Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    44

    Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I have seen that both the GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 3.0 and 3.1 boards are totally compatible for the new AM3+ processors. There is just one difference with this and that is the socket. CPU compatibility is the difference between the 3.0 to 2.1 and on the other hand, if we check the 2.1 to 2.0 then we will find that the only difference is the missing chip as well as dissimilar RAM settings.

    What I am not able to understand that how the 2.0 and 2.1 are incompatible with the AM3+ processors as this having good subtle and also very less differences. I would like to hear your thoughts on this and so I am posting this thread over here. If you have something to share about this then you are most welcome.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    259

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I think that you have not seen the difference between these processors. If not then would like to tell you that Rev2.0 & 2.1 are having smaller BIOS chips as compared to the 3.0 and because of this the AM3+ processors are not supported with these. And I don’t think that there is any trick to make this supported. Other than this, it will be better if you can directly contact with the Gigayte and see if they can write bespoke BIOS which will be able to takeout some of the features and aloe the AM3+ processors to work with the Rev 2.0.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    285

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    If you look properly then you will also find that the cpu socket color is different and this is for the reason that the new chips is making use of a pin which is not used by the 1090 t six cores and further. Just take a look at the cpu socket closely and you will find that the board which is blocked out on the 2.0 boards is having the square blocked out therefore there is noo place to put additional pins on that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    245

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I have found some of the way to make it possible but that is risky and so I am not mentioning that here. If you try with that there are more chances that you may create some major problem with the system. So this is never recommended form my side.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    235

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I would like to tell you that the AM3 processor is having the 938 pins and then also the AM3 socket is having 941 holes whereas the AM3+ Socket is having 942 holes but this does not indicate that the AM3+ processors will make use of all of them. You will notice that the holes which are on the AM3+ Socket are a bit bigger and because of this the pins on the AM3+ is thicker. Because there are many of the AM3 motherboards which is having support for the AM3+ CPU's then I don’t think that there is any requirement for pin assignment otherwise thickness.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    302

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I have taken a closer look to the pictures of these two boards and I found that both of them are having similar BIOS.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    253

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I have contacted with the Gigabyte and they replied that they are currently working with the BIOS of the previous revisions of this board. If you consider the smaller BIOS chip similar to the UD5 then you will find that this is having the BIOS support for Bulldozer.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    294

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    Quote Originally Posted by Skullnit View Post
    I have contacted with the Gigabyte and they replied that they are currently working with the BIOS of the previous revisions of this board. If you consider the smaller BIOS chip similar to the UD5 then you will find that this is having the BIOS support for Bulldozer.
    If this can be made possible then it will need to lose some of the options in order to make available the new facilities. This will be dome because there is just the fixed amount of space within the BIOS and chip and this is the reason that they have raised the size and it will make the space for the updated code.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    333

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    The main issue with this is that the revisions 2.0 and 2.1 are still having the AM3 socket but in case of the Bulldozer (Zambezi) processor, it will need to have the AM3+ (AM3b) socket. This is officially announced by the AMD. Anyways, this is obvious that as you go to the newer version of this you are surely going to get more features with that. So if you wish to have these features then you can go for revisions 3.0 and 3.1.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    208

    Re: Compatibility of GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5 rev 2.0 Bulldozer

    I don’t want to argue for this but I can just say that the newer version for the boards with the AM3+ socket might be the feasible proposition.

Similar Threads

  1. Gigabyte 890FXA-UD5 RMA Problem
    By rahulsuraj in forum Official GIGABYTE Motherboard Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-02-2013, 05:17 PM
  2. Does Gigabyte GA-870A-USB3 Rev 3.0 supports Bulldozer
    By Go!pee in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 23-08-2011, 10:37 PM
  3. Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD5 vs Gigabyte GA-890XA-UD3
    By Talaketu2 in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-11-2010, 06:09 AM
  4. GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD7 vs GIGABYTE GA-890FXA-UD5?
    By Hibiscus5 in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 12:08 PM
  5. Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD7 - IOMMU does not work
    By Miquel in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-10-2010, 12:52 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Page generated in 1,714,030,111.85579 seconds with 17 queries