Do you also have an inferior revision of gigabyte motherboard?

[BALADU]

Finally, the media realizes that gigabyte cutting costs with motherboard revisions at the cost of the customer..
I don't understand why they don't use another model name for such a revised product.. so shame

Source: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/gigabyte-pushing-it-a-motherboard-revision-too-far.html

• Rev. 1.1 features 3 mosfets for all 3 phases of the CPU power supply. Revision 2.0 has 2 mosfets per phase
• Rev. 1.1 has Dual BIOS, Rev. 2.0 only sports one BIOS chip
• Rev 1.1 has an extra ASMedia chip near the HDMI port; it's missing on Rev 2.0 mist
• Rev 2.0 has fewer SMD components surrounding the audio codec chip
• Rev 2.0 has fewer SMD components around the chipset

• GA-B85M-HD3 V2 lacks one power phase
• GA-B85M-D2 series V2 lacks one of the two dual-bioses
• GA-P85-D3 series V2 got smaller heatsinks
• GA-B85-HD3 / GA-Z87P-D3received a smaller PCB, smaller heatsinks

 

[CJCerny]

The Rev # is printed right on the motherboard, so it's not like they are trying to hide anything. I think this is a non-issue.

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

Are they both the same price ?

A revision does suggest that there have been changes.

I am surprised to see such a difference in the physical size though.

 

[Blue-Knight]

Do you also have an inferior revision of gigabyte motherboard?

What!? Revisions are generally an improvement they do to the motherboard or cut on things that does not need much attention and improves other important things or even fix potential problems.

My board is rev. 1.0, no other revisions are available. It seems it is too good already.

 

[rtwjunkie]

The Rev # is printed right on the motherboard, so it's not like they are trying to hide anything. I think this is a non-issue.

I actually think it IS an issue when a revision "dumbs down" or makes a product inferior. Rarely, if you buy online do you know what revision number you are getting. Someone will think they are getting 1.1 in this case, only to get 2.0...and had they known they would get 2.0, they might never have bought, because they would have known ahead of time that it was inferior.

I know I have always counted on a product being continually improved upon when I make purchases. It appears this is no longer the case.

 

[Sasqui]

I actually think it IS an issue when a revision "dumbs down" or makes a product inferior. Rarely, if you buy online do you know what revision number you are getting. Someone will think they are getting 1.1 in this case, only to get 2.0...and had they known they would get 2.0, they might never hve bought, because they would have known ahead of time that it was inferior.

I know I have always counted on a product being continually improved upon when I make purchases. It appears this is no longer the case.

I share that sentiment. I looked up the GA-D85M-D3H on Newegg and the stock photos show the Rev 1.x. Like you say... would you get the Rev 2.0?

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

Are the mounting holes even in the same place ?

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

I have a Gigabyte GA 970 A DS3

mine one is blue if i search for it the results are black.

 

[de.das.dude]

those are two different versions. one is the economical one and the other, the black one is not. the black one is a DS3P as far as i remember and NOT A DS3 like yours.
p stands for Pro (i presume, just like asus line up)


the black one
http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=5216#ov

the actual 970a ds3
http://www.gigabyte.in/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4122#ov

so i have no idea what you are talking about,

In any case, revisions are usually done to make things better.
As OP said the audio chip has fewer components sourrounding it.
there can be two reasons,
1. the audio chip in itself has been revised and those SMD components are now internal.
2. The SMD components were causing capaticance with the ground plane which in turn interfered with the audio output, Hence they were removed.
3. Number of mosfets hardly has anything to do with anything. If they are using better mostfet and better power design its better (mind you, less components actually mean better efficiency in almost all cases)
also they may have removed on phase as they found out it was not needed. Or they needed to remove it to keep costs down as component prices rose.
4. Dual bios..... that itself makes no sense as far as i can see. i have never heard a single case where someone needed dual bios. I myself used to do quite a bit of overclocking but never faced any issues that would have been eliminated with a dual BIOS.
again its down to costs. as manyfacturing costs arise, or new products are pushed into a different price range, these things are changed to suit the consumer.


That article has done a good job of pointing out missing parts, but they have given no proof of how this affects performance, if at all.


PS:- never had a gigabyte mobotherboard myself.

 

[GorbazTheDragon]

Already lost interest in their products after they dropped the IR powerstages of the Z87 boards for the SiRa mosfets in the Z97 ones.

 

[newtekie1]

Rev. 1.1 has Dual BIOS, Rev. 2.0 only sports one BIOS chip

I see two BIOS chips on the Rev. 2.0.

 

[fusionblu]

Finally, the media realizes that gigabyte cutting costs with motherboard revisions at the cost of the customer..
I don't understand why they don't use another model name for such a revised product.. so shame

Source: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/gigabyte-pushing-it-a-motherboard-revision-too-far.html

• Rev. 1.1 features 3 mosfets for all 3 phases of the CPU power supply. Revision 2.0 has 2 mosfets per phase
• Rev. 1.1 has Dual BIOS, Rev. 2.0 only sports one BIOS chip
• Rev 1.1 has an extra ASMedia chip near the HDMI port; it's missing on Rev 2.0 mist
• Rev 2.0 has fewer SMD components surrounding the audio codec chip
• Rev 2.0 has fewer SMD components around the chipset

• GA-B85M-HD3 V2 lacks one power phase
• GA-B85M-D2 series V2 lacks one of the two dual-bioses
• GA-P85-D3 series V2 got smaller heatsinks
• GA-B85-HD3 / GA-Z87P-D3received a smaller PCB, smaller heatsinks

As much as a fan I am of Gigabyte I do find they do cut corners quite often with motherboards of certain revisions and I have seen this a lot on their mid to lower end motherboards, and sometimes on their high-end motherboards too.
A good case study would be the Gigabyte GA-Z97-HD3 (rev. 2.0) where this one is the better model, but the other two revisions of 1.0 and 2.1 are inferior.

Differences in comparison of Rev 2.0 to the other two include:

Rev 1.0:
-Cons: Gold Heatsinks instead of Black ones (purely cosmetic, but there is still those personal preferences), inferior onboard sound card (lacks the circuit isolation feature).
-Positives: Besides the area for the onboard sound the amount of capacitors and other chips appear to be identical.
-Conclusion: Clearly an inferior revision.

Rev 2.1:
-Cons: Appears to be identical, but has slightly fewer capacitors and other chips, some other chips in the same location on the motherboard appear to be smaller than Rev 2.0 and detailed print around the CPU area on Rev 2.0 is missing entirely on Rev 2.1.
-Positives: Functionality appears to be consistent.
-Conclusion: Consistent overall equivalent with cheaper production costs.

I only took notice of this particular motherboard as my Dad wanted this for Christmas and after taking a risk from buying this motherboard under the simple product description of "Gigabyte GA-Z97-HD3" I was fortunate to have gotten the Rev 2.0 on first purchase attempt.
Both me and him had initially noticed Rev 1.0, but I also noticed Rev 2.1 with further research.

I am aware there have been many different revisions of the same board where the later revision was inferior to first and mid release motherboards.

I'm surprised to see that my own motherboard is still a single revision, but that might not last for long.

 

[CJCerny]

The term "revision" doesn't imply "improvement". It just means that changes were made. Change can be either an improvement or a change for the worse, in the eyes of the buyer. You just have to do your homework and be aware that revisions take place. It is certainly not uncommon for a business to make changes to a product to save themselves some cost or because certain parts are no longer available. That doesn't make them evil--just a business.

 

[AsRock]

Well they all print some thing on their sites to cover these kind of things if for the better or worse and surprised it has not or does not happen more often.

• All specifications are subject to change without notice. Please check with your supplier for exact offers. Products may not be available in all markets.
• PCB color and bundled software versions are subject to change without notice.

So ASUS which is were is quoted from you could end up with a pink mobo Just kidding .

 

[Fixit123]

You can add the B85M-DS3H and H81M-DS2 to the list.

http://www.enlacehw.com/2015/01/gigabyte-revision-reduccion.html

 

[craigo]

OMG! you are totally on to something bro.. look whar i found, both are sold by the same company and have the same model number (323i)
BUT becuase they where built at a different time they are obviously different products. call the cops! how can these big companies push us around like this?
how dare they revise the design like that DAMN THE MAN!

 

[micropage7]

first i think well known brand wont ruin their reputation by releasing bad product
if they take any revision it would be ok, since it wont affect much to performance
they may give another solution like less components but has same performance and by size you cant tell smaller is cheating since the component is smaller and more compact

better is do the benchmark than judging from the looks

 

[craigo]

Stop being so rational micropage7, Its a damn CONSPIRACY.. Sony are even in on it!
Look three PS3`s built at different times` ALL DIFFERENT!!

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

Car manufacturers do it all the time apparently, even on preorder cars.

Apparently there is very little you can do about it.

There is often some sort of caveat in the small print saying something like................

"the manufacturer reserves the right to change or otherwise adapt specifications without notification"

 

[neliz]

better is do the benchmark than judging from the looks

And hardware.info did just that, showing that the V1 would OC fine and the V2.0 would throttle even without OC.

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/583...sions-present-markedly-different-test-results

 

[rtwjunkie]

Actually, the point of this thread I believe, is not "how dare they do revisions." It's down to the premise that you buy online, see a photo and description, which is the motherboard, for instance, that you want, and then you get an inferior product because the "revision" removes features or performance that you want.

Let me give an example from socket 775 era. Gigabyte's fantastic king of the 775's, the EP45-UD3P motherboard had 3 revisions. Turns out that revision 3.0 is the best performing one, which most people know. Go to auction sites. People there that have the best revisions of motherboards, which sometimes are the ORIGINAL ones, make sure to advertise that fact, because other people in-the-know will pay more for that particular one.

Sure, it's pretty common to put out revisions, and most of the time (but not all) it is for the better. But you should not be sold something inferior, when it's not what you wanted, and the online site made no mention of the difference. That is NOT acceptable.

 

[neliz]

Sure, it's pretty common to put out revisions, and most of the time (but not all) it is for the better. But you should not be sold something inferior, when it's not what you wanted, and the online site made no mention of the difference. That is NOT acceptable.

And that's what the (original) article was about, not the link in the OT. the fact that this is sold with the same part and EAN number, while it is clearly a different (inferior) product is standard "bait and switch."

For products with high market visibility, like the X99 OC Champion (updated and cost-down OC Force), they suddenly do know how to rename properly.

 

[craigo]

That makes sense. revision should be stated in online sales and buyers should research their purchase on the manufacturers site to make sure.
I have had ris build issues arise from hardware in prebuilts changing mid rollout before..that was bad. though these boards being consumer gear and the rrp
adjustments that no-doubt took place between revisions would offset the impact somewhat.

Actually, the point of this thread I believe, is not "how dare they do revisions." It's down to the premise that you buy online, see a photo and description, which is the motherboard, for instance, that you want, and then you get an inferior product because the "revision" removes features or performance that you want.

Let me give an example from socket 775 era. Gigabyte's fantastic king of the 775's, the EP45-UD3P motherboard had 3 revisions. Turns out that revision 3.0 is the best performing one, which most people know. Go to auction sites. People there that have the best revisions of motherboards, which sometimes are the ORIGINAL ones, make sure to advertise that fact, because other people in-the-know will pay more for that particular one.

Sure, it's pretty common to put out revisions, and most of the time (but not all) it is for the better. But you should not be sold something inferior, when it's not what you wanted, and the online site made no mention of the difference. That is NOT acceptable.

 

[AsRock]

Well it all so happens to ram modules to, do they tell you ?, o hell no.
Should they ?, yes as some people need to match modules and changes should be clearly mark on package so they could be return without further issue's \ cost.

Some ram modules go single sided some change ram chips which screws people over no end as the reviews they read on a item would be totally false.

What should be done they should put stickers on if they change stuff, sellers should be more aware too so places like Amazon and Newegg could cut down on returns and even open boxes.

So if a item is released as 1.0 and then has a update sticker later on places like Newegg could make a new item letting you know what your getting after some research.

 

[neliz]

What should be done they should put stickers on if they change stuff, sellers should be more aware too so places like Amazon and Newegg could cut down on returns and even open boxes.

So if a item is released as 1.0 and then has a update sticker later on places like Newegg could make a new item letting you know what your getting after some research.

And that's the problem, they already put stickers on the box, with product number, serial number, EAN code etc. (probably a BOM number as well.) and unless you know the details, you're screwed.

Another great example is this: http://hw-db.com/memory/1979/avexir-avd3u24001104g-2cio-review/2
Sending an Overclocking reviewer high performance Hynix MFR to review, while the store bought part features Hynix CFR, which overclocks worse in general.