1. I may have overemphasized the importance of the IDE port. I won't have a IDE drive in the system 24/7, I just wanted access for a IDE drive.
2. I'm now looking at a 800 series chipset since I'm now considering a Phenom processor instead of a FX due to concerns over the core design.
3. After reading about this UEFI deal, I'm suspicious of this setup with these "keys". This sounds as another Wintel stunt pulling another fast one and I'm not along on this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Ex ... _Interface
The UEFI 2.2 specification adds a protocol known as Secure boot, which can secure the boot process by preventing the loading of drivers or OS loaders that are not signed with an acceptable digital signature. When secure boot is enabled, it is initially placed in "setup" mode, which allows a public key known as the "Platform key" (PK) to be written to the firmware. Once the key is written, secure boot enters "User" mode, where only drivers and loaders signed with the platform key can be loaded by the firmware. Additional "Key Exchange Keys" (KEK) can be added to a database stored in memory to allow other certificates to be used, but they must still have a connection to the private portion of the Platform key. Secure boot can also be placed in "Custom" mode, where additional public keys can be added to the system that do not match the private key.
In 2011, Microsoft was accused by critics and free software/open source advocates (including the Free Software Foundation) of trying to use the secure boot functionality of UEFI to hinder or outright prevent the installation of alternative operating systems such as Linux, by requiring that new computers certified to run its Windows 8 operating system ship with secure boot enabled using a Microsoft private key. Following the criticism, Microsoft denied that the secure boot requirement was intended to serve as a form of lock-in, and clarified its requirements by stating that systems certified for Windows 8 must allow secure boot to enter custom mode or be disabled, but not on systems using the ARM architecture
4. I also wanted the option of a separate boot menu like my current board has (Foxconn N570SM2AA). I have gotten spoiled by having it.
5. I am planning on running a SSD drive.
I an considering the following;
ASRock 990FX Extreame4 (slightly more than I wanted to spend,.Does this have a separate boot menu option?)
Gigabyte GS-890FXA-UD5 (rev 3) (with a few more legacy functions that I needed)
ASUS M5A97 R2 (this does have a boot menu)