890FXA-UD5 revisions 2.0 i 2.1 changelog

[bungynik]

It's interesting that nobody didn't notice this hardware difference between those two revisions!!!

2.0


2.1


This is the Core Boost chip that have disappear on new revision of this MB. Did Gigabyte try to cut expenses with removing this chip and then create marketing about better memory handling with new revision??? They didn't remove the chip on UD7, so I suppose that chip is functioning OK.

.

[absic]

Interesting, I hadn't realised that and am at a loss to explain why Gigabyte have chosen to do this.

[bungynik]

For almost 10 days I'm googling about this in chance to find some answers, but it is incredible that nobody didn't notice this hardware change. Nowhere on the wed... I have translated Chinese, Japanese and every language where somebody mentioning something about revision subject... but not a single word about this!!!

[Dark Mantis]

It's very similar to what they have done on the Intel based X58A boards. They started off with many more phases and Gigabyte was extolling their virtues as more is better and then they bring out the rev2 boards and suddenly they have reuced the number of phases and now saying that they are better. I just can't understand that if that is the case then why does their flagship board the GA-X58A-UD9 still have it's full compliment of 24 phases

[bungynik]

Yep!  It looks like cutting expenses! They promote something and after some positive reviews, they decid that, now with good reputation , they can reduce costs without sacrifice the selling results. A little more marketing about "improvements" they made.... and voila, you have a "better" board revision with 2000+MHz Mem clock! I don't like this, but then... it's not Gigabyte invention. But they didn't forget to print "Core boost" on PCB of rev. 2.1, which by the way lacks this chip.. or maybe the white paint used for printing can emulate Core Boost chip.... or t5his is the Star Wars technology implemented in paint. 

So, I think that ones that have rev. 2.0 boards are lucky one, having fully featured board ready for rigorous testings. If you pay attention, the Solid state capacitors are also changed on 2.1.... and who knows what we can find if we start to looking under magnifying lens

[absic]

Yes, making these kind of "quiet" changes to motherboard specs are very disconcerting and are really not very fair to the end user. If you buy a board based on the early reviews and buy a later revision you aren't really buying the same board, are you?

Gigabyte and other Mobo manufacturers should really make these changes clearly identifiable so you know what you are getting.

[bungynik]

Yes, making these kind of "quiet" changes to motherboard specs are very disconcerting and are really not very fair to the end user. If you buy a board based on the early reviews and buy a later revision you aren't really buying the same board, are you?

Gigabyte and other Mobo manufacturers should really make these changes clearly identifiable so you know what you are getting.

+1

[JMDooley]

Looking at the manual for the GA-890FXA-UD5 Rev. 2.1 they still have the Core Unlock and CPU core Control listed.  Are these part of the Easy Tune 6 and maybe the chips was moved to another spot.
James

[Dark Mantis]

Hi and welcome to the forum. It would not be feasible to move the chip to another spot as you put it as it would require a complete redesign of the board layout.

[tgioiosa]

It also looks like the white/blue memory connectors are arranged differently on the Rev2.1 board.  I contacted Gigabyte for more details on the differences, but all I got was a very uninformative reply, see below:

[tgioiosa]

It also looks like the white/blue memory connectors are arranged differently on the Rev2.1 board.  I contacted Gigabyte for more details on the differences, but all I got was a very uninformative reply, see below:

Question - 977063
From :  Tony Gioiosa [ tgioiosa2@att.net ]
Sent :  9/19/2010 05:13
Question :  I am planning to purchase the GA-890FXA-UD5 soon, how will I be sure that I will get the latest version 2.1 of that motherboard? Is it already at the distributor NewEgg.com as version 2.1?

Did Gigabyte remove the Debug Display from the UD5 model? It looks like the board has provisions for the LED displays and the FPGA chip that drives it, but these parts aren't soldered in on the UD5.

Also, it looks from the board photos that some hardware may have been removed in Rev 2.1 for core unlocking? And if so, does that mean that the Rev 2.1 boards cannot perform core unlocking, where the Rev 2.0 could do it?

There is not much on the website that explains what else changed from Rev 2.0 to Rev 2.1, can you elaborate on the changes?

Thanks

Answer :  Dear Customer,

Rev 2.1 will not be released in the US/Canada until November. There are only minor changes in the BOM (which means component brands used in production). The performance and features are otherwise the same.

Thank you for choosing Gigabyte products
 

[Dark Mantis]

What you have to do is go to the webpage where you got your reply nad on it there is a prompt for a another question. Fill that in with Please answer my original question properly and in full and send it off. Usually what happens is they send out stock replies (I often even wonder whether the operator even speaks English) to these questions and if they get no reply then it is sorted. Try this and then let us know what they say.

[bungynik]

Well I don't think that he will get the clear and straight answer. I assume that they relay on the fact that it's hard to notice that kind of change, so no one gonna bother with this. That is why they didn't gave us any proper revision changelog.

[Dark Mantis]

Possibly, but we will never know if we don't try will we? The OP has asked a direct question and requires a direct answer.
Take for example their question

Also, it looks from the board photos that some hardware may have been removed in Rev 2.1 for core unlocking? And if so, does that mean that the Rev 2.1 boards cannot perform core unlocking, where the Rev 2.0 could do it?

It needs to be answered correctly and in full otherwise it would be misleading. We shall have to wait and see what the response is.

[bungynik]

Yes, but the answer will be, possibly, that the MB is fully capable to perform core unlock. Core Boost chip is there just to assure more stable hardware control of unlocking. As you know, this function can be performed without that chip, like on many other MB from another manufacturers, as well as Gigabyte. But I'm pretty sure that they will not admit, at least not directly, a removing of hardware component, around which they have made a lot of marketing.

But if you ask them something like:

"Dear sis, I have noticed that you have removed Core Boost chip and related components on Rev. 2.1 of motherboard. Will you be so kind to explain the purpose of this action, and are you experienced any problem with Core Boost chip in the past, so you were forced to remove the same."... I'm not sure that you will get any answer on this kind of question.