Originally Posted by CDub07
This looked good on paper but for AM3+ OCing board it is not the best.
That's Asrock! It always looks "too good of a deal". And when it's not, well, Asrock can retroactively change the specs!
Take a look at this:
^ I bought 4 of this motherboard, based on that list. I bought the 1st one, when i was running 1090T and later 6300 and it was running without problems (other than increased socket temp), so i thought "I may as well buy more, in case i get 83xx later). Also in forums, people were running them without much trouble.
Compare it with this now and search for the 125W 83xx and 81xx
Ooops! Where did it go! And for the record, i have ran for months 8320@4Ghz without ill effects, despite hours and hours of nonstop video encoding. So what happened!
This happened: RMA rates in the 1st year from hardware.fr:
^ Before that, it was the R1.0 on top of the list, because aspiring overclockers were buying the extreme3 and overclocking it to the last stable clock, usually between 4.1 and 4.3. And the board was failing.
So Asrock, years later, simply removed the 125W chips from the compatibility list. So, no complaints!
You can't imagine how many people bought the extreme3. In 2012-13, if you google around, even in enthusiast fora, it was reccomended as "decent board" for 83xx. And the "extreme" encouraged teenagers to run it balls to the wall. Until some mosfet fried. So today, the 83xx don't show in the list, although the motheboard correctly IDs the 83xx CPUs and runs them just as it used to before Asrock removed the CPUs from the list.
Asrock should rename it's entire 970 line, as "BE". Like Asrock 970 BE3 or Asrock 970 BE4, Asrock 970G 3.1 BE and son on. BE for "Barely Enough". Edited by Undervolter - 6/17/16 at 7:04am