ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review

ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review | Overclockers http://www.overclockers.
com/asrock-990fx-extreme4
Join the OCForums SETI Team today!
Overclockers
The Performance Computing Community
Search Overclockers.com
Search for:
Home
Forums
Reviews
News
How-tos
Editorials
Contact
Cooling
Memory
Motherboards
Processors
Software
System & Components
Video Cards
Most Popular Articles
Last 30 Days
All-time
AMD Confirms Kaveri Will Show Up Only in 2014

MSI Z87 Xpower Motherboard Review (with LN2 results)
Is Intel Building the World’s First 450mm/10nm Fab?
ADATA 8GB XPG DDR3-2800 Memory Kit Review
Cooler Master N600 Case Review
Stay Connected
Overclockers Facebook Page

Follow Overclockers on Twitter
Subscribe to Our Feed
« Lian Li PC-Q25 mITX Case Review

Preview – G.Skill Ripjaws Z DDR3-2133 Memory Kit »
11/2
2011
ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review
1 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review | Overclockers http://www.overclockers.com/asrock-990fx-extreme4
0
Tweet 24
Like 3
Posted by Dolk in Motherboards, Reviews
ASRock has given us an opportunity to review one of their midrange AMD boards, the 990FX Extreme4.
Although the word ‘Extreme’ is in the name, the number (4) shows us that it falls in the midrange between the
Extreme3 and Extreme7 from their 990FX line. As with a lot of midrange offerings, they do what you need them
to do, but may not necessarily give you everything you want. Let’s take a closer look at this board and see if it
falls into line with that thinking.
Taking a look at the board

I was really anxious when I saw that UPS dropped off the package at my house. What I really wanted to do was
put this board on the test bed and not turn it off unless it was dead or I ran my power bill too high for the
summer. Yet, once I opened up the package, I realized that I had to do the photo shoot before trying to torture
this board to oblivion.
Box of ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Box containing board
The ASRock box is pretty generic, and is completely geared toward the gaming community. When you look at
the box, and open up the flap to look at all the specs, it screams out “Hey, you gamer, look at all these cool
things I can do!” The ASRock box has two compartments: the first one holds the motherboard and the other one
holds the accessories. You can see the accessories in the following section.
2 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
When you finally take a look at the board, after being enthralled by the amazing box, you realize that there is not
much to its appearance. In a lot of ways, it’s a bit boring. Now don’t get me wrong: I love the color scheme, it
reminds me of the old Asus socket 939 boards. I grew up on overclocking with those boards. Yet, if you are in
the market for components to build a budget gaming computer, this board will come up and when you look at it
and compare it to the Gigabyte and Asus boards that are priced close to the ASRock Extreme4, these looks are
not going to win.
For the CPU, the board is packed with a 8+2 power phase. What that means is that 8 phases are dedicated to the
CPU power plane, and 2 are dedicated to the CPU-NB power plane. This is pretty typical for AMD
motherboards. This power will be efficient for any voltage you want to pack into your Phenom II or Bulldozer
CPU. The power plane uses an old L6717A voltage regulator by STMicroelectronics. Attached to each phase
line are two MOSFETs with the cleaning inductor and capacitor for cleaning the signal. As for the DDR power
plane, you can see that it is nicely packed down by the southbridge. This keeps the socket clean and away from
the CPU fan.
When looking at the CPU power plane, you probably noticed something that should not be there. Yes, that is the
BIOS battery. The BIOS battery is horribly placed on this board and will be covered by the heatsink – you
cannot access it for those “oh crap” moments when you really mess up the settings. Next to the battery is the
CLR CMOS jumper, another horrible choice of placement, although there is a CLR CMOS button on the back
plane of the board, which somewhat makes up for the bad placement. It will be interesting to see what happens
when I try LN2 or DICE with this board. I am afraid that the battery may freeze over and cause a short if it starts
3 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
to melt ice around it.
Moving over to the backplane, we see everything is typical. There are eight USB slots, two of which are USB3.
There is 7.1 channel audio controlled by a Realtek controller, a Broadcom 10/100/1000 MBps network port,
SPDIF and optical, along with your classic PS2 keyboard and mouse ports. Firewire and eSATA did manage to
get placed on this board as well.
The 990FX and SB950 are the controllers for this board. The 990FX takes care of PCI-E lanes to the CPU while
the Southbridge takes care of everything else, controlling the SATA and IDE ports along with the BIOS. The
SB950 southbridge only controls six out of the eight SATA3 ports found on this board: a Marvell chip was added
on to take care of two other ports. The six SATA3 ports controlled by the southbridge support RAID in various
flavors.
I really would not say that the design of this board is unique, or the color scheme for that matter. I have seen the
blue and white on brown PCB for quite some time. What I have not seen is the gold caps being used by
motherboard manufacturers. They are a bit difficult to implement into a board color scheme. They fit in pretty
well for this motherboard, and as you can tell, I fell in love taking photos of them. The caps are pretty much the
only part of the color scheme that makes the board stand out.
Specifications
General
4 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
- Support for Socket AM3+ processors

- Support for Socket AM3 processors: AMD Phenom™ II X6 / X4 / X3 / X2 (except 920 /
940) / Athlon II X4 / X3 / X2 / Sempron processors
- Supports 8-Core CPU
- Supports UCC feature (Unlock CPU Core)
- Digi Power Design
CPU
- Advanced V8 + 2 Power Phase Design
- Supports CPU up to 140W
- Supports AMD’s Cool ‘n’ Quiet Technology
- FSB 2600 MHz (5.2 GT/s)
- Supports Untied Overclocking Technology
- Supports Hyper-Transport 3.0 (HT 3.0) Technology
- Northbridge: AMD 990FX
Chipset
- Southbridge: AMD SB950
- Dual Channel DDR3 memory technology
- 4 x DDR3 DIMM slots
- Supports DDR3 2100(OC)/1866/1600/1333/1066/800 non-ECC, un-buffered memory
- Max. capacity of system memory: 32GB*
Memory
*Due to the operating system limitation, the actual memory size may be less than 4GB for the
reservation for system usage under Windows® 32-bit OS. For Windows® 64-bit OS with
64-bit CPU, there is no such limitation.
- 32Mb AMI UEFI Legal BIOS with GUI support
- Supports “Plug and Play”
- ACPI 1.1 Compliance Wake Up Events
BIOS
- Supports jumperfree
- SMBIOS 2.3.1 Support
- CPU, VCCM, NB, SB Voltage Multi-adjustment
Audio, Video and Networking
Graphics - n/a
- 7.1 CH HD Audio with Content Protection (Realtek ALC892 Audio Codec)
Audio - Premium Blu-ray audio support
- Supports THX TruStudio™
- PCIE x1 Gigabit LAN 10/100/1000 Mb/s
- Broadcom BCM57781
LAN - Supports Wake-On-LAN
- Supports Energy Efficient Ethernet 802.3az
- Supports PXE
Expansion / Connectivity
- 3 x PCI Express 2.0 x16 slots (PCIE2/PCIE4 @ x16 mode; PCIE5 @ x4 mode)
- 2 x PCI Express 2.0 x1 slots
Slots - 2 x PCI slots
- Supports AMD Quad CrossFireX™ , 3-Way CrossFireX™ and CrossFireX™
- Supports NVIDIA® Quad SLI™ and SLI™
- 6 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors by AMD SB950, support RAID (RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID
0+1, JBOD and RAID 5), NCQ, AHCI and “Hot Plug” functions
SATA3
- 2 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors by Marvell SE9120, support NCQ, AHCI and “Hot Plug”
functions (SATA3_8 connector is shared with eSATA3 port)
- 2 x Rear USB 3.0 ports by Etron EJ168A, support USB 1.0/2.0/3.0 up to 5Gb/s
USB 3.0 - 1 x Front USB 3.0 header (supports 2 USB 3.0 ports) by Etron EJ168A, supports USB
5 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
1.0/2.0/3.0 up to 5Gb/s
- 8 x SATA3 6.0 Gb/s connectors
- 1 x ATA133 IDE connector (supports 2 x IDE devices)
- 1 x Floppy connector
- 1 x IR header
- 1 x COM port header
- 1 x IEEE 1394 header
- 1 x HDMI_SPDIF header
- 1 x Power LED header
Connector
- CPU/Chassis/Power FAN connector
- 24 pin ATX power connector
- 8 pin 12V power connector
- CD in header
- Front panel audio connector
- 2 x USB 2.0 headers (support 4 USB 2.0 ports)
- 1 x USB 3.0 header (supports 2 USB 3.0 ports)
- 1 x Dr. Debug (7-Segment Debug LED)
I/O Panel
- 1 x PS/2 Mouse Port
- 1 x PS/2 Keyboard Port
- 1 x Coaxial SPDIF Out Port
- 1 x Optical SPDIF Out Port
- 6 x Ready-to-Use USB 2.0 Ports
Rear Panel I/O - 2 x Ready-to-Use USB 3.0 Ports
- 1 x eSATA3 Connector
- 1 x RJ-45 LAN Port with LED (ACT/LINK LED and SPEED LED)
- 1 x IEEE 1394 Port
- 1 x Clear CMOS Switch with LED
- HD Audio Jack: Side Speaker / Rear Speaker / Central / Bass / Line in / Front Speaker /
Microphone
Other Features / Miscellaneous
- ASRock Extreme Tuning Utility (AXTU)
- ASRock Instant Boot
- ASRock Instant Flash
- ASRock APP Charger
- ASRock SmartView
- ASRock XFast USB
Unique
- ASRock On/Off Play Technology
Feature
- Hybrid Booster:
- CPU Frequency Stepless Control
- ASRock U-COP
- Boot Failure Guard (B.F.G.)
- Turbo 50 / Turbo 60 CPU Overclocking
- Turbo UCC
- 1 x Power Switch with LED
Smart Switch - 1 x Reset Switch with LED
- 1 x Clear CMOS Switch with LED
- Drivers, Utilities, AntiVirus Software (Trial Version), CyberLink MediaEspresso 6.5 Trial,
Support CD AMD Fusion, AMD Fusion Media Explorer, ASRock Software Suite (CyberLink DVD Suite
– OEM and Trial)
6 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
- 1 x ASRock SLI_Bridge_2S Card

- Quick Installation Guide, Support CD, I/O Shield
- Floppy/ATA 133 Cables
- 4 x SATA Data Cables (optional)
- 2 x SATA 1 to 1 Power Cables (optional)
Accessories
- 1 x 3.5mm Audio Cable (optional)
- 1 x Front USB 3.0 Panel
- 4 x HDD Screws
- 6 x Chassis Screws
- 1 x Rear USB 3.0 Bracket
- CPU Temperature Sensing
- Chassis Temperature Sensing
Hardware - CPU/Chassis/Power Fan Tachometer
Monitor - CPU Quiet Fan
- CPU/Chassis Fan Multi-Speed Control
- Voltage Monitoring: +12V, +5V, +3.3V, Vcore
- ATX Form Factor: 12.0-in x 9.6-in, 30.5 cm x 24.4 cm
Form Factor
- All Solid Capacitor design (100% Japan-made high-quality Conductive Polymer Capacitors)
OS - Microsoft® Windows® 7 / 7 64-bit / Vista™ / Vista™ 64-bit / XP / XP 64-bit compliant
- FCC, CE, WHQL
Certifications
- ErP/EuP Ready (ErP/EuP ready power supply is required)
Accessories
The accessories are pretty typical. You have your power cables, PATA and SATA cables, and your USB brackets
for the rear. A nice plus is the front USB 3 bracket. If you have some extra room and your case does not support
USB3 yet, this could be a nice add-on.
The one accessory I am going to talk most about is the optional fan you can put onto your board. First off, I
7 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
don’t know why is this not already on the board when it is shipped. Most people would use it, and could use it
depending on the airflow in their case. I do understand why you would want to swap between a fan or a fanless
setup: some people like to keep their boxes quiet and it is nice to have that option. Although, there is one more
problem: the screws that are used to hold these two parts down are a bit rubbish, or it could be the mounts
themselves. It required the use of the small screwdriver that they give you and one of my own to get each screw
out. ASrock could have done better with this. Yet, truth be told, how many times are you going change this thing
out? Reviewer Note*: After some more use with the removal of the heatsink and the fan (during the temp
testing) I found I did not need the screw drivers anymore. I only need simply lift and the heatsink or fan will
come off with no problem.
As an engineering student, I do like to test everything that can be tested. For my amusement, I decided to test
how much the fan actually helps with the temperature on the MOSFETs. Using a K-Type temperature probe and
my thermometer, I placed the probe at the center underneath the heatsink to get the best temperature read and
swings during load and idle times. I decided to go with using my 24/7 build with stock hardware
settings. Ambient temperature in my room (as read by thermostat) is 75 °F (23.8 °C). All fans were kept on high
with no power savings.
8 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
The results are not terribly surprising but it does make you question a couple things. First off, the fan, with
system idle, only had the MOSFETs 1 °C lower in temperature than the heatsink alone. I would have expected to
see a bit more in the difference, but since this is an open case test platform I can only assume that the heatsink
may actually have a higher idle if it is in a case. Second, the difference in the incline, if you follow
the logarithmic line you will notice that that the heatsink has a faster incline. This shows that the fan really does
help keep the temperatures lower for a longer period of time, while the heatsink heats up much faster. Third, the
end result. You may notice that the test without the heatsink lasted longer than the one with the fan. This is
because the fan leveled off after some time. The heatsink kept rising, and the spreadsheet can only hold so many
data points. If I could have gone on longer, I would not have been surprised to see the heatsink temps rise higher.
In the end, all of this is not too surprising. A fan outperforms a heatsink (if you can call it that, its more like a
metal lid). If you were to put this system in a case, I could only imagine that the results would be much more
dramatic. The fan would probably show a bigger lead. I do have to make one last comment about this. I would
like to see how the two would perform when the board is under LN2. One thing Extreme Overclockers have to
worry about is frost build up on the board, preventing this from happening can allow us to bench longer. Fans
usually help with moving the condensed air away from the board. I would like to see if the fan or the heatsink
would be better suited for the task, but that is a test for another time.
UEFI BIOS
Now, time for the UEFI BIOS. This is the first time that I have had a board with the UEFI BIOS and I must say I
like it, but there are some things that could be done to make it a lot better. Maybe it’s ASRock’s particular UEFI
BIOS, but I found some bugs and a couple items that should be in the UEFI BIOS, but are missing. Overal, I like
it, and I cannot wait to see what comes out of these UEFI BIOS’s in the future.
First up is the main screen. It looks pretty normal, but there is something missing. Neither the main page, nor
any other page, has the current UEFI BIOS version listed anywhere. Normally this is not a big deal, and in a way
really does not matter. But the truth is, I would like to know my BIOS version before I spend the time looking up
a newer version. It’s a time saver more or less.
9 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
Next up is the OC Tweaker page, with the default settings displayed. I really like how ASRock sectioned all the
categories into appropriate groups. Each sub menu is very clean. You are given three save slots with this board,
and as you can tell I have already used that feature. I also like where they are located. Most of the time this
option is stored somewhere else in the BIOS.
The OC Mode has 2 different settings: Manual Mode, and CPU OC Mode. The CPU OC Mode is basically a
quick overclocking tool for your CPU. It will overclock your CPU by a percentage. This is a nice feature for
those that really do not know what settings to play with and want a bit of an extra boost. How stable each of
these settings may be, I do not know. From my experience in the past with other motherboards, they are hit and
miss.
10 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
The first picture just gives you a picture of how the OC Tweak page looks when you first enter into full Manual
mode, and the next two pictures, I show one of my overclocking settings during testing. All of the frequencies
can be typed in, but the multipliers and voltages are a pull down menu. I wish that voltages were not a pull down
menu, and that I could increment the voltages at in smaller increments, not 0.25 v. Well, the 0.25 v increment is
only for the CPUv and CPU-NBv, the HTTv and VDDA’s have their own settings and way too high increments.
I do like how the multipliers will auto update their frequency as you increase the HTT bus. The problem is that
the CPU will not update past 18x multiplier. A reboot in the BIOS will auto correct this though.
ASRock’s DDR Overclocking page, for this motherboard, is one of the worst I have ever played in, and needs to
be redone. Everything works, and there is no problem for when I overclock my RAM. It is how the page works
that needs to be redone. As you can see with the two screenshots, each menu has a sub-menu that you can key in
your value. What they should have done was insert a drop down menu or a key in section, not both. It is really
frustrating to enter in the values and move around this menu. Please ASRock, change this.
11 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
The Advanced tab is pretty typical. You can access power saving features for your CPU, Northbridge and
Southbridge options and work with your storage. Built onto this board is a BIOS debug hex screen, power on
and reset buttons. You can configure how to keep the LED back lights on or off during sleep, or while the
computer is on. These options are called: Good Night LED and Onboard Debug Port LED. Unfortunately, the
default to these buttons/hex screens are off when your computer is ON. Having these off is suppose to help with
LED brightness in a dark room or while your asleep, but I really do not believe they are bright enough to bother
someone. Furthermore, the power buttons and reset buttons back lights do not stay on when the computer is off,
12 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
but with active power. I would like to see all three of these features stay on, when power is running through the
computer even if the computer is off.
Last there are the Hardware Monitor, Boot, and Security pages. As you could expect, they are typical. The
temperatures in the Hardware Monitor seem to be spot on. The voltages are pretty accurate, but the CPU voltage
is a bit off. As I was working the benchmark results for this board, I used my USB memory stick to install OS’s.
At one point or another I deleted one of the boot priority options. You cannot get this option back. I did not
notice this until I had deleted two of the three options I started with. After that, I tried to figure out how to get it
back. A BIOS update brought back the options.
Overall the BIOS is alright. It needs a lot of updates and fixes in my opinion. I did write down a couple more
bugs that I found and hopefully Asrock will fix them soon. Having a bad BIOS with a board labeled Extreme
leaves a bad feeling with the user.
AXTU
ASRock Extreme Tuning Utility reminds me of the very first Asus overclocking tool. It has nothing to do with
the looks, even though they do use somewhat the same color scheme. It is more about the simplicity and the
options that are given. I always thought those days were done and gone, although I should not make it sound that
bad. Right now, manufacturer-supplied overclocking utilities are very advanced. TurboV and Easy Tune from
Asus and Gigabyte offer tons of features, and these tools can be used on almost any of their motherboards. Now,
granted, most of the settings will not be used, unless you’re someone like me. So, something like AXTU is
completely reasonable for those that are not like me. Since ASRock does list this as one of their higher end
boards, I cannot imagine not having some sort of software that allows me to work in the OS as if I was still in
the BIOS.
13 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
The hardware monitor page and fan controller are pretty typical. The temperature readings on these pages are
pretty accurate. During my 24/7 testing I solely used this software to watch my temperatures. CoreTemp and
AIDO64 were no use for me while using this board and CPU. The voltages were pretty close to accurate, but
later on you will see just how accurate the readings were.
Now this is what I’m talking about: the overclocking sections of this tool. As I said before, AXTU is a pretty
simple tool. You can easily adjust some parts of the CPU and work with most of the voltages. You pretty much
have enough to work with if you were to overclock in a benching OS. However, there is one item I would love to
see in this program: controlling the different frequencies of each core of the CPU. This is one thing that I see in
AOD and Asus’ software. The feature is very helpful for when I really want to maximize the system during
competitions.
OC DNA is a bit of an interesting section, and it is not something you see a lot with overclocking software. You
are able to switch between BIOS settings that you have saved in the BIOS. This is pretty cool and could come in
handy for those overclocking gamers. Let’s say you wanted to put some more power down on your computer for
playing a heavy game like Witcher 2, but when you’re done, you do not want your system to be using this same
power while your viewing your favorite website: Reddit.
14 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
IES or Intelligent Energy Saver is an attempt to control the number of power phases that are turned ON for the
CPU. Now that motherboard manufacturers have to cater to more than just those that want a motherboard that
looks like nice and overclocks well, new energy saving technologies are being implemented. Controlling the
power planes is not a bad idea, and from some playing around it does a pretty good job of it. When my CPU
demanded performance, the power plane gave all 8 to the CPU. At idle, the CPU sat with 2 planes turned on.
I did manage to find some bugs with the software as well. One of the most troublesome is that if you increase
the CPU voltage, the LLC will reset back to Auto. Even if you have it set to something like 1/4, it will ignore
that setting. For this test, I played with LLC through the UEFI BIOS first to see how LLC affected the CPU
voltage through Prime95 tests. After the Prime95 test I would adjust the voltage in AXTU and bring it back
down to where I started. Then, I launched Prime95 once more and recorded the results. The voltage for the CPU
was set at 1.45 v in both the UEFI BIOS and AXTU.
As you can tell, AXTU would simply ignore the setting set in the UEFI BIOS. This is most likely a bug in the
software and a quick update will certainly fix this. In the end, I can see through the little faults that the software
has, and see what it could do. Later in this review, I will get down to the good stuff of pushing the system to the
limit, and I relied mostly on this software.
Test Systems
Windows 7 64-bit Operating System: Fresh install with updates, and few programs installed
AMD Phenom II 1090T CPU @ 3.0 GHz
OCZ Black Edition 1600 Cas 8 (2×2 GB) 4 GB RAM
Asus Matrix 5870 GPU
Drivers: Cat 11.8
All BIOS settings were set to default, only the RAM and DRAM voltages were changed.
Water cooled on an open-air benchmarking station
As with all tests, reviewers have a structure we adhere to. For motherboard reviews, we like to test things at the
most default settings. This gives the most general and non-biased view point of how well the motherboard
works for most users. Since this is my first time doing a motherboard review, I do not have any data to compare
with so this time around we will just have to look at the scores and just say “Uhm… Quite”.
15 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
CPU Bench
For testing, I worked only with the CPU and memory. Motherboards tend to yield the same scores given enough
samples in the data set. The benchmarks chosen were SuperPi, Wprime, Cinebench, 7zip and the AIDA 64
package. These benchmarks are all designed to either focus on the CPU, or the CPU and Memory. All
benchmarks were run three times in a row and an average was calculated.
SuperPi 1M 19.59867 Cinebench 10 18347.33

SuperPi 32M 19:52.118 Cinebench 11.5 5.703333
Wprime 32M 8.283 7Zip 16961
Wprime 1024M 260.2353
Memory Read 9140 CPU Queen 31431.67 FPU VP8 3269

Memory Write 6547 CPU PhotoWorxx 30496 FPU Julia 12214.33
Memory Copy 10683.67 CPU Zlib 236.4 FPU Mandel 6215.333
Memory Latency 45.8 CPU AES 53086.67 FPU SinJulia 3103
CPU Hash 3191.667
Everything is pretty normal. If I have my calculations right, most of the people that open this review are going to
look through results and probably not read anything, so hopefully you read this. Benchmarks are nothing more
than somewhat useless for motherboard reviews. The only reason that we do them is to hopefully catch memory
or bus latency. Given a big enough data set, the score for all boards will average over time. Instead of looking at
the results, look at what it can do for overclocking, and read about how the BIOS behaves and the software
packages. That is where a motherboard can be different from its competitors.
Overclocking
Overclocking with this board was a bit of a hassle at first, or at least for me. As an extreme overclocker, I like to
set very specific overclocking settings in the BIOS and then do a couple tweaks in the OS once I know settings
are stable. It helps for when I am trying to find the absolute maximum overclock, not just the boot maximum.
This kind of style helps extreme overclockers, or overclockers that like to benchmark competitively. Since this
board does not give true readings from the software or BIOS, I was worried about what voltages I was actually
setting and using while benching.
I was able to request some information from the engineers over at ASRock. I asked for onboard contact points so
that I could wire my digital multimeter up to the board and get live voltage readings. They gave me the CPUv,
CPU-NBv, NBv, and DDRv. The CPUv and CPU-NBv became very helpful. I found that there was quite a bit of
a difference from what various software was reading and to what my multimeter was reading. To regular users
and overclockers, these differences are not that big and you would probably figure out the offset without even
knowing it. Yet, for competitive overclocking, knowing these offsets can help me tune my system for specific
start-ups and benchmarks.
16 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
After wiring up these read-outs, I started to benchmark with stock settings. I learned quickly that what I was
given in any of my software was nothing near to what I was getting on my multimeter. In a previous section, I
showed the difference with the CPU voltage. I will not go over that again. The NBv and the DDRv were right
on, and since I do not play too much with those voltages, these contact points were hardly touched. What I kept
my eye on most of the time was the CPU-NB voltage. Stock voltage of the CPU-NB is 1.125 V; what is on my
multimeter is 1.138 V idle. That is a 0.013 V difference and it’s pretty big. The difference will continue to
increase as the system is being pushed. Most likely this is due to the CPU-NBv LLC. On a lot of the new
high-end AMD boards, you are now able to control the LLC on the CPU-NBv line. An option like that for this
board may help with the gap that I’m seeing.
24/7 Overclocking
For 24/7 overclocking, it was pretty simple to get up to the normal speed of 4.0 GHz. 4.1 GHz took only a small
push on the CPU voltage, and after that, I was able to find my absolute boot-up maximum and stable overclocks.
These settings are only based on the safe range of voltages that I list in my Phenom II Overclocking Guide. That
is to say, that voltages in the range 1.45 – 1.50 V are safe for 24/7 use, but I prefer 1.45 V.
17 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
Simple... Next! 4.1 ghz max with safe settings
I really did not see a difference in this board compared to my M4A89GTD-Pro (with the 890GX chipset). I have
to be honest, since I push my hardware so much during benching sessions, I like to keep my 24/7 settings at
stock. This helps limit degradation of the chip. What will really show the difference with this board is how far I
can push the hardware with benchmarking.
Pushing The Limit
Now it’s time to push the system to its maximum. At this point, I changed my operating system to a custom-built
benchmarking OS. These are specially designed for those that want the best results from benchmarks, and are
no-where close to being suitable for 24/7 systems. Who cares about those 24/7 overclocks: I like to see how far I
can push this board with my favorite CPU in the world, the 1090T.
For 2D benches, I have a custom built Windows XP 32 bit. Most of the services are disabled and
only necessary drivers are installed; video drivers are not even installed. This allows the CPU and memory to
avoid any use by any small services that may otherwise run in the background. This then gives me the best
18 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
chance to push the system, and for the hardware to be dedicated completely to the benchmarks.
The results speak for themselves – they are not bad. Compared to what I used to get on 890GX and 890FX
boards, I find the results an improvement. These results were done on an water-cooling system. I had a lot of fun
pushing the SuperPi 1M times lower and lower. The CPU kept taking the increase in speed each time, allowing
me to run the bench each time. I only stopped at 4.5 GHz because I did not want to increase the voltage any
further. This board definitely has some tolerance.
I really like 2D benches and Heaven, working with 3DMark Vantage and 3DMark 06 is not really my thing, but
since these two tend to put a lot of strain on the CPU (Heaven does nothing with the CPU), I gritted my teeth
and pushed hard. For 3DMark 06, I was very very surprised to see how far I got with my CPU. The CPU tests
are not particularly stressful to modern CPUs, but it does require a lot of stability on the user end. All I can say
is that it was a breeze to get to 4.4 GHz and have it pass. After that, it was more of a CPU voltage limit, but I
really did not want to go beyond what I had already set since I am only on water cooling. As for Mark Vantage, I
could only hit a maximum of 4.2 GHz. Vantage really does put a strain on the system and it really likes having
high frequency memory with low timings. Since my memory was pretty much at maximum settings I called it
quits there. All in all though, I am very impressed in how far I was able to push these benchmarks on this board.
Last, but not least, here are the maximum pushes. Both of these results were me just pushing the hardware as
hard as I could. It’s not surprising to see the bus speed up at 323 MHz. I know that it can give a lot more, but for
the life of me I could not get the memory to behave at the lowest ratio. You will have difficulty booting up at
300 MHz into the OS, but once in there, your system will find the 300 MHz to be stable.
As for the maximum CPU run, that is a pretty sad run. I normally push only one core and will see easily 5 GHz
with the voltage that I supplied. The reason why I didn’t get 5 GHz is because the software that ASRock gives
you does not support individual CPU ratio increments. I could have disabled more CPU cores too, and maybe
got a higher score, but I do not know which core is the best to push. With the right software, I could see which
core is the strongest, and show how far I could push it. ASRock: if you really want this board to make a
statement, please include individual CPU ratio overclocking in your software.
19 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
Conclusion
I am going to give this board a Overclockers Approved stamp, but only barely. To my standards, which I admit
are pretty high, the board does not come close to what I would call Extreme. In fact I would call this board a
generic, typical, motherboard. ASRock did a good job with the board, but left a lot to be desired; there are a lot
of changes that I believe should be made before this board can really compete against the big dogs.
You may be wondering why would I give an approval for a motherboard that I believe has a lot of problems. If I
were to place this board in my gaming computer, give it a slight overclock for everyday use and close the case
up, I would never be able to tell the difference between this board or any other AM3 or AM3+ motherboard.
This is both good and bad. It is good that I can trust this board, and know that when I am using it my system will
run perfectly fine everyday that I turn it on. It is bad because it does not stand out: it does not allow me to go that
extra step and take my hardware onto the next level of overclocking. This is why I give it an approval, because
the majority of you that are looking for a motherboard want to put something in a case and forget about it.
Maybe tweak here and there. This board will do just that, but if you want something to take your breath away
you will have to look elsewhere.
- Dolk
Related posts:
1. ASRock P67 Extreme 6 Motherboard Review

2. ASRock Z68 Extreme4 Motherboard Review
3. ASRock Z77 Extreme4 Motherboard Review
4. ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-z Motherboard Review
5. Asus Sabertooth 990FX Review
9 Comments:
David
11-02-11 02:11 PM
Nice review Dolk
ScrewySqrl
20 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
11-02-11 03:27 PM
Nice Review. Didn't focus on what I see is ASRock's real strength: Good quality for a good price.
AS Rock tends to have good stuff (like those gold caps) for less money than a Gigabyte or Asus board.
As you state: for a 24/7 light overclock, ASRock specializes in fantastic bang-for-buck, not necessarily the
best-of-the-best-at-any-price.
Dolk
11-02-11 04:43 PM
The board itself was sturdy and will probably last long. But that is hard to determine if you only plan to use the
board in a review period.
I hope to take this board cold sometime in the near future to see how it will do for intro benchers.
KG4UPR
11-02-11 07:33 PM
Thanks for the review, but I think several factors that set this motherboard apart from the competition were
overlooked. The ASRock slot layout featuring PCI X1 and legacy PCI interfaces in useable locations contrasts
with the poor placement on ASUS and others. Inclusion of PATA interface and PS/2 mouse and keyboard
connectors is a useful feature for those who tinker or have legacy components available (also less trouble prone
for debugging). The debug display and back panel CMOS clear button are very nice touches. As for
performance, it will extract everything a high-end AMD processor is capable of delivering on a 24x7 basis. The
UEFI BIOS and AXTU need some tweaks including LLC improvement and indication of core temp. Overall the
Extreme4 is a versatile and solid implementation of the 990FX/SB950 chipset. I cannot see the rationale for
spending $50-$100 on a competing platform that delivers less.
TheQuadFather
11-04-11 08:27 PM
990fx is showing up some real nice boards, that are set out slot wise like for like with intel, which is an issue for
me as a amd+sli fanatic who cant run tri on these new boards because nobody makes a bridge with the right
spacing
Muad'Dib
12-14-11 01:40 PM
Firstly, I do not quite understand why you actually gave it your approval stamp, or why you might not have done
it -- I am missing the reasons.
I understand that the placement of the battery -- under the passive heatsink on the MOSFETs -- is stupid;
arguably, it is the clumsiest place on the whole mainboard.
21 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
Other than that, I see no drawbacks or faults, perhaps other than the purported ones on an UEFI page, which is,
however, just a small inconvenience, perhaps not even a nuisance. Otherwise it is completely irrelevant - who
cases about UEFI, anyway?! I do not spend weeks there tinkering with it, perhaps at most minutes, so a one-time
delay of a few seconds is not a big show-stopper, at least not for me, definitely not.
I do not understand you reasoning about the "average" and the "enthusiast" mainboard classes. Is an "enthusiast-
class" supposed to be a freaky one, completely focused on overclocking tinkering, supporting it with the
weirdest options, like overclocking through bluetooth with an iPhone, etc.?
On the other hand, I am missing an LPT port... for my home-made EEPROM programmer -- for that is what I
consider "enthusiast". But ASRock has not included them for a while -- even the previous generation of
mainboards had to do without them. :-(
Fortunately, this mainboard at least has a conveniently placed 1xPCIe connector that is actually usable -- just
like KG4UPR has already mentioned -- where I could add a parallel port card for my beloved programmer... ;-)
However, it would cost me some additional 20 €... :-( and simply because of the manufacturer's vanity, as the
Super-IO chip certainly supports an LPT port!
Indeed, unlike on many others, it is placed above the slot for the graphics card. On many others, it is placed just
below the topmost 16xPCIe for graphics card, so it is not really usable, as it is typically blocked by the heatsink
of the graphics card.
In fact, I would prefer an internal LPT connector over a FDD one -- after all, the flash chips got so large that
they can now hold UEFI, so the main reason for needing a floppy diskette -- BIOS recovery -- has been
obsoleted, and at least on 2 grounds at that: (1) the capacity of the typically available diskette (HD) is too small
to hold the whole image to be flashed and (2) the boot block that is typically not overwritten during a normal
update is now capable of supporting more sophisticated means of recovery.
(That said, ASRock used to be particularly weak when it came to BIOS recovery, which got it a fairly bad
reputation in the past. I do not know how things are at the moment, with UEFI.)
But it also has a PATA port, so I can use my fine stash of DVD burners -- never mind their lack of newer
firmware, for I still use the same, well-proven, good quality DVD+R discs, not some new, cheap exotic crap...
So... you failed to account for some of these, IMHO... Moreover, you ought to have tested it with a Zambezi
(Bulldozer) processor, as that is perhaps the main reason for getting an 990FX-based mainboard, I reckon, at
least for most people, esp. now that Phenoms are being phased out of production and the 990FX chipset (and
hence the mainboards based on them) is supposed to stay here longer.
Dolk
12-17-11 06:26 PM
The reason why I gave it an approval stamp is because, for what its worth, its a good board. My reason for that is
people, like yourself, that do not tinker with their hardware that much can use this board and be satisfied. The
reason why I say that I should not give at an approval is due to the miss labeling of the board. Something labeled
"Extreme" should have extreme features.
As for the UEFI, I express that because of the extreme labeling I expected more control over the board and the
power. It gives enough features that it will satisfy those, like you, that want to do something quick.
Now you question what is the difference between average and extreme, or what I classify regular users and
extreme users. I classify overclockers in a couple ways, one is the typical or average user like you. You do a
22 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
quick overclock and your fine. The second type is the gamer overclock. Someone that puts effort into their
overclock so that they can optimize their games, or tools that utilize the full potential of their computer. And
than there is the third type, those that are extreme. They put their computers through LN2 and DICE.
Testing with bulldozer is not a large deal with this board, and at the time of testing I bulldozer was not out. A
motherboard review has no reflection on what CPU was used with the test. As long as you stress the full amount
of the board through standard overclocking, you can than see how the board feels and works. Like I stated in the
review, doing any benchmarks with motherboards is worthless. You only do them to make sure that the
engineers did not royally mess up on the design.
notJUSTguitar
12-17-11 08:35 PM
Nice review.
How I wish I could get my CPU that high
Markh
03-15-13 01:41 AM
I purchased this motherboard several months ago for its hardware support. I still have some IDE hardware I
want to use and because I still use Windows XP its nice to have an internal floppy to load drivers as an
alternative to a custom Windows XP installation. I also like how the motherboard supports PCIe two 16X at 16X
along with several other PCIe connectors and a couple of PCI connectors. Other features that attracted me to the
motherboard include its USB3, SATA3, eSATA and firewire support.
I received the motherboard free of defects to the best of my knowledge at this point but I have some reservations
about the motherboards BIOS.
1) I am using an NEC 3520A IDE DVD/CD drive and some of my DVD/CD software either malfunctions or
does not work at all. In an effort to resolve the problems with it I clean install Windows XP the operating system
I have used with the software for years and that did not resolve the problem. I also tried another IDE drive
before purchasing a SATA DVD/CD drive and I tried the new SATA drive on both the AMD and Marvell SATA
3 controllers but that did not resolve the problem either. In looking in the BIOS the DVD/CD drive is only listed
under boot devices and there is no sub menu to set block data, PIO mode and DMA mode like with every other
motherboard I have owned. While this is usually set to automatic in most cases I assume other motherboards
provide Windows or the software installed on it information that is not being provided with this IDE controller
on this motherboard and I assume it has been removed from SATA technology in general and that's why the
SATA controllers didn't work either with the software. In looking in the device manager in Windows XP I did
not see any drivers for the IDE controller like with most motherboards. All the drivers are provided by
Windows.
2) With this motherboard you can only have one hard drive device in the boot priory along with a DVD/CD
drive and floppy. As a result you cannot set the boot priority with multiple hard drive devices so if you remove
the first in the list it will boot on the next in line then if put the first that was in the list back in the computer will
boot from it without having to revisit the BIOS. I have some backup software I run from flash drives and I have
to visit the BIOS coming and going with this motherboard unlike with a couple of other motherboards I have.
3) Under Storage Devices if you disable the 1394EE you disable the IDE. It would be nice if these were
separated.
23 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
Otherwise so far I would recommend this motherboard.
Sincerely,
Markh
Leave a Comment
Hardware Reviews (Select a Tab)
Recent
Popular
All-time
Noctua NH-U14S Heatsink Review

EVGA GTX 780 Classified ACX Graphics Card Review
Noctua NH-U12S Heatsink Review
ADATA 16GB XPG DDR3-2600 CL11 Memory Review
MSI N760 HAWK (GTX 760) Video Card Review
Share Overclockers
ShareThis
Reference List
Overclockers.com GPU Testing Procedures

3 Step Guide to Overclock Your i7 / i5 Haswell Platform
Memory Overclocking Guide for Intel Ivy Bridge platform
Beginner’s Guide to Water Cooling Your PC
Overclockers.com Product Rating System
3 Step Guide to Overclock Your AMD Phenom
Welcome To Overclockers.com
3 Step Guide To Overclock Your Core i3, i5, or i7 – Updated!
An Introduction To Extreme Cooling
Intro to Folding@Home and Team 32
24 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49
Tags
amd case Cooling Editorials HowTo Memory Motherboards Processors review Software Systems & Components Video Cards
Home
Sitemap
iNET Interactive Copyright © 2013 iNET Interactive.

All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | EU Privacy Policy
Internet Services
Web Hosting Talk

HostingCon
Web Host Industry Review
Hosting Catalog
Host Voice
Cheap Hosting Directory
Data Centers
Data Center Knowledge

Data Center World
AFCOM
Web Development
Hot Scripts
DB Forums
Digital Marketing
ABestWeb
Search Marketing Standard
Pay Per Click Universe
Consumer Tech
Windows Secrets
Overclockers
Mac Forums
Learn more about advertising opportunities across the iNET Interactive Network.
LiquidWeb
25 of 25 26-08-2013 22:49

ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review - Overclockers

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review - Overclockers

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Motherboard Review | Overclockers http://www.overclockers.

Join the OCForums SETI Team today!

Most Popular Articles

AMD Confirms Kaveri Will Show Up Only in 2014

Overclockers Facebook Page

« Lian Li PC-Q25 mITX Case Review

Posted by Dolk in Motherboards, Reviews

Taking a look at the board

Box of ASRock 990FX Extreme 4 Box containing board

to melt ice around it.

- Support for Socket AM3+ processors

- 1 x ASRock SLI_Bridge_2S Card

SuperPi 1M 19.59867 Cinebench 10 18347.33

Memory Read 9140 CPU Queen 31431.67 FPU VP8 3269

Simple... Next! 4.1 ghz max with safe settings

Pushing The Limit

1. ASRock P67 Extreme 6 Motherboard Review

Nice review Dolk

Otherwise so far I would recommend this motherboard.

Hardware Reviews (Select a Tab)

Noctua NH-U14S Heatsink Review

Overclockers.com GPU Testing Procedures

iNET Interactive Copyright © 2013 iNET Interactive.

Web Hosting Talk

Data Center Knowledge

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi