Asus P5Q-EM G45 mATX motherboard

Post by **MikeC** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:12 pm

silo · Post by **silo** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:59 am

nice mobo, but that Arctic Cooling Alpine dsnt seems to work, in my experience, the 7200 @ 3.17ghz idles at 32C with the stock e6600cooler. inside a small modded elite 340 case. (using speedstep / EISTE / qfan silent / ZM-STG1)

btw with the Gemini II S the temp is even better. great cooler, and no i dont work 4 coolemaster btw

EDIT WhA 140? overpriced much? lol no thanks. i rather buy this

1 ) G31 Micro ATX mobo > $42

2) Radeon HD 4670 > $76

3) $2GB DDR2 800 cas5 > $21

4) bubblegum > $1

TOTAL $140

throw a cheap cpu and you have a pc capable of playing crysis at high
i know the article mobo is good but really 140? the g31 is not that bad btw

1600/1333/1066/800 MHz fsb
SATA3Gbx2/PATA x2native
Onboard Video/ 8 chanel HD audio
LAN / micro atx / low power / good OC!

and the 4670?

HDMI,DVI, S-Video Out
512MB GDDR3,750MHz Core
+ LOW POWER

+ bubblegum?

chahahc · Post by **chahahc** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:50 pm

Great review as always.

The northbridge temperature was rather surprising. With such a small heatsink I though it would at least be in the 70c range. I wonder how much the temperature would differ with a passive cpu heatsink setup.

Lawrence Lee · Post by **Lawrence Lee** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 8:32 pm

silo wrote:nice mobo, but that Arctic Cooling Alpine dsnt seems to work, in my experience

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.

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:27 pm

glad to see they fixed the reported HDMI issue's with older bios versions.

This will likely go down as the last best socket 775 board before its replaced by socket 1366

bgiddins · Post by **bgiddins** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:57 pm

I've been running the P5Q-VM for about a month now - basically the same board but no Firewire or onboard RAID.

Very happy with it - the later BIOS versions are more advanced than the base BIOS mine came with - you can store a dozen or more overclock profiles, as opposed to the 2 profiles with the original BIOS.

Only complaint I have is that when running 1650 x 1080 over DVI, my LCD occasionally blinks off then on - with VGA, no such problem. I'm assuming that this is mobo-related.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:51 am

It's a nice mobo, but it's a worse overclocker than the P5E-VM HDMI.
It all 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

Well, that certainly depends on what you're looking for.
I assume you're talking about ÂµATX, even though you didn't mention it.
I'm not sure that this one is better than the 9400 counterparts, or other G45 models.

MiKeLezZ · Post by **MiKeLezZ** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:09 am

Best INTEL mATX motherboard to date.

And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:16 am

MiKeLezZ wrote:And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.

Why not?

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:06 am

MiKeLezZ wrote:Best INTEL mATX motherboard to date.

Maybe, Intel mATX motherboards are all crap then!

What is consuming 30+W at idle on this motherboard? I don't see where this is even a halfway decent motherboard for this audience. Intel's chipsets keep going downhill, which is too bad since their CPUs keep getting better and better.

I would like to replace my ATX Abit IP35-E with a micro ATX motherboard, but I haven't found a good candidate yet.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:34 am

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?

Strid · Post by **Strid** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 1:20 pm

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?

Two very good recommendations! I'd love to see those as well!!

As for the G45 motherboard. Still can't be used for gaming. Definitely an option for a watching TV/movies from your HTPC, if you want to go the Intel route. Other uses? I can't see any given the price tag. G31 for the win.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 1:41 pm

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.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 1:54 pm

Strid wrote:G31 for the win.

I vote for one of these to be reviewed:

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.

lucas82 · Post by **lucas82** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:29 pm

QuietOC wrote:
Strid wrote:G31 for the win.
I vote for one of these to be reviewed:

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.

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

mattthemuppet · Post by **mattthemuppet** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:11 pm

I'm a little surprised by the idle power consumption, both EIST and underclocked/volted - my X2 5000 on a Gigabyte GA-MA74G-S2H (reviewed here) pulls 39W idle ([email protected]) and 74W ([email protected]), with an extra GB of RAM and a 3.5in HDD. Given the 45nm process and reported almost non-existent idle draw of the E7200, I would have thought it would be lower.

Kind of glad I didn't have the funds to go G45+E7200 - my original plan

silo · Post by **silo** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:19 pm

tomshardware (lol, i know but it has nice info)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/int ... ,2039.html

g31 + 4670 = win

MiKeLezZ · Post by **MiKeLezZ** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:00 am

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.

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:
MiKeLezZ wrote:And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.
Why not?

Data corruption, stability, drivers.

Aris · Post by **Aris** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:38 am

QuietOC wrote:
Strid wrote:G31 for the win.
I vote for one of these to be reviewed:

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.

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 · Post by **QuietOC** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 4:59 am

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.

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.

A low power motherboard should be cheap, because it should have less components on it.

QuietOC · Post by **QuietOC** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 5:41 am

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

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.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 5:43 am

MiKeLezZ wrote:
Mats wrote:
MiKeLezZ wrote:And you can't compare NVIDIA chipsets with INTEL ones.
Why not?
Data corruption, stability, drivers.

Please give me a link or something that proves this kind of problems with the 9400.
Drivers usually gets better after a couple of weeks or months for most motherboards,
just like the INTEL based P5Q-EM had trouble with hardware decode acceleration, HDCP, and STILL having trouble wiith the PCIe x16.
The 9400 is not a perfect product, but neither is the G45 just because it's made by Intel.

Monkeh16 · Post by **Monkeh16** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:55 am

Mats wrote:just like the INTEL based P5Q-EM had trouble with hardware decode acceleration, HDCP, and STILL having trouble wiith the PCIe x16.

What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:59 am

Monkeh16 wrote:What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.

Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.

Monkeh16 · Post by **Monkeh16** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 7:04 am

Mats wrote:
Monkeh16 wrote:What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.
Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.

Ok.. That's not an issue, that's normal. Consumer boards are not designed for headless operation.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 7:21 am

Monkeh16 wrote:
Mats wrote:
Monkeh16 wrote:What sort of trouble? I find it hard to believe there are software problems with the PCI-E bus.
Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.
Ok.. That's not an issue, that's normal. Consumer boards are not designed for headless operation.

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 · Post by **Monkeh16** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 7:30 am

Mats wrote:
Monkeh16 wrote:
Mats wrote: Look here. It's not a problem if you're using it for graphic cards.
Ok.. That's not an issue, that's normal. Consumer boards are not designed for headless operation.
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.

Yes.. and where do you suppose the IGP gets the bandwidth from? Oh, yeah, that PCI-E bus.

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 7:36 am

Monkeh16 wrote:Yes.. and where do you suppose the IGP gets the bandwidth from? Oh, yeah, that PCI-E bus.

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 · Post by **Monkeh16** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 7:43 am

Mats wrote:
Monkeh16 wrote:Yes.. and where do you suppose the IGP gets the bandwidth from? Oh, yeah, that PCI-E bus.
All 20 (something) lanes for an IGP, are you sure? The Promise SuperTrak EX8350 needs 2 lanes. Do you have any links for this?

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.

E: Ok, so it would appear I missed something.

â€” x1 width support simultaneously with the sDVO functionality which is
multiplexed onto the PEG port. Such shared use facilitates ADD2+/MEC
implementation.

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?

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 7:56 am

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.

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.

This doesn't change the fact that the P5Q-EM can't be considered a perfect IGP ÂµATX mobo since it can't handle a simple RAID card that does work in other (older?) ÂµATX mobos (like MSI K8NGM2-FID).

E: Yeah, I assumed you were right about the lane count . .