High-End P67 Express: Five $200-250 Motherboards

Asus P8P67 Deluxe

An integrated Bluetooth transceiver and separate eSATA controller are two things that set Asus’ P8P67 Deluxe apart from its value-oriented competitor. Of course, you have to give something else up, and the P8P67 Deluxe only has two rear-panel USB 3.0 ports.

Four additional USB 2.0 ports have been moved from front-panel headers to the rear I/O panel, replacing one of the PS/2 and two of the USB 3.0 ports seen on ASRock's boards. That leaves only two USB 2.0 headers (four ports) internally, though that number has sustained most builders through several motherboard generations, and we don't expect any changes now. Those who need more front-panel USB will find a two-port USB 3.0 header.

That two-port USB 3.0 header also marks a big difference from competing products by being placed front-and-center, just behind the 3.5” external bay of most cases. Asus still places its front-panel audio connector in the bottom-rear corner, however.

Asus does not offer any Ultra ATA or floppy connectors, even though the floppy controller is present in its Multi-I/O controller. Leaving the connector out does clean up the board’s layout a little, and the combined market for both interfaces is far too small to consider removal a mark against value.

Asus even uses the same slot layout as ASRock, switching from x16-x0-x4 to x8-x8-x4 transfer modes automatically whenever a card is installed in its second x16-length slot.

Things look quite a bit different under the sinks, though. Performing traditional southbridge functionality, Intel's P67 PCH is placed in the traditional southbridge location. Next to it, the PEX8608 eight-lane bridge distributes the bandwidth of four lanes not used by the third graphics slot across two PCIe x1 slots and several interface controllers. Those controllers include two SATA, two USB 3.0, one Ethernet, and one FireWire controller.

The P8P67 Deluxe’s primary network controller is not a PCIe-based device. Asus uses Intel’s WG82579V PHY to interface the chipset’s network function directly, purportedly reducing latency and simultaneously saving the board from running out of PCIe lanes.

The P8P67 Deluxe includes six internal SATA cables, four of which are rated compliant with the SATA 6Gb/s specification. Asus’ USB 3.0 front-panel 3.5” external bay adapter is fully boxed (rather than open-topped), adding expense while eliminating its ability to be used as a 2.5” drive adapter.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
46 comments
    Your comment
  • rolli59
    Nice article would have been nice to have a Gigabyte board in there as well.
    4
  • joytech22
    So glad I grabbed my P8P67 Deluxe!

    It had all the features I was looking for at a low enough price to make it very appealing.
    2
  • Crashman
    rolli59Nice article would have been nice to have a Gigabyte board in there as well.
    Please tell Gigabyte to produce something for this market!

    Tom's Hardware included the UD4 in its $150-200 motherboard roundup, and the UD5 costs more than $250.
    1
  • Manos
    How te hell is it possible that a website like this keeps ignoring my question as in WHY its been for so many months if not year or whatever, that they dont fix this *** and I cant click to submit my comment from IE? How can THIS be the only website with issues with IE? I find it rather sad. Its why i quit commenting instead of being forced to open a different browser for this site which I used to love and respect. Till they started ignoring this issue Ive been pointing out ( and not just me ).

    Thank you for the charts tho id love to see one with Maximus IV included x.x ( I edited cause I asked something stupid as in why I dont see it in the chart. Sorry.. Been working all night and no time to read the article. Bits only.And no I obviously hadnt read the title x.x My bad. Happy Easter!
    -4
  • jerreddredd
    It would have been nice to see if there is a performance gain in these "high end" boards over a value P67 board.

    For an even better article also throw in one of each value rated H67 and H61 boards. ($240 vs $130 vs $70 boards)
    -2
  • alidan
    jerreddreddIt would have been nice to see if there is a performance gain in these "high end" boards over a value P67 board. For an even better article also throw in one of each value rated H67 and H61 boards. ($240 vs $130 vs $70 boards)

    this, i would love to see how the high end stacks up with the low end. the low may not have as much as the high end, but performance is really all that matters considering we can just get expansion cards for things we dont have.
    1
  • sudeshc
    Nice analysis glad to know ASUS is good to go.
    0
  • Hupiscratch
    Great article. Now it´s time for the high-end overclocking oriented boards, like the ASUS Maximus IV Extreme.
    0
  • memadmax
    I'm gonna go all out on this chipset when it matures a bit. A cool 5 grand i'm thinking for my next gen build.
    -1
  • Anonymous
    Quote:
    Please tell Gigabyte to produce something for this market!


    GA-P67A-UD7 doesn't count?
    0
  • Onus
    Thanks for the wake-up call on MSI; I had thought to maybe risk buying one of their boards again. Sounds like I should be happy to stick with ASRock.

    Edit: Oh, and those shots of the ASRock boards show three pairs of two SATA cables, not just three individual cables.
    0
  • Anonymous
    Looks like the mid-range mobos do better in some of the gaming tests. That's surprising to me, since the test setups are identical.
    0
  • rolli59
    Anonymous said:
    Please tell Gigabyte to produce something for this market!

    GA-P67A-UD5-B3 http://www.gigabyte.us/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3762#ov
    0
  • ammar711
    hope if u can make a review of Asus Saertooth P67
    0
  • jfby
    ManosHow te hell is it possible that a website like this keeps ignoring my question as in WHY its been for so many months if not year or whatever, that they dont fix this *** and I cant click to submit my comment from IE? How can THIS be the only website with issues with IE? I find it rather sad. Its why i quit commenting instead of being forced to open a different browser for this site which I used to love and respect. Till they started ignoring this issue Ive been pointing out ( and not just me ).Thank you for the charts tho id love to see one with Maximus IV included x.x ( I edited cause I asked something stupid as in why I dont see it in the chart. Sorry.. Been working all night and no time to read the article. Bits only.And no I obviously hadnt read the title x.x My bad. Happy Easter!


    I am using IE and Firefox at home and both allow me to comment on articles.

    I would like to see the 'thumbs up' and 'thumbs down' buttons function appropriately, though.
    1
  • Onus
    I too am waiting for the return of the thumbs. It's been months; come on guys, it USED to work just fine, so please roll it back. In the forums, it says I've already voted, and here it is possible to vote, but not see the results.
    4
  • Max_DTH
    Hi everyone :hello: it's nice to be a part of Tom's Hardware forum community :) I'm constant Tom's Hardware reader and I just love this site, especially for professional and reliable reviews.

    My Q6600 based PC just died and I'm building Sandy Bridge machine. I'm having a tough time understanding new architecture.
    I can't get the idea of second paragraph at "ASRock UEFI" page:
    Quote:
    ASRock is among the brands that can use programming tricks to make the installed CPU run at its maximum Turbo Boost frequency full-time, which is apparently against Intel's design recommendations, but preferable to anyone accustomed to overclocking previous Intel platforms. That basically means that disabling Turbo Boost and increasing the standard multiplier does just the opposite, forcing Turbo to stay at full throttle using whatever multiplier the overclocker desires.

    and it made me somewhat lost. I've read a lot about Sandy Bridge and thought that I know how things are, but now I'm not so sure, so please clarify some things for me.

    Below statements are to be confirmed:
    In general
    1) Stock 2500K run at 3300MHz (2600K at 3400MHz) when all 4 cores are active.
    1a) With SpeedStep is enabled when there is no load multiplier drops to x16.
    1b) With Turbo Boost enabled, when 4/3/2/1 cores are stressed, they run at +1/+2/+3/+4 bins respectively (so multiplier increases by given value).
    2) When we are overclocking Sandy Bridge we set maximal Turbo Boost multiplier.
    2a) With both Turbo Boost and SpeedStep disabled CPU run constantly at set multiplier.
    2b) With both Turbo Boost and SpeedStep enabled CPU run at x16 multiplier when idle and at set multiplier when at load (it doesn't matter how many cores are stressed, the multiplier is fixed at set value).

    Are above statements correct? Do they also apply to ASRock?
    I would also like to ask what quoted paragraph means, because I get an impression from it, that at stock with Turbo Boost enabled CPU run constantly at +4 bins and I don't get the point of "does just the opposite" part, because it's contrasting two things which are the same (maxiing multiplier all the time). This may be just a problem of my poor understanding, because I'm not native English speaker, so maybe just saying it in other words would help.

    Thank you very much for all help :)


    P.S. At first page we got information that CLR_CMOS Button in ASRock's is Jumper-Only. Why back pannel CLR CMOS doesn't qualify?
    2
  • Leaps-from-Shadows
    1) If you ignore Turbo Boost, this is correct.
    1a) Correct.
    1b) Correct.
    2) Depending on the board. For ASRock, this is correct.
    2a) You also have to disable C1E and all of the CStates settings.
    2b) Depends on the board. For ASRock, this is correct.
    1
  • prabal34
    After reading this review I will stay away from future MSI motherboards. What a sham.
    -1
  • rockitman
    The nice thing about the Asus Deluxe is the spacing of the PCI slots for Crossfired Video cards. A nice 2" gap exists between my 2 6950's.
    And as my case is a Silverstone Fortress, the MB is rotated 90 degrees so all the outputs come out the top. This enhances the cooling ability for these 2 cards as they both receive direct airflow from the bottom mounted 180mm fans.
    The front mounted USB 3 device is a nice idea except that the short cable that is provided will not work with these 2 huge graphic cards in the way. I need to find an extender if they make one.
    Glad to know my MB was rated tops.
    1