The Deluxe has more of the features we expected from the Pro board.  In a similar design, we see power and reset switches on the board, dual gigabit Ethernet and double-digit debugging LEDs.

The extended VRM heatsink cooling is the most obvious visual change over the Pro, despite the fact that the Pro and the Deluxe both have only one 8-pin 12V connector, which suggests that ASUS have shelled out a few more reddies on the VRM for the socket on the Deluxe.  Whether that plays out to any performance gain, or a raise in the performance ceiling, we’ll find out in due course.

The main back panel change, apart from the presence of dual gigabit Ethernet, is the combination PS/2 mouse and keyboard port, and the CMOS clear button.  The button itself is recessed slightly behind the 5.1 audio and the USB ports on either side, so in order to press it, you really have to be searching for it.  Or if your cat decides it’s a toy on the back panel and accidentally claws it with some force.

Other additions/changes of note is the PLX chip between the first PCIex16 slot and the first PCI slot, and the relocation of the bridging USB2.0/3.0 to SATA ASMedia chip to a more central location next to the battery.  The Deluxe, like the Pro, has eight SATA ports in total, but these are labelled, and shows four SATA 3Gb/s (labelled 3, 4, 5 and 6), two SATA 6Gb/s, and two more SATA 6Gb/s, designated ‘E’.  This raises a couple of questions – what happened to SATA 3Gb/s which are labelled 1 and 2?  If the 6Gb/s ‘E’ designation is for eSATA, why are the back-panel eSATA ports labelled 3Gb/s? 

Obviously, expect the Deluxe to retail at a high price than the Pro.  How much more, we don’t know yet, and ASUS is keeping that info to themselves.

P8P67 Pro Maximus IV Extreme
POST A COMMENT

53 Comments

View All Comments

  • jonup - Monday, November 15, 2010 - link

    Nice catch! I had to look hard to notice it. I almost thought you were on something good. Anyways, I would like to know if the second molex is indead for the PCIx or is it to supply additional power for all the additional controllers on this board. Maybe it is for the NF200. Reply
  • nbjknk - Thursday, November 25, 2010 - link

    Dear customers, thank you for your support of our company.
    Here, there's good news to tell you: The company recently
    launched a number of new fashion items! ! Fashionable
    and welcome everyone to come buy. If necessary, please
    plut:==== http://www.vipshops.org ======

    ==== http://www.vipshops.org ======

    ==== http://www.vipshops.org ======
    Reply
  • Qapa - Sunday, November 14, 2010 - link

    1 - Why would anyone need dual GBe?? Are you expecting to have 2 internet connections with 2 different ISPs, and want to be sure be always online? :P

    2 - No UEFI? For real? I don't understand that! Specially in high end MBs. And that probably means 2012 till mainstream gets it :(

    PS: I also wish something could be done about Intel not having direct support for USB3... any ideas? Cause it is costing us all...
    Reply
  • GeorgeH - Sunday, November 14, 2010 - link

    1) One reason:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation

    2) If it becomes necessary, UEFI can be implemented on top of a BIOS and isn't a complete BIOS replacement anyway:
    http://www.uefi.org/about/

    3) Intel won't release USB 3.0 until the 2011/12 time frame, which very coincidentally is also the Light Peak time frame. I'll let you connect the dots.
    Reply
  • Qapa - Sunday, November 14, 2010 - link

    1 - As I said, redundancy seems ridiculous. And more speed the same.

    2 - Point taken and learnt :) On the other hand, I doubt they will add UEFI to their MBs and how would those really be booting faster as UEFI systems should.
    AFAIU, UEFI replaces parts of BIOS, not all. But if they already have full BIOS, would they really remove parts to move them to UEFI? Don't think so.

    3 - AFAIK, I think they are even trying to put LightPeak in, ahead of USB3. No dots need connecting here. What I wanted was ideas on what to do to change this and make them put USB3 in the market together with Sandy Bridge...
    Reply
  • jonup - Monday, November 15, 2010 - link

    3. I don't know. Did you try showing up at Paul Otellini's house with a baseball bat?
    Dont you get it? Intel has business agenda that does not coincide with your need. Intel vs Qapa -> Intel wins!
    Reply
  • strikeback03 - Monday, November 15, 2010 - link

    Well since these chipsets are obviously shipping already there isn't anything to be done about USB3 now, the customers simply get screwed. All the SATA ports should have been SATA 6Gb/s and all the USB ports should have been USB3. Maybe these issues will be fixed on more consumer-level versions of the chipset (that can use the integrated graphics in SB), otherwise they are giving AMD another opportunity. Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, November 16, 2010 - link

    Someone may want to update the Wikipedia page on Link aggregation, if Windows 7 now supports it:

    "Note that Microsoft Windows does not natively support link aggregation (at least up to Windows Server 2008)."
    Reply
  • Regenweald - Sunday, November 14, 2010 - link

    Large format printers and plotters often use a dedicated lan port. what if you wanted wired network access on your printing machine as well ? There are many instances where two lan ports can be very handy, as they would in my office right now. Reply
  • Qapa - Sunday, November 14, 2010 - link

    Well, that's a niche implementation.
    More commonly, the printer would be connected to the network as well (router/switch/etc), so everyone can access it and not only your computer.

    Still, seems overkill to me.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now