Motherboard Question about Motherboard

[dcs18]

People buy a CPU with the intention of gaming and then commit the blunder of purchasing the wrong chip — personally, regardless of whether I intend to game or not, I invariably opt for the Z Series which ship with the most heavy-duty, industry-grade components . . . . . . designed with the specifics to endure an extremely high threshold of heat.

In my profession of system building, have witnessed a good number of ASUS meltdowns as also a high number of GIGABYTE motherboards outliving the rig — both these examples though, prove nothing because on closer look . . . . . . . . . . every meltdown was traced back to a poor selection of unsuitable chip, not well-matched to the CPU.

Last time I checked, Z series were really expensive. I wonder if you have the same opinions about the H series too. Reason I asked is to understand the reliability of the H chips and the main difference between the Z and H being the overclocking abilities and the build-in multiple PCI-E support. Would recommend H chip to i5 or would you recommend only Z chip for it.

I wonder how does it happen though, would it happen because of CPU being too heated or just the motherboard getting heated. Come to think of it, much effort has been put to keep the motherboard and RAM cool, but they are not enough I feel, atleast the part where both of them are passively cooled.

I must mention though, another mistake people making a gaming PC make is not buying a proper graphics card. A lot the games are ported from the consoles and require a good CPU, which from what I can understand, may not be a case for the next DirectX though, but most games need a good graphics card, not just a good CPU.

Undoubtedly, the H Series are rocking the sales chart — everybody (including Corporates) want to be purchasing them . . . . . . . . based on specifications, they do seem to offer the greatest value for money. However, while specifications may not lie . . . . . . just like a mini skirt, they fail to reveal the complete picture. :think:

Now, the Z Series are exorbitantly expensive and often seem to be regarded as a stupid waste of money. However, the H Series offer a better ROI (Return On Investment) only in the shorter run and can often prove costlier than the Z Series in the longer run — let me explain.

The most commonly preferred combination today, is a Core i-3 with the H Series — generally, covered under warranty for 3 years. Whenever there is a flash-point (which is quite frequent under Indian climatic conditions, compounded with the difficulty of procuring quality thermal compound,) the memory module/s and/or the DIMM socket/s conk/s-off a number of times within the warranty period. If the memory module/s conk/s-off, the work-flow and productivity remain unaffected — however, if the Motherboard conks off the entire advantage of using a Desktop is defeated . . . . . . I mean apart from the linearity in power, the dwindling Desktop is purchased chiefly due its propensity of being modular — unlike say a laptop or an All-in-one . . . . . . . this brings ones computing life to a standstill when the Motherboard decides to bite the dust.

I have never come across a spike claiming the life of a Z Series — it has always been the memory module that has been required to be replaced, instead. FWIW, a repaired/re-balled Motherboards is never really the same. Not to forget — the CPU generally outlasts almost every other hardware component unless the User installs it incorrectly causing the pin/s to get bent. The H Series are not built as robustly as the Z Series — they just cannot possibly meet the life span of the CPU, in question.

I am afraid, these practical experiences don't get listed under specifications. :)