Intel Z77 Motherboard Review with Ivy Bridge - ASRock, ASUS, Gigabyte, and MSI
by Ian Cutress on May 7, 2012 7:40 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- MSI
- Gigabyte
- ASRock
- Asus
- Ivy Bridge
- Z77
3D Movement Algorithm Test
The algorithms in 3DPM employ either uniform random number generation or normal distribution random number generation, and vary in various amounts of trigonometric operations, conditional statements, generation and rejection, fused operations, etc. The benchmark runs through six algorithms for a specified number of particles and steps, and calculates the speed of each algorithm, then sums them all for a final score. This is an example of a real world situation that a computational scientist may find themselves in, rather than a pure synthetic benchmark. The benchmark is also parallel between particles simulated, and we test the single thread performance as well as the multi-threaded performance.
In our single threaded test, the improved IPC from Ivy Bridge is clear to see, with every board able to beat the i7-3960X results.
Now we see some real differences to the boards - as the ASUS has MultiCore Enhancement, which boosts the CPU to full turbo mode under multithreaded mode, it has a clear advantage over the other boards in the test. Surprisingly the Gigabyte board also did the same, despite clear settings in the BIOS to enforce multiplier ratios at core loads.
WinRAR x64 3.93
With 64-bit WinRAR, we compress the set of files used in the USB speed tests. WinRAR x64 3.93 attempts to use multithreading when possible.
Due to the mixed threaded nature of the WinRar test, this is all about how the board reacts to different load levels. The four core Ivy chips are on par with the six core Sandy-E chips, but the ASRock Z77 seems to lag behind.
FastStone Image Viewer 4.2
FastStone Image Viewer is a free piece of software I have been using for quite a few years now. It allows quick viewing of flat images, as well as resizing, changing color depth, adding simple text or simple filters. It also has a bulk image conversion tool, which we use here. The software currently operates only in single-thread mode, which should change in later versions of the software. For this test, we convert a series of 170 files, of various resolutions, dimensions and types (of a total size of 163MB), all to the .gif format of 640x480 dimensions.
The single thread speed is key for FastStone, where the IPC for Ivy really gets to play.
Xilisoft Video Converter
With XVC, users can convert any type of normal video to any compatible format for smartphones, tablets and other devices. By default, it uses all available threads on the system, and in the presence of appropriate graphics cards, can utilize CUDA for NVIDIA GPUs as well as AMD APP for AMD GPUs. For this test, we use a set of 32 HD videos, each lasting 30 seconds, and convert them from 1080p to an iPod H.264 video format using just the CPU. The time taken to convert these videos gives us our result.
As one of our new tests, Xilisoft can show how motherboards treat a fully multi-threaded load with optimised coding. Again, the ASUS and Gigabyte win out here.
x264 HD Benchmark
The x264 HD Benchmark uses a common HD encoding tool to process an HD MPEG2 source at 1280x720 at 3963 Kbps. This test represents a standardized result which can be compared across other reviews, and is dependant on both CPU power and memory speed. The benchmark performs a 2-pass encode, and the results shown are the average of each pass performed four times.
Similarly to Xilisoft, the way different boards react to a full multithreaded load are on display. Score another one for ASUS and Gigabyte.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
117 Comments
View All Comments
vegemeister - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
Yes, it is a very important feature. The Ivy Bridge IGP can drive 3 monitors. 4 display outputs means 3 of them are digital.Discrete GPUs increase idle power consumption, an as of this post none of them have particularly good open source drivers. Some of us just want lots of screens, good compiz performance, and silence.
philipma1957 - Monday, May 7, 2012 - link
I have been building a series of matx htpc/gamer machines.I have one with the basic
Gigabyte GA-B75M-D3H mATX board
and one with the
Gigabyte Ga-h77m-d3h mATX board.
I want to decide between
the ASUS P8Z77- m pro mobo or
the ASUS p8z77-m board and
last but not least the
Gigabyte Intel Z77 LGA 1155 AMD CrossFireX/NVIDIA SLI DVI/HDMI/DisplayPort Dual UEFI BIOS mATX Motherboard G1.SNIPER M3 .
I am liking the two builds I did with the lowend gigabyte boards and some intel i5 t2500t cpus I want a better board but I don't have many reviews to go by.
EnzoFX - Monday, May 7, 2012 - link
It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Are most DIY'ers really opting for ATX? Should they? I'd bet most people only plug in a video card and maybe one other card such as wireless or even a tuner. Every other possible need they may have would not only be met by mATX but even ITX is pretty full featured these days.You'd think mATX would be what most boards are targeted at, and leaving ATX for extreme builds/bragging rights. It's just like those high end video cards, most people don't buy those, rightfully and importantly so. Those should be the premium prices, and mATX should have a lower price. The focus just feels off.
Zoomer - Monday, May 14, 2012 - link
You mentioned people want mATX board. There by itself probably means that it can command higher prices, due to higher price tolerance of the purchasers.Caeric - Monday, May 7, 2012 - link
Enjoyed the review. I still have an old AMD dual core, and I'm considering a new system in the next couple of months so these help a great deal.I did find one error in the article, under the ASUS board:
"The ASUS P8Z77-V Pro retails at $225-$235, essentially $100 less than the ASRock Z77 Extreme4..."
It should say "...essentially $100 more than the ASRock..."
Movieman420 - Monday, May 7, 2012 - link
Curious as to this controllers' performance vs the ever present Marvell controllers. Does it use a pci-e lane or usb3 for it's bandwidth?FozzyofAus - Monday, May 7, 2012 - link
Great review.I'm leaning towards mATX as well for this build as I've never used more than four expansion slots and currently I'm only using 3 (one is USB3 which won't be needed in the new board).
I'd like to have a bit more room in my current case and the option to reuse this motherboard in a smaller case in future if I upgrade my main rig to Haswell next year.
Any chance of adding Asrock Extreme4-m to the next motherboard roundup?
spronkey - Monday, May 7, 2012 - link
Sorry guys but this review was a bit average. Comment on the various different controllers used by the motherboard manufacturers but don't offer any kind of review on them?The good additions: DPC latency and boot time.
The missing? Well everything else.
I was especially hoping for a comment on the VIA audio on the UD3H - it's been a while since I've seen VIA codecs on mainstream boards.
I'm also amazed that you didn't slam the ASUS board for it's price and lack of features. Realtek 892? On a board that's nearing twice the cost of the ASRock? Seriously?
No comment on the durability of the boards either? Hrm. No separation in testing of the different controllers on each board?
A bit lacking, sorry.
ggathagan - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
Perhaps you're commenting on the wrong review.As Ian stated multiple times throughout the review, Asus is using Intel NIC's on their boards, in this case, the Intel 82579V.
Durability is a function of time. Please point out the other motherboard reviews that covered durability.
spronkey - Thursday, May 10, 2012 - link
He stated ASUS were using Intel, sure. But didn't get into any details other than stating they exist about the fact that there are multiple USB3 controllers and SATA controllers on each board. No benchmarks comparing them etc.In fact does it even mention which controllers were tested?
And Durability is a function of construction quality and time. It would be nice to see comments on points such as board weight and flex, quality of soldering, quality of components used on the board (according to an electrical minded person on OCN, Gigabyte uses significantly higher rated MOSFETs than other manufacturers), temperatures of chipsets and VRM circuitry. These are things I can't easily find out by reading manuals.