ASRock’s $165 Z77 Extreme6 targets value seekers in the mid-range enthusiast market with three-way graphics capability, an extra USB 3.0 controller, an extra SATA 6Gb/s controller, a two-digit diagnostics display, and an I/O panel CLR_CMOS button to assist in recovery from failed overclock attempts.
Those extra controllers bring the total number of USB 3.0 ports to six, and the total number of SATA 6Gb/s ports to four. One of the added SATA ports is still shared with the eSATA connector, however.
ASRock even adds mini-PCIe beneath the primary x16 slot to enable the addition of notebook-style adapters, such as internal Wi-Fi cards, which lay flat over its PCI-based VIA IEEE-1394 controller.
There’s no good way to host a third PCIe 3.0 graphics card on an LGA 1155 platforms, since only sixteen of these lanes are native to Ivy Bridge CPUs. The Z77 Extreme6 divides those lanes into x8/x8 mode whenever a card is detected in the second slot, relying on the Z77 PCH's slower PCIe 2.0 controller to drive the third slot at x4. That makes this primarily a two-way graphics design, so ASRock triple-spaces the two high-bandwidth slots to support extra airflow and/or extra-thick cards.
Complaining about a layout this clean could be difficult, with its well-placed USB 3.0 front-panel header, replaceable firmware ROM, forward-facing SATA ports and a downward-facing latch on its eight-pin CPU power connector. Yet, further inspection reveals small nags like a front-panel audio header located in the extreme lower-rear corner and the fact that this is a single-ROM motherboard in a primarily dual-ROM market. Amusing asides include floppy and serial port headers next to that audio connection.

The Z77 Extreme6 installation kit includes four SATA cables, a two-way SLI bridge, and ASRock’s USB 3.0-to-3.5” bay adapter with integrated 2.5” drive tray. The ports can be moved to the back of a case by instead attaching them to an included slot plate.
- Z77 Express: The Perfect Replacement For Older Machines
- ASRock Z77 Extreme6
- Z77 Extreme6 Firmware
- Asus P8Z77-V Pro
- P8Z77-V Pro Firmware
- Biostar TZ77XE4
- TZ77XE4 Firmware
- ECS Golden Z77H2-A2X
- Z77H2-A2X Firmware
- Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD3H
- Z77X-UD3H Firmware
- MSI Z77A-GD65
- Z77A-GD65 Firmware
- Test Settings And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3
- Benchmark Results: DiRT 3
- Benchmark Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Power, Heat, And Efficiency
- Overclocking
- Which Mid-Range Z77 Board Should You Buy?


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131820
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131820
Something's gotta be pooched with the ASUS P8Z77-V Pro BIOS (UEFI) -- hopefully. In the past the ASUS Pro line has been the meat & potatoes for my recommendations, and this is not the only review with similar performance numbers.
Voltages, I am going to have a hard time recommending a vCore >1.2Xv, VCCSA and CPU VTT of 1.20v on the IB. I still need to see otherwise. From what I've seen the IB is more 'girlish' with voltages than the SB or SB-E, and there's little point having the fans spinning 'through' the case and creating high dBA with a high vCore. RAM (voltage), it goes back to my feelings that 1.50v DIMM was a bunch of Urban Myths especially since the SB-E and seemingly the IB can handle 1.65v DIMM RAM.
Yeah, I noticed the XMP tried to set 1.25v VCCSA, or at least the set is encoded that way. Further, I don't wan to debate the OC until I get my hands on an IB, it should be any day now.
Further, either the Engineers were dead wrong on the SB (1.50) or IB (1.65) they're wrong in both instances. I 'get' ultra fast kits (today) >DDR3-2133 e.g. DDR-2400 or faster are 1.65v kits, but only a few months ago IF 'I' recommended SB + 1.65v I'd have 20+ negative comments in the Forum. Seems counter intuitive step in DRAM voltage.
Also, I am assuming you're testing the IB ES and I wonder how much of an impact that has in that the CPUID are geared towards the Retail. I remember all of the E5 (ES) problems and drops in performance compared to the Retail sisters.
OC observation only, you seemed 'wimpish' with the SB-E compared to the IB - interesting?!
A chose this board as it has a better Audio Chipset then the Competitors. This board comes with ALC898, while the other ones come with ALC892. Apparently ALC898 is far better than ALC892.
So far i am quite happy with the board.
Just 1 note, if overclocking do not disable "Power technologies", it will prevent overclocking. If i disabled the power saving features 1 by 1 i had no problems.
I have always loved ECS for cheap 'value' builds (in fact I am using a 6 year old ECS board in a little htpc I am throwing together, it doesn't do much, but it has never let me down either), it is wierd seeing them in the 'high end' market like this, and (unlike previous boards they have produced) it looks stunning!
The first time I saw the gold on black look was with my ex3 gen3 board, which looked odd in pictures, but great in real life, and this new ECS board looks absolutely gorgeous in pics, so I am sure it looks great in real life as well.
Still, at the end of the day I am not sure that I would go for ECS on a high end build, but it is good to see that they are getting somewhere.
Also, it is good to see that ASRock is still doing OK now that they are no longer under the ASUS umbrella.
As for the review: Why even do the program benchmarks? We all know that the mobo is merely for the feature set, parts cooling, and power management quality for OCing (and truth be told aesthetics as well), and has next to no bearing on how fast things get processed at any specific frequency. All that I personally care about is the feature set, OC ability, and subjective ease of use for the UEFI and keeping it updated, vs the overall cost of the board.