GPU Prices Are Seemingly Dropping

It feels a lot like they added go-fast LED's and raceboy shaped aggressive looking non-functional (or at least, no more function than traditional ones) heatsinks, and then cranked the pricing knob to 11.
Check out the ASUS ProArt Z690: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/ProArt/ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI/

This is the board I'm looking at. Main draw for me is that it's the cheapest Z690 board with real Thunderbolt integration, meaning not a separate AIC that eats a four-lane PCIe slot.

And that's really all I care about, as Z690 boards come with three or more M.2 slots and at least one x4 slot for my X550-T2.
 
Check out the ASUS ProArt Z690: https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/ProArt/ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI/

This is the board I'm looking at. Main draw for me is that it's the cheapest Z690 board with real Thunderbolt integration, meaning not a separate AIC that eats a four-lane PCIe slot.

And that's really all I care about, as Z690 boards come with three or more M.2 slots and at least one x4 slot for my X550-T2.

$480 would have been a yikes for me, if not for the last motherboard I bought...

I'm curious. What do you use Thunderbolt for? I've literally never come across anything I'd need or want it for in a desktop.

In a laptop, where you don't have PCIe slots, I can see it being useful, which is why I've always thought of it as "a mobile thing".

I could see myself using it to connect an eGPU to a laptop or something like that, but other than that I honestly don't have a clue what people actually use it for.
 
I'm curious. What do you use Thunderbolt for? I've literally never come across anything I'd need or want it for in a desktop.
Everything from better USB hubs to faster external drives, to audio interfaces that have much lower latency than USB.

As well as being able to share any of that between desktop and laptops.

And if anyone had built a DDR4 Alder Lake board with Thunderbolt 4 onboard, like they did for Rocket Lake, I'd already own one. Apparently that's just not an option somehow.
 
So, the prices have still trended upwards, but not as much as inflation makes it seem.
I don't think that really changed anything. The jump between the 1650 and 3050 is ... striking no matter how you look at it - and was more or less my point.

You do mention that jitter as the price kind of oscillates between lower $100 and mid-$100, but I think that's mostly due to there were also some other cards in some of those generations (x40 series, Ti editions, etc) that kinda played around with the pricing tiers a bit.
 
A) Inflation lately has been absolutely crazy, and is affecting everything. So there is that. But I don't think that accounts for price increases over the past couple of generations that GPUs have seen. Maybe you could make the case for Moore's Second Law coming into play.

B) I think price has to be relative to performance. Are today's flagships that much faster relative to the rest of the product line that previous generations were? I'm not comparing previous to next generation (generational/tech increase), I'm comparing inside of a given generation. You can make a seperate case for generational price/performance deltas, but that has to consider the entire lineup, not just flagship (more on that below).

C) Do you consider a card like the Titan to be a flagship in a given line or a separate-but-equal prosumer product line; and to follow up on that, a card like the 3090 to be a replacement for the Titan or Flagship for Turing?

I don't know the answer to B - it would be interesting to see some data, say, how a 2080Ti stacks up relative to other Pascal cards versus, say, a 1080Ti or a 980Ti.

Same with C, would be kinda the same as the previous statement only throw Titans into the mix.

Just some initial data:
780Ti - $699 MSRP
980Ti - $649 MSRP
1080Ti - $699 MSRP
2080Ti - $799 MSRP
3080Ti - $1,199 MSRP

I think I'm ok with Flagships going up as high as whatever people are willing to pay. I always have a budget and I look for the best I can that fits inside my budget. I don't necessarily need "Flagship", so top-tier cards and their prices are only relevant if they happen to fit inside that budget. But I do look for a certain amount of performance increase - I don't just upgrade because something is new: it has to be better than what I have, by a big enough margin, and fit inside my budget. Usually I look for cards that roughly double the current performance, and I wait until I can get that inside of about a $500 (+/-) budget. If that takes years, it takes years. At current pace, it may take decades... I have noticed it takes longer and longer to hit those metrics. It was 3 years. Then 4 years. Last one was 6 years and a big budget increase that I probably shouldn't have done.

What concerns me more is that we aren't seeing generational value increase. When I say value, I mean performance relative to price. Value in today's GPU market has actually been trending negatively -- it costs more to get the same performance today than it did 3-4 years ago. We have to reverse that trendline and get back to positive value, and then we have to sustain that positive value trend for a while just to get back to where we were with respect to performance per dollar spent.

And we could blame that on the current economy, except we started to see the value line degrade well before that -- when Turing came out, the prices started to edge up, but apart from RT/DLSS, rasterizing performance didn't move nearly as much. You could say the all-in value considering everything added to it, but you could also point to the number of gaming titles and such that supported it at the time and make a strong case that it doesn't add much, if anything at all (and you can still make that case with a straight face) -- the added value of the new tech is very much dependent on your willingness to futureproof and believe that tech would be utilized in the future efficiently. I'd also point out during this time AMD deprioritized graphics, particularly high end graphics, and that was very much a contributing factor: I don't hold either company blameless.

I would equate the value proposition of RT/DLSS/FSR to buying a game and hoping they fix it in the patches -- some people were happy with Cyberpunk when it shipped, some people think it's fine now after a few patches, and others are still waiting for it to be fixed: I see RT/DLSS in the same vein. Just like some people think RT/DLSS was totally worth it when Turing shipped, some people think there are enough titles out today to justify it, and others think it still isn't worth anything extra yet.
Note that there is no "Titan" branded card this generation. NVIDIA has replaced the Titan moniker with the RTX 3090. By price and by feature set, this makes sense. That's why I described it as being at a reduced price compared to the Titan V and on the same level as previous Titan cards. These are perhaps flagship cards, but they also straddle the high end gaming and prosumer markets.

But your pricing list is incorrect. The RTX 2080 Ti's were never $799.99. Not even close. They were all $1,099 or more. Turing cards were the ones that seriously broke the pattern with the Titan cards coming in at $1,299.99 or more in prior generations. That generation, the Titan V cost $2,500 and the RTX 2080 Ti, the fastest pure gaming card was $1,099 or $1,199. I can't recall. I think they were actually $1,200 but it wasn't uncommon to see the EVGA and other reference cards for $1,099 at Microcenter.

I'm with you on this, but even your old 2015 comparison prices were a little bit on the crazy side.
Well, the $450 board I mentioned specifically was an outlier and at the extreme end of the spectrum. That board was the GIGABYTE Z170X G1 Gaming 7. It included things like Thunderbolt support and a built-in Creative Labs Soundblaster Core3D. There are also things like PCIe lane switches and additional ASICs, higher end voltage controllers and a very beefy VRM implementation that made it so expensive. It was the most expensive board, but it was probably the best board of its generation.

Most were $350-$399 on the high end.
It doesn't seem like so long ago a typical motherboard cost you between $79 and $129. The most expensive one ever was probably ~$250 for an over-the-top board. As recently as 2010, a $100 motherboard was a pretty **** good motherboard.
I remember those days too. They were a very long time ago. I am going to disagree with 2010 and a $100 being a pretty **** good board. It was a lot longer ago that this was the case. You could get decent boards for $100, but they were far from the best out there.
When I bought my Asus P9x79 WS in 2011 for $399 it was an absolutely unheard of ridiculously high price for a motherboard. I justified it based on the fact that it was a "workstation board" (whatever the hell that really means anymore) and that it probably would last me longer than ones I had had in the past. Between my $600 i7-3930k and $400 motherboard I had buyers remorse for months. I couldn't believe I had just dropped a grand on only a CPU and a motherboard, something that combined had used to cost me ~$350.
To be fair, that was an HEDT setup. It bridges the gap between the extreme gaming rig and the workstation.
Little did I know what was coming.

What I paid for my Asus ROG Zenith II Extrreme Alpha makes me cringe a little.

Now granted, they have been adding more features to them (most of which I don't want or need) and the chips they put on them have been going up in price, but still. The price increases in motherboards have been ridiculous and unwarranted.

It feels a lot like they added go-fast LED's and raceboy shaped aggressive looking non-functional (or at least, no more function than traditional ones) heatsinks, and then cranked the pricing knob to 11.
People need to get over the RGB LED's. If you don't like them that's fine but you aren't paying anything for them. A board like the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme has a lot of things on it that drive up the price. The RGB LED's are the tiniest fraction of that. RGB LED's are almost free compared to everything else.

On high end boards you are paying for better voltage controllers, 90A MOSFETs, double the inductor count, specialized ASICs for fan control and flashing the BIOS without a CPU and memory installed, BIOS flashback features, onboard power and reset controls, additional USB, Thunderbolt, beefier VRM heat sinks, etc. Even things like your PCIe slots are more costly due to nicer locking tabs and steel reinforcement for them. In this specific case there is also the I/O shield mounted OLED screen, special headers for things like the fan extension card, water flow sensors, external thermal probes, etc. The list goes on and on.
 
Last edited:
People need to get over the RGB LED's. If you don't like them that's fine but you aren't paying anything for them. A board like the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme has a lot of things on it that drive up the price. The RGB LED's are the tiniest fraction of that. RGB LED's are almost free compared to everything else.

On high end boards you are paying for better voltage controllers, 90A MOSFETs, double the inductor count, specialized ASICs for fan control and flashing the BIOS without a CPU and memory installed, BIOS flashback features, onboard power and reset controls, additional USB, Thunderbolt, beefier VRM heat sinks, etc. Even things like your PCIe slots are more costly due to nicer locking tabs and steel reinforcement for them. In this specific case there is also the I/O shield mounted OLED screen, special headers for things like the fan extension card, water flow sensors, external thermal probes, etc. The list goes on and on.

Well, yeah, I'd agree with you from a "cost plus" perspective. The LED's aren't costing the manufacturer very much, but in consumer products the trick is to find things that don't cost very much to you, but in the eyes of the typical consumer add value, and make them willing to pay more, and charge for it anyway. Thats how they drive larger profit margins. Pay a tiny bit more for a for a feature, charge a lot more for it.

In the gaming space, fancy looking heatsinks and RGB LED's fill that space.

I understand that my Zenith II Extreme alpha has a lot of stuff that drives up the cost, but quite frankly, most of it I could do without. The only thing I like that is on my Zenith II that wasn't on my old p9x79 WS are the sturdier PCIe slots. Over time, the plastic on the P9X79 got brittle, with the tabs on the back of the PCIe slots and on the memory sockets breaking. I don't see that happening with this board.

The functional stuff (beefier VRM's & MOSFET's, ) are good, maybe even necessary on a Threadripper, but honestly, I've never even tried overclocking this CPU, and I don't think I will. Unlike in the old days, the gains to effort ratio just don't make it worth it.

Ability to flash the BIOS without a CPU/RAM, and bios flashback are nice to have in a pinch I guess. I've never had a need for features like this in my 30+ years of doing this, but still nice to have I guess for that once in a lifetime moment when they suddenly become really important.

Everything else is a dumb waste for me:

1.) I don't use thunderbolt. (I don't even remember seeing it on the specs of my board, but I'll take your word for it being there) But if I wanted it and didn't have it, on a Threadripper I could easily just install a PCIe card as I have all these lanes and slots. No need to drive up the cost of the board for this.

2.) Aesthetic stuff (integrated IO Shield cover, fancy looking heatsinks, LED's) We've already covered this. I don't give a rats *** about motherboard aesthetics.

3.) Sound chips: I don't remember what was on my old p9x79 WS. I never used it. In the beginning I continued to use my X-Fi Titanium HD, but over time I migrated to various USB based external DAC solutions, and those just carried over to my new board.

4.) On board OLED Screen: This thing is moronic. I don't know why they even bothered putting it on the board. I guess someone out there likes it because they think it looks cool. (That someone isn't me)

5.) All the crazy M.2 slots and the proprietary RAM-looking slot (DIMM.2?) that serves as an M.2 expansion board. Don't know why I'd need 5x m.2 slots in total. (I'm using 2 right now, and that's sufficient) I'd rather just have more PCIe slots. That way, if I really wanted to, I could install one of those 16x PCIe to 4x m.2 boards I have three of in my server. PCIe is simply so much more useful because I can pop in anything I want in there and not be tied to the decisions ASUS made for me.

A board this size has room for 8 PCIe slots. One almost inevitably gets covered by the two slot GPU. So, I'd wan't 7 16x (physical) slots on the board, electrically populating them as best possible. I'm thinking like two of them 16x, three of them 8x, and two more 4x. That totals 64. Then maybe add two m.2 slots on board that share lanes with PCIe slots. You know, one of the 4x slots gets disabled if an m.2 drive is in one of the slots, and one of the 8x slots drops to 4x if the other m.2 slot is populated. That would give me the most flexibility. I just want them to not waste PCIe lanes on on board junk I'll never use.

One thing that is missing from this Zenith II that is baffling to me is PCIe bifurcation. No excuse for this feature to be missing at this price level.

I'd still prefer a barebones old school green board, with traditional basic looking heatsinks, even at the same price. Heck, I'd even pay more for it. Simplicity is always better. Less **** to break/go wrong.

I do want the functional stuff though. Beefy VRM's and MOSFET's, lots of sturdy PCIe slots, etc.

I can hear the next comment right away. If you didn't want this stuff, why did you buy this motherboard?

1.) Initially I didn't. I went with a Gigabyte Aorus Master.
a.) I didn't like this board either. It too had a lot of useless features I wasn't interested in (including dual on board sound chips for some stupid reason), and not enough PCIe slots.
b.) It failed on me and killed two threadrippers, forcing me to search locally for whatever TRX40 motherboard I could find in the middle of the pandemic supply woes. The only one I could find anywhere locally was an open box Zenith II at MicroCenter (and I didn't get much of an open box discount on it...)

2.) Even now, I can't find my ideal motherboard. All of the manufacturers have gone gamer crazy, and over-on board accessorized.

Give me a motherboard that is basic green or black, as many PCIe slots as possible, and nothing integrated on board, except what is included in the chipset (and thus unavoidable anyway) And give me back any spare chipset lanes as extra PCIe or m.2 slots. Give me PCIE bifurcation! Give me IOMMU/VT-D and ECC RAM Support. No RGB/LED/OLED Screens, no covered/integrated IO Shields and heatsinks are basic silver with visible heat pipes. Functional, not aesthetic. Also give me the beefiest VRM's and MOSFETS you can.

Essentially I want a Supermicro server board in a desktop form factor (EATX is fine), that can run desktop CPU's (server chips tend to have more cores than I need and and those cores are always clocked too low) but has typical enterprise features (ECC, PCIe Bifurcation, IOMMU/VT-D) and that has overclocking features enabled along with the VRM's and MOSFET's to best take advantage of them. That would be the PERFECT motherboard.

There's a motherboard I'd go stand in line and pay over MSRP for.

Something like this (but designed for TRX40 instead of the WX models would be perfect:

1643233700092.png
 
You are very much in the minority on a lot of things. Board aesthetics count for a lot when most cases have a windowed side panel are are one third tempered glass.
 
You are very much in the minority on a lot of things. Board aesthetics count for a lot when most cases have a windowed side panel are are one third tempered glass.

Well, there are two things for me.

1.) I truly don't care about board aesthetics much or at all. If I could still buy a decent case without a window I would. To me the best computer is the computer that is never seen (or heard). It's whats on screen that is important

2.) If I had to choose an aesthetic, I would choose the simple one every single day over the riced up look with ground effects / spaceship from close encounters of the third kind lights.

My preferred aesthetic in PC's is similar to my preferred aesthetic in cars.

Large dark colored late model Euro sedan, 100% factory, with nice factory wheels = Classy as hell.

Stanced Honda with ground effect lighting, fart can, tinted windows, etc. = Complete classless trash.

I liked it when PC;s looked like this:

1643250577940.png

All classy and professional. No flash.
 
Well, there are two things for me.

1.) I truly don't care about board aesthetics much or at all. If I could still buy a decent case without a window I would. To me the best computer is the computer that is never seen (or heard). It's whats on screen that is important

2.) If I had to choose an aesthetic, I would choose the simple one every single day over the riced up look with ground effects / spaceship from close encounters of the third kind lights.

My preferred aesthetic in PC's is similar to my preferred aesthetic in cars.

Large dark colored late model Euro sedan, 100% factory, with nice factory wheels = Classy as hell.

Stanced Honda with ground effect lighting, fart can, tinted windows, etc. = Complete classless trash.

I liked it when PC;s looked like this:

View attachment 1437

All classy and professional. No flash.
fractal design define series should be up your alley then
 
fractal design define series should be up your alley then
I was a 'Define' acolyte right up until I got tired of digging round inside. Ran a Define 3 and then a Define 5.

Now I'm in a Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL. Giant fishtank of a case that's easy to work in. Case is white, fans are white, LEDs are set to white. All ten of them with RGB. And there are three more non-RGB in an enclosed area.
 
I was a 'Define' acolyte right up until I got tired of digging round inside. Ran a Define 3 and then a Define 5.

Now I'm in a Lian Li O11 Dynamic XL. Giant fishtank of a case that's easy to work in. Case is white, fans are white, LEDs are set to white. All ten of them with RGB. And there are three more non-RGB in an enclosed area.

I prefered my define 6 over my regular 011, find it too small but it will have to do for now.
 
Well, yeah, I'd agree with you from a "cost plus" perspective. The LED's aren't costing the manufacturer very much, but in consumer products the trick is to find things that don't cost very much to you, but in the eyes of the typical consumer add value, and make them willing to pay more, and charge for it anyway. Thats how they drive larger profit margins. Pay a tiny bit more for a for a feature, charge a lot more for it.

In the gaming space, fancy looking heatsinks and RGB LED's fill that space.

I understand that my Zenith II Extreme alpha has a lot of stuff that drives up the cost, but quite frankly, most of it I could do without. The only thing I like that is on my Zenith II that wasn't on my old p9x79 WS are the sturdier PCIe slots. Over time, the plastic on the P9X79 got brittle, with the tabs on the back of the PCIe slots and on the memory sockets breaking. I don't see that happening with this board.

The functional stuff (beefier VRM's & MOSFET's, ) are good, maybe even necessary on a Threadripper, but honestly, I've never even tried overclocking this CPU, and I don't think I will. Unlike in the old days, the gains to effort ratio just don't make it worth it.

Ability to flash the BIOS without a CPU/RAM, and bios flashback are nice to have in a pinch I guess. I've never had a need for features like this in my 30+ years of doing this, but still nice to have I guess for that once in a lifetime moment when they suddenly become really important.

Everything else is a dumb waste for me:

1.) I don't use thunderbolt. (I don't even remember seeing it on the specs of my board, but I'll take your word for it being there) But if I wanted it and didn't have it, on a Threadripper I could easily just install a PCIe card as I have all these lanes and slots. No need to drive up the cost of the board for this.

2.) Aesthetic stuff (integrated IO Shield cover, fancy looking heatsinks, LED's) We've already covered this. I don't give a rats *** about motherboard aesthetics.

3.) Sound chips: I don't remember what was on my old p9x79 WS. I never used it. In the beginning I continued to use my X-Fi Titanium HD, but over time I migrated to various USB based external DAC solutions, and those just carried over to my new board.

4.) On board OLED Screen: This thing is moronic. I don't know why they even bothered putting it on the board. I guess someone out there likes it because they think it looks cool. (That someone isn't me)

5.) All the crazy M.2 slots and the proprietary RAM-looking slot (DIMM.2?) that serves as an M.2 expansion board. Don't know why I'd need 5x m.2 slots in total. (I'm using 2 right now, and that's sufficient) I'd rather just have more PCIe slots. That way, if I really wanted to, I could install one of those 16x PCIe to 4x m.2 boards I have three of in my server. PCIe is simply so much more useful because I can pop in anything I want in there and not be tied to the decisions ASUS made for me.

A board this size has room for 8 PCIe slots. One almost inevitably gets covered by the two slot GPU. So, I'd wan't 7 16x (physical) slots on the board, electrically populating them as best possible. I'm thinking like two of them 16x, three of them 8x, and two more 4x. That totals 64. Then maybe add two m.2 slots on board that share lanes with PCIe slots. You know, one of the 4x slots gets disabled if an m.2 drive is in one of the slots, and one of the 8x slots drops to 4x if the other m.2 slot is populated. That would give me the most flexibility. I just want them to not waste PCIe lanes on on board junk I'll never use.

One thing that is missing from this Zenith II that is baffling to me is PCIe bifurcation. No excuse for this feature to be missing at this price level.

I'd still prefer a barebones old school green board, with traditional basic looking heatsinks, even at the same price. Heck, I'd even pay more for it. Simplicity is always better. Less **** to break/go wrong.

I do want the functional stuff though. Beefy VRM's and MOSFET's, lots of sturdy PCIe slots, etc.

I can hear the next comment right away. If you didn't want this stuff, why did you buy this motherboard?

1.) Initially I didn't. I went with a Gigabyte Aorus Master.
a.) I didn't like this board either. It too had a lot of useless features I wasn't interested in (including dual on board sound chips for some stupid reason), and not enough PCIe slots.
b.) It failed on me and killed two threadrippers, forcing me to search locally for whatever TRX40 motherboard I could find in the middle of the pandemic supply woes. The only one I could find anywhere locally was an open box Zenith II at MicroCenter (and I didn't get much of an open box discount on it...)

2.) Even now, I can't find my ideal motherboard. All of the manufacturers have gone gamer crazy, and over-on board accessorized.

Give me a motherboard that is basic green or black, as many PCIe slots as possible, and nothing integrated on board, except what is included in the chipset (and thus unavoidable anyway) And give me back any spare chipset lanes as extra PCIe or m.2 slots. Give me PCIE bifurcation! Give me IOMMU/VT-D and ECC RAM Support. No RGB/LED/OLED Screens, no covered/integrated IO Shields and heatsinks are basic silver with visible heat pipes. Functional, not aesthetic. Also give me the beefiest VRM's and MOSFETS you can.

Essentially I want a Supermicro server board in a desktop form factor (EATX is fine), that can run desktop CPU's (server chips tend to have more cores than I need and and those cores are always clocked too low) but has typical enterprise features (ECC, PCIe Bifurcation, IOMMU/VT-D) and that has overclocking features enabled along with the VRM's and MOSFET's to best take advantage of them. That would be the PERFECT motherboard.

There's a motherboard I'd go stand in line and pay over MSRP for.

Something like this (but designed for TRX40 instead of the WX models would be perfect:

View attachment 1436


I have to take that back. My Rog Zenith II Extreme Alpha does have PCIe bifurcation, they just call it "PCIe RAID Mode" which threw me off.
 
I have to take that back. My Rog Zenith II Extreme Alpha does have PCIe bifurcation, they just call it "PCIe RAID Mode" which threw me off.

So that board can handle eight PCI-e 16x slots at 8x speeds? Think I might buy this board with a low end Threadripper CPU.


edit
On second thought maybe not. Appears the board is EOL and the cheapest I found it was like $1500. Didn't check eBay, but I'd like to find a board that can handle eight x16 slots at x8 speeds for a reasonable price.
 
I'll give ya tree fiddy for it.

I had a brain fart, didn't realize you were talking about the Supermicro board.

I don't have that one, I ahve an Asus ROG Zenith II Extreme Alpha.

Mine only has four slots. Two 16x and two 8x. The rest of the lanes are allocated to Chipset/onboard stuff/m.2
 
I was talking about the Asus ROG Zenith II Extreme Alpha. The one that has the PCIe bifurcation, but I only looked at the pictures and seen 4 16x slots, but didn't realize two of them were wired for x8. Which means with PCIe bifurcation you can do six 16x slots @ 8x. Correct?

16x@16x split into two 16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@16x split into two 16x@8x
16x@8x

So you'd have
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
 
I was talking about the Asus ROG Zenith II Extreme Alpha. The one that has the PCIe bifurcation, but I only looked at the pictures and seen 4 16x slots, but didn't realize two of them were wired for x8. Which means with PCIe bifurcation you can do six 16x slots @ 8x. Correct?

16x@16x split into two 16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@16x split into two 16x@8x
16x@8x

So you'd have
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
16x@8x
Oh yeah, theoretically.


You'd have to find the right risers to make everything fit.

Though that said, i don't know how configurable the bifurcation is. From reading the manual it looks like it may only allow for the 16x slots to become four 4x slots (for m.2 riser cards) not two 8x slots.

I could be wrong though. It's a little bit ambiguous.

I'd have to go into the bios and play around and see what I find.
 
I already know where to get the risers for the setup. It's just finding motherboards with the feature is the difficult part. Seems it's not really listed anywhere and the only way to know is to have the board and look in the BIOS settings.

It's good that I know they call it something different. Sometime this week I'll spend a night doing some more research with those keywords and see what I can find.
 
Become a Patron!
Back
Top