherboards both made by Foxconn. Only 2 phase CPU VRMs. No quad core support. If you really want the lowest possible power draw these (or something similar) should be it.
Foxconn makes motherboards for a lot of other companies. The last two Foxconn branded motherboards I've had were much better quality than the last two ASUS motherboards. I have issues with my Abit motherboard.Aris wrote:If were going to start going down the motherboard review road, i think it best to stick with reliable manufacturers. Like Asus, Abit, Intel, MSI, Gigabyte. Price isnt everything, you usually get what you pay for when it comes to computer components. You buy cheep and you get cheep quality.
The Biostar board is 3 phase VRM and Gigabyte board is 4 phase VRM. I am sure both are better options for overclocking, although they both lack the ability to run 800FSB CPUs with 1:1 memory divider. So, they aren't great for overclocking either. I do think Biostar and Gigabyte tend to have better quality than Abit or ASUS at the <$100 price range.lucas82 wrote:Only two SATA. BIOSTAR G31-M7 TE is a better option.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813138125
GIGABYTE GA-EG31M-S2 also is better quality product.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813128338
Please give me a link or something that proves this kind of problems with the 9400.MiKeLezZ wrote:Data corruption, stability, drivers.Mats wrote:Why not?MiKeLezZ wrote:And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.
What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.Mats wrote:just like the INTEL based P5Q-EM had trouble with hardware decode acceleration, HDCP, and STILL having trouble wiith the PCIe x16.
Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.Monkeh16 wrote:What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.
Ok.. That's not an issue, that's normal. Consumer boards are not designed for headless operation.Mats wrote:Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.Monkeh16 wrote:What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.
LOL, no, of course they're not. But you're missing the point, he doesn't want headless operation. This motherboard have integrated graphics, and that is why some people want to use the slot for something else than graphics.Monkeh16 wrote:Ok.. That's not an issue, that's normal. Consumer boards are not designed for headless operation.Mats wrote:Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.Monkeh16 wrote:What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.
Yes.. and where do you suppose the IGP gets the bandwidth from? Oh, yeah, that PCI-E bus.Mats wrote:LOL, no, of course they're not. But you're missing the point, he doesn't want headless operation. This motherboard have integrated graphics, and that is why some people want to use the slot for something else than graphics.Monkeh16 wrote:Ok.. That's not an issue, that's normal. Consumer boards are not designed for headless operation.Mats wrote: Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.
All 18 (something) lanes for an IGP, are you sure? The Promise SuperTrak EX8350 needs 4 lanes. Do you have any links for this?Monkeh16 wrote:Yes.. and where do you suppose the IGP gets the bandwidth from? Oh, yeah, that PCI-E bus.
The G45 uses the PCI-E lanes for SDVO (8 lanes) and DVI/HDMI (2x4 lanes), which accounts for all 16. It's IGP or PCI-E GPU, unless the BIOS allows headless operation.Mats wrote:All 20 (something) lanes for an IGP, are you sure? The Promise SuperTrak EX8350 needs 2 lanes. Do you have any links for this?Monkeh16 wrote:Yes.. and where do you suppose the IGP gets the bandwidth from? Oh, yeah, that PCI-E bus.
So PCI-E devices should be able to be used, but for some reason it doesn't negotiate down to x1. Chipset bug, BIOS bug, device bug?— x1 width support simultaneously with the sDVO functionality which is
multiplexed onto the PEG port. Such shared use facilitates ADD2+/MEC
implementation.
You're right about that, but then again Intel should have added more lanes into their premium IGP chipset. The whole idea with having a good IGP mobo is that you shouldn't have to add a graphics card if you don't need to, and that's why you should be able to use the x16 slot for somethig else.Monkeh16 wrote:The G45 uses the PCI-E lanes for SDVO (8 lanes) and DVI/HDMI (2x4 lanes), which accounts for all 16. It's IGP or PCI-E GPU, unless the BIOS allows headless operation.