Home / Computing / PC Component / Asus Rampage II Gene / Performance Results

Asus Rampage II Gene - Performance Results

By Leo Waldock



Our Score:



March 19, 2009, 10:31 pm

But when will etailers start listing them? I've only seen it on a few sites, and would rather buy from a trusted etailer newegg, or zzf :|


March 20, 2009, 1:53 am

I like how the X-fi is built into the I/O panel unlike the Rampage II Extreme makes it far more tidy


March 20, 2009, 8:37 pm

I know that technology trailblazers pay a steep price but when you consider I just put a Q6600 in an Asus motherboard costing 㿏 that runs at 3.2Ghz stock voltage and 3.6Ghz easily I do feel these latest motherboards are ridiculously overpriced for the tiny increase in real world performance they yield.

Not to mention the i7 processor.


March 20, 2009, 9:36 pm

@ basicasic - That's an apples to oranges comparison really because the X58 chipset is high-end in the same way X48 is for 775 motherboards, almost all of which are the same price as X58 boards (𧵘+). They all support SLI and Crossfire as well as DDR3, all of which you have to pay more for if you want that with your Q6600. Intel just made sure all the expensive kit was released first to make those with enough money to upgrade pay through the nose for it. Besides, I'd never even think of pairing a 𧵘 processor with a 㿏 motherboard in the first place.

Wait until the summer when you can get yourself the more mainstream i5 and P55 motherboard, so that Nehalem upgrade won't seem so expensive.


March 20, 2009, 11:54 pm

I build systems for a living. I get to play with plenty of kit. You may scoff at a 㿏 motherboard and a Q6600 cpu but for a customer after performance on a limited budget its the bargain of the century. Stick in a decent graphics card and in a blind test you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between that and an X58/i7 system.

My main point is that never has there been such a huge discrepancy in price between high-end and mainstream kit for such a small gain in performance and features. No doubt as a result of lack of competition at the high-end.


March 22, 2009, 2:13 am

more room for water cooling?

comments powered by Disqus