Gigabyte 6-Quad N680SLI-DQ6 Review - PAGE 9

We cheated :-)

Micah had the idea of putting those copper motherboard standoffs into the X to raise it off the back of the board. It worked, although it does apply more pressure to the holes, as long as you are careful it *should* be ok.

quote RichardU

How did you mount the ThermalRight Ultra 120? Doesn't it have an "X" support on the bottom of the board?

How did you mount the ThermalRight Ultra 120? Doesn't it have an "X" support on the bottom of the board?

I'm told a new BIOS will be released very soon

Please can someone tell me where this F4E bios for the ga-n680sli-dq6 can be downloaded?

The latest bios I see at the GA site is F3.

I've had occasion to use pcie slots for gigabit controllers as well... however I'd guess that 95%+ of people buying motherboards with multiple PCIe 16x or 8x slots are looking for multi-gpu systems

quote Hibo

I wonder when reading board reviews. There is no thought of using the pcie slots for anything but sli. Are you reviewers completely oblivious to the thousands of people who use those slots for real raid controllers and multimonitors?
gh

I wonder when reading board reviews. There is no thought of using the pcie slots for anything but sli. Are you reviewers completely oblivious to the thousands of people who use those slots for real raid controllers and multimonitors?
gh

Hi, after reading your comment I re-checked p.4 vs. the charts. It looks like the Gigabyte 965P-DS3 results were accidentally left out the last time charts were uploaded; I will upload charts with GA-965P results added shortly.

I have since received a newer BIOS for the Gigabyte N680SLI, and if I obtain better results, I will update the review.

This message was edited by bhenning on Apr 26 2007.

I thought it was a decent review except for ONE glaring factor. You promised to use a set of motherboards for comparison against the reviewed product and did NOT stick to that list. The use of the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 was irregular and only in selected benchmarks. That was not cool. What is the point of including it only in a few tests? If it scores equally to other board in the tests it didn't show up in, then that needs to be noted somewhere. Showing an item in the list of items to be tested and then not testing it for most of the testing is bad form. I've been a reviewer for over a decade and can promise you that is not considered acceptable.

And yes, I signed up to your forum just to comment on this review.