Final Words

Looking back on the ASUS P8Z68-V PRO, I can come up with a variety of conclusions. It's a great little board in terms of performance, features and add-ons, even for the $210 asking price. Though at this price, we'd perhaps ask for a little more to be in the boxed product—a few more SATA cables perhaps, or a full USB 3.0 3.5" bay. As much as this was a review about the ASUS board, it's also a first impression of the Z68 chipset through the ASUS P8Z68-V PRO.

The ultimate combination of P67 and H67 was inevitable—if Intel were going to market a series of processors with integrated graphics, it would seem odd not to include connectors on every chipset for those graphics. That's what happened with P67, when Intel decided that enough people wanted discrete GPU performance that the integrated GPU wouldn't get a look-in. Though with the virtues of Quick Sync, there had to be a way of providing one chipset that tried to do everything—overclocking the CPU, overclocking the integrated GPU, multiple discrete GPU setups, the works.

There was a sigh of relief when Lucid developed a software solution to allow them all to work together—the integrated GPU for low throughput graphics, a discrete GPU for gaming, and any situation to be able to use the integrated GPU for highly specialized applications. Virtu is a nice bit of kit, but in terms of power saving, if you're not using Quick Sync, there isn't much to be saved as graphics card manufacturers are pretty good on low power states.

The ultimate question is—should I upgrade to Z68? You may have realized I haven't talked about SSD caching yet—I've left that up to Anand to discuss and report on, but it's a feature worth considering. From my perspective, if you want an all-round computer that plays games and uses Quick Sync and the other specialties that the iGPU can provide, then Z68 is a logical upgrade. However, if you already have a discrete GPU and P67, unless you're really big on video transcoding there's no point in replacing your current board.

I know that prices for Z68 boards will be as low as $120 from some manufacturers, and as high as $350. The price difference in all these boards is similar to that of the P67—stability at high overclocks, features such as more and more SATA ports, increased support for better cooling, etc. Does that mean that the ASUS P8Z68-V PRO is a good buy? At $210, our only comparison so far in the P67 space that we've reviewed is the ASRock P67 Extreme6, which has 10 SATA ports, but minimal RAID, a lot more IO panel USB connectors, more in the box to come with the motherboard, arguably a worse BIOS, better USB performance, and a shorter warranty. It's a tough decision—people will like the ASUS board, of that I have no doubt. It's just a case of if it's got the right features for you as a consumer.

We can't come to any final conclusion with only one Z68 board, of course. I expect to have more Z68 boards to review in the near future, so watch this space. Right now, the ASUS board is a good Z68 offering, but if you're in no rush, wait a few weeks to see if another board can rise to the top—and let's be honest, if you've been waiting for Z68 you can probably wait a bit longer.

Gaming Benchmarks


View All Comments

  • tomoyo - Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - link

    Haha I love russia lines.
    But I do think a number of us want a system that is the fastest, lowest power, and quietest. Conflicting options, but options I always go for in every system. Also cheapest is nice also. It seems like a much better challenge than the lame boring crap of fastest o/c. Only the truly awesome can mix everything together :)
  • xinaes - Thursday, May 12, 2011 - link

    Conflicting, like anything else in life. We want to know what options are available and to find the best balance / compromise for our needs. Reply
  • L. - Thursday, May 12, 2011 - link

    Again, you want the greenest solution ?

    Undervolting is NOT it.
    Sandy Bridge != reasonably powerful.
  • tomoyo - Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - link

    Uh what? Hello sandy bridge is amazingly low power consumption AND fast. Nobody wants a piece of @#$% atom or e series when you can get something fast AND low power consumption. Reply
  • L. - Thursday, May 12, 2011 - link

    Errr .. you might want to go back to school and learn how to compare numbers ...

    There is NO comparison between an e-350 and a Sandy Bridge in terms of power consumption - besides said chip is not really a piece of crap if you don't play modern games.
  • NeBlackCat - Friday, May 13, 2011 - link

    Which do you think wins in power efficiency, for the widest range of tasks from nothing to re-encoding a BlueRay? Reply
  • Stuka87 - Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - link

    It would be cool to see a review done that way to see what kind of power savings there are. My guess they will be very little since just about every modern chips declocks itself constantly.

    But this motherboard is NOT for that segment. This is a top end performance board. NOT the board to use if you want yo conserve energy.
  • vol7ron - Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - link

    The procs go into a low-power/normal state when not in use and they jump in clocks when workloads demand, but that low-power state is probably spec defined, and not the min that you could get. Just like, if you were to OC the chip yourself, you'd get more jump than the max boost.

    For these reasons, if a person wanted to manually set an undervol7ed/underclocked configuration, it'd be nice to know before a purchase. I don't think it's a fair assumption to say that same user would always use that configuration. They might do video/photo editing or gaming very sparingly and just want to conserve power when and where they can.
  • cyklonman - Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - link

    Sandy bridge undervolt it self to rougly 4W in idle, undervolting at load will gain more but there is no real reason. Reply
  • NeBlackCat - Wednesday, May 11, 2011 - link

    But when you're not at idle... Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now