could you explain to me what exactly is better about the main board you took, that justifies the 65$ price increase? (discount already included)

There is no difference except the Gaming label.

there sure are differences. The PCH supports x16 3.0 PCI-E compared to the 6x2.0 PCI-e from the H110. Also his mainboard has a m.2 socket. I was just asking why he thinks that these are features that someone on a 400$ budget might need xD

EDIT: but sorry. thats going off topic. Canadian_Born... you can pm me if you want.

This post was edited by maulepan on Jan 29 2016 06:12pm

You're comparing apples to apples. Those are miniscule differences. As far as CPU performance is considered there is no difference between the 2.

Latelly, there's an influx of people around here that believe they have all the knowledge in the word yet their builds are absolutely horrid. You should actually take time and read about the builds you are making.

Skylake is being force fed because it's new and shiny, yet, it hasn't produced signficantly justifiable numbers as opposed to Haswell. Even DDR4 isn't showing to be too much better than DDR3. Stop recommending these horrible horrible CPUs for people on budgets. It's quite ridiculous.

just my preference... i have ALWAYS stood by asus boards. theyve been around the longest in relation to other manufacturers, have the highest stability, and KNOWN for longetivity in thier life over any other manufacturer... *** for all of the above, you pay a slightly higher pricetag *** just my opinion and preference to choose asus. plus... the old 110 chipset would bottleneck the cpu slightly, to unlock proper performance in sandy cpus you need a minimum of a 150, and for me, why not go higher?.

i dont just slap together a cheap POS system, i build one to last.. anyone can use cheap parts, i wont.... to each their own right?

just like peoples preferences..

amd/intel
ati/nvidia
seagate/wd

e/ inserted in **

This post was edited by Canadian_Born on Jan 29 2016 06:22pm

It's not a Sandy Bridge it's a Skylake.

Also, how will it bottleneck?

Edit:

Also, from my own experience with Asus and their RMA process I would never recommend them again. I have a 3930K sitting with no motherboard for 2 months. Their inept repair facility actually made my Sabertooth X79 worse than when it was sent out to them. So, stand by them as much as you want but since they've switched to ECS as a OEM their boards heve been getting worse.

This post was edited by Deny on Jan 29 2016 06:37pm

was meaning skylake, been a long day.. my bad..

bottleneck: opting for the 110; you may as well revert to a ddr3 board, the chipset in my experience was no better than the old 78's.. but again my opinion.. sure a 110 would be great for an i3 or comparable pentium, but not an i5 or higher. especially in the staging in the architecture of the different generations of i5 for example, the staging in chipsets has improved, so.. my question is why not opt for a better chipset that performs better?

as for your experience with asus.. you are one in 90-100 that i can add to my list of having problems with their RMA, or even having problems with their motherboards.. ive never had a problem with their product; aside from a 15 year old motherboard that finally hit its life cycle. ECS from what i understood went bankrupt, and then resurfaced a year or 2 later under asrock.. i could be mistaken, its been a few years since i read taht information. i didnt research it, just read it in PC Mag, as i said years ago..

out of the last 100 pc's ive repaired (concerning the motherboard) in the past year, a good 50-60% were asrock, 10% gigabyte, 10-15% msi 1-5% were asus.. just what ive come accross the past year..

Onboard gpu sucks, not worth ur time