Friday, January 22nd 2016

MSI Intros 970A-G43 Plus Socket AM3+ Motherboard

MSI unveiled the 970A-G43 Plus socket AM3+ motherboard. Priced under $100, this board offers a modern feature-set for mid-range gaming PC builds based on AMD FX processors. The board supports socket AM3+ processors with TDP of up to 125W. The board is based on AMD 970 + SB950 chipset. It draws power from a combination of 24-pin ATX and 8-pin EPS power connectors, and conditions it for the CPU with a 4+1 phase VRM. The CPU socket is wired to four DDR3 DIMM slots, which support up to 32 GB of DDR3-2133 MHz memory.

Expansion slots include one PCI-Express 2.0 x16, featuring a reinforcement brace; one PCI-Express 2.0 x16 (electrical x4), and two each of PCIe 2.0 x1 and legacy PCI. Storage connectivity includes six SATA 6 Gb/s ports. Modern connectivity includes two USB 3.1 (10 Gb/s) ports; two USB 3.0 (front-panel) ports, 8-channel HD audio (Realtek ALC892), and gigabit Ethernet (Realtek controller). The board is driven by UEFI firmware, and supports modern Windows 8.1/10 features.
Add your own comment

65 Comments on MSI Intros 970A-G43 Plus Socket AM3+ Motherboard

#1
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
:roll:
Posted on Reply
#2
Aderbas
MSI not had to do and , "Well, we will launch it"
Posted on Reply
#3
natr0n
There are a few new AM3+ boards out on newegg with 8+2 phase.
Posted on Reply
#4
Jborg
:banghead::banghead::banghead:
btarunr said:
, and conditions it for the CPU with a 4+1 phase VRM
AM3+ processors with TDP of up to 125W.
Posted on Reply
#5
-The_Mask-
Jborg said:
:banghead::banghead::banghead:
There is nothing wrong with a 4+1 VRM design as long as it can deliver enough current. A 4+1 VRM design can easily be a much better design then a 8+2 VRM design, it all depends on the components that are used.

Or do you also still believe in the MHz myth? Only look at the video memory when buying a graphics card? And think that more watts are better when buying a PSU? :roll:
Posted on Reply
#6
lemonadesoda
"Expansion slots include one PCI-Express 2.0 x16, featuring a reinforcement brace; one PCI-Express 2.0 x16 (electrical x4), and two each of PCIe 2.0 x1 and legacy PCI"

does not stack with the picture!
Posted on Reply
#7
Jborg
-The_Mask- said:
There is nothing wrong with a 4+1 VRM design as long as it can deliver enough current. A 4+1 VRM design can easily be a much better design then a 8+2 VRM design, it all depends on the components that are used.

Or do you also still believe in the MHz myth? Only look at the video memory when buying a graphics card? And think that more watts are better when buying a PSU? :roll:
Almost every single issue I have seen AMD users have is related to the poor power phase designs, and are always a 4+1 design.... and always with 125W AM3 CPUs.... So I don't really see any point to your petty argument. This board is only 5 years late anyway.

Did I ever say anything about what I believe? Move on and find your next person to judge.
Posted on Reply
#8
gdallsk
Can this chipset die already please?
Posted on Reply
#9
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
-The_Mask- said:
There is nothing wrong with a 4+1 VRM design as long as it can deliver enough current. A 4+1 VRM design can easily be a much better design then a 8+2 VRM design, it all depends on the components that are used.

Or do you also still believe in the MHz myth? Only look at the video memory when buying a graphics card? And think that more watts are better when buying a PSU? :roll:
Yeah, except you missed the part where the VRMs don't even have a heat sink. :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#10
-The_Mask-
Please don't reply if you don't know how a VRM works, an efficient VRM doesn't even need a heatsink.

A 4+1 design that can deliver 30A for each phase is a bad idea. A 4+1 design that can deliver 60A for each phase with a high efficiency is perfect and doesn't even need a heatsink.

It's like saying a FX-6300 is a better CPU then a I5 6500 because a I5 6500 is faster then a I5 6400 because of the higher frequency. So then a FX-6300 needs to be much better because the higher clock and more cores.

Most people here know that's bull shit, but still believe that every phase in every VRM is the same. I find that strange. So don't say it's bad before you actually know the specifications of the VRM.
Posted on Reply
#11
Jborg
-The_Mask- said:
Please don't reply if you don't know how a VRM works, an efficient VRM doesn't even need a heatsink.
I will openly admit I don't fully understand how VRM's work. But from what I have seen from @Aquinus he knows ALOT about a wide variety of things related to PC's

So again, be careful with your assumptions.
Posted on Reply
#12
PP Mguire
How about we all agree that this cheap board won't have 60A power delivery in each phase. :roll:Be real now.
Posted on Reply
#14
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
-The_Mask- said:
A 4+1 design that can deliver 60A for each phase with a high efficiency is perfect and doesn't even need a heatsink.
A: MOSFETs are never perfect unless they're superconducting, which they're not.
B: More phases of the same kind of MOFSET will always reduce heat because the heat is proportional to the square of the current going through a circuit.
C: If you think that budget board is going to have MOSFETs that can handle 60A per phase without a heatsink, you're delusional.
D: Fewer phases usually means more switching and MOSFETs produce most of their heat when they're changing states (on to off or off to on,) not when they're simply on or off.

Even efficient VRMs are going to create heat and at higher power draws, that amount of heat will only increase.
-The_Mask- said:
Please don't reply if you don't know how a VRM works, an efficient VRM doesn't even need a heatsink.
Keep your comments to yourself if you're going to be a twit about it.
Posted on Reply
#15
-The_Mask-
Jborg said:

So again, be careful with your assumptions.
An assumption would be, saying it's a bad motherboard VRM before actually knowing the specifications.

PP Mguire said:
How about we all agree that this cheap board won't have 60A power delivery in each phase. :roll:Be real now.
Well we don't know, it's only an assumption. It defiantly could be a bad design, but everyone already thinks it's a bad design before even knowing the specifications, that's just stupidity.
Posted on Reply
#16
PP Mguire
It's called an educated guess. This board has a 970 chipset and judging by the design (and model #) will be sub $100. Like I said, be real now. What's stupidity is arguing over VRMs on a board that literally 0 people will care about in 10 minutes.
Posted on Reply
#17
hojnikb
In any case, its safe to say this thing will die if fx9590 is slapped into it.
Posted on Reply
#18
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
-The_Mask- said:
An assumption would be, saying it's a bad motherboard VRM before actually knowing the specifications.
I would wager a bet that I have melted the mosfets on more MSI boards, than you have owned in your life. MSI is not known for using quality mosfets. I do not have to know specifications to know that this will not handle a 125w CPU under load.
Posted on Reply
#19
Casecutter
Batou1986 said:
Buying an AM3+ platform in 2016
Cra... I agree, but there are guys building with i34170's on a LGA1150 and paying more than FX6300 and 970 as they think there's some upgrade there still.

Other than MSI had some reason to dump parts and this is a creative solution from marketing. It just stupid late.
Posted on Reply
#20
Batou1986
Casecutter said:
Cra... I agree, but there are guys building with i34170's on a LGA1150 and paying more than FX6300 and 970 as they think there's some upgrade there still.

Other than MSI had some reason to dump parts and this is a creative solution from marketing. It just stupid late.
Yea but with the intel you can at least go to a I5 or I7 going from say a fx4100 to a 8350 isn't much of an upgrade.

That's why I think its better to get a cheap celeron or i3 over the cheap FX chips
Posted on Reply
#21
tabascosauz
-The_Mask- said:
An assumption would be, saying it's a bad motherboard VRM before actually knowing the specifications.

Well we don't know, it's only an assumption. It defiantly could be a bad design, but everyone already thinks it's a bad design before even knowing the specifications, that's just stupidity.
All those AM3/AM3+ owners who have been burned by MSI 970 boards must be wrong, blind and stupid then.

Nearly all of MSI's 970 boards are problematic in part due to their VRM design. Let's recap: no MOSFET heatsinks, the exact same 4+1 that MSI uses everywhere, with the same conventional MOSFETs/MOSFET layout.

From the past failures of MSI's 4+1 collection, as well as the "HIGH FAILURE RATE" and "AVOID FOR OC" and "AVOID FOR 8-CORE" plastered everywhere in red on MSI's page in the OCN AM3+ VRM Database, I think that's a pretty good indication that it's a shitty design that needs to go.

If you want to buy a relic of a 4+1 design with a few bits of added bling such as a black PCB, slightly updated audio, and a metallic PCIe slot, go ahead. That doesn't make it a good board, and it doesn't make careful scrutiny a display of stupidity.
Posted on Reply
#23
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
-The_Mask- said:
Guess reading is difficult...
Maybe you should come back when you get better at it. :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#24
Casecutter
Batou1986 said:
intel you can at least go to a I5 or I7
While that's the normal line of reasoning that might not hold up in a 12-18 months. Intel is great of drying that pond almost instantly when the decide to move, it not like such box'd LGA1150 are sitting on shelves for moths and at great prices. You can go used and that's how it normally plays, however at such a point most guys with such chip's will be divesting of DDR3 so rather be dumping the "whole kit and caboodle". The chance of snagging a nice chip on it's own at Ebay or C_List for a good price isn't always a simple task in the good times, as that what everyone is after some good bidding wars.. More often by ten you'll be looking at CPU's still in a Mobo with memory, and there not a lot of cost benefit in that, even if you think you'll "off" your complete i3 board, memory. I've built several kid's gaming machines and I told them up front it's a losing position to jump in now, consider the lowest budget that can meet need and expectations and be ready to drop the whole box at a great discount when it stop giving you good play and move on.
Posted on Reply
#25
-The_Mask-
Lol in a year or so I hope that people here are looking at the current the VRM can deliver and the quality of the VRM instead of how many phases a VRM has. I guess this forum isn't there yet...

Till next year I guess.:roll:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment