| BIOS Frequency and Voltage settings (for overclocking) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASRock Z87 Extreme9/ac | Asus Z87-WS | Gigabyte Z87X-UD7 TH | MSI Z87 XPower | |
| Base Clock | 90-300 MHz (0.1 MHz) | 80-300 MHz (0.1 MHz) | 80-267 MHz (0.01 MHz) | 90-300 MHz (0.06 MHz) |
| CPU Multiplier | 8.0-120x (1x) | 8.0-80x (1x) | 8-80x (1x) | 8-80x (1x) |
| DRAM Data Rates | 800-4000 (200/266.6 MHz) | 800-3200 (200/266.6 MHz) | 800-2933 (200/266.6 MHz) | 800-3200 (200/266.6 MHz) |
| CPU Vcore | 0.80-2.00 V (1 mV) | 0.001-1.92 V (1 mV) | 0.50-1.80 V (1 mV) | 0.80-2.10V (1 mV) |
| VCCIN | 1.20-2.30 V (10 mV) | 0.80-2.70 V (10 mV) | 1.00-2.91V (10 mV) | 1.20-2.30 V (1 mV) |
| PCH Voltage | 0.98-1.32 V (5 mV) | 0.70-1.80 V (6.25 mV) | 0.65-1.30 V (5 mV) | 0.70-1.80 V (10 mV) |
| DRAM Voltage | 1.17-1.80 V (5 mV) | 1.2-1.92 V (5 mV) | 1.15-2.10 V (5 mV) | 1.20-2.40 V (10 mV) |
| CAS Latency | 4-15 Cycles | 1-31 Cycles | 5-15 Cycles | 4-15 Cycles |
| tRCD | 3-20 Cycles | 1-31 Cycles | 4-31 Cycles | 4-31 Cycles |
| tRP | 4-15 Cycles | 1-31 Cycles | 4-31 Cycles | 4-31 Cycles |
| tRAS | 9-63 Cycles | 1-63 Cycles | 5-63 Cycles | 9-63 Cycles |
Some manufacturers happen upon their overclocking victories by tampering with set voltage levels, sneaking in 20 to 30 millivolts more than you specify. But we usually catch that, either by voltmeter or by CPU temperature (often both). We weren’t surprised that three of the boards hit exactly the same overclock, and only one of these allowed us to bump up base clock by a measly 1 MHz at 46x.

Speaking of base clock, the most significant setting for users with multiplier-locked processors is at the 100 MHz strap. That’s because both ratio adjustment and base clock strap are locked out of those same CPUs. Certain manufacturers have ways to boost base clock overclocking capability, included reductions in System Agent/Cache and integrated GPU ratios. We left those settings to the manufacture to choose, and Asus surprised us with a 114 MHz BCLK.

ASRock and Gigabyte experienced the same phenomena seen by EVGA in our mini-ITX motherboard round-up, where increased base clock caused the PCIe graphics card to malfunction. I’m starting to wonder if it’s a problem with Intel’s latest base firmware, which companies can modify to suit their board’s configuration differences.

We used our voltmeter to set 1.650 to 1.655 volts to the memory
- Making Z87 Express Three-Way SLI-Capable
- ASRock Z87 Extreme9/ac
- Z87 Extreme9/ac Software
- Z87 Extreme9/ac Firmware
- Asus Z87-WS
- Z87-WS Software
- Z87-WS Firmware
- Gigabyte Z87X-UD7 TH
- Z87X-UD7 TH Software
- Z87X-UD7 TH Firmware
- MSI Z87 XPower
- Z87 XPower Software
- Z87 XPower Firmware
- Hardware And Benchmark Configuration
- Results: 3DMark And PCMark
- Results: SiSoftware Sandra
- Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Results: Adobe Creative Suite
- Results: Productivity
- Results: File Compression
- Power, Heat, And Efficiency
- Overclocking Results
- Which Premium Z87 Motherboard Takes Top Honors?
After spending two days per board on a "one week" article, I couldn't add more tests. The general benchmark set looks for unintended overclocking/underclocking, power and memory bandwidth issues, so you can see the performance difference attributable to each board's CPU and DRAM configuration differences. It runs from a .bat file, so it didn't add significantly to the article's completion time.
The PLX bridge that these all share represents the "great equalizer" when it comes to CrossFire and SLI configuration, so that portion of all three boards should be identical. I understand that things that should be the same in theory are occasionally different in practice. My apologies for not having the extra 1-day per board for additional tests.
These boards had to be tested for general performance and stability like any other boards. The PLX controller is the equalizer when it comes to games.
I think testing 3/4 way sli would still be valid, as it doesn't always work properly, in the past there have been compatibility problems with certain gpu's/boards/firmware/controllers and certain benchmarks completely failed.
Those have nothing to do with readyboost. The internal usb ports are very common on workstations and you put CAD dongles and equivalent items in them so that you can lock them inside the case and don't have to worry about some one stealing them from the outside or them taking up an outside usb port.
Hey guys, we have these awesome new setups for supreme graphics pumping power! Watch it zip files like every other board!
They had the exact same heatsink design for on their P8P67 WS Revolution and P8Z77 WS but in grey not gold.
Also I thought this review as suppose to be about, is it worth getting a 1150 board that can do full x16/x16 compare to 1150 board that can only do x8/x8. Even the Asus ROG 1150 boards can't do x16/x16.
They had the exact same heatsink design for on their P8P67 WS Revolution and P8Z77 WS but in grey not gold.
Also I thought this review as suppose to be about, is it worth getting a 1150 board that can do full x16/x16 compare to 1150 board that can only do x8/x8. Even the Asus ROG 1150 boards can't do x16/x16.
I would like to see something like that as well, but I understand if this review had some time constraints. Perhaps a future article where you can pit one of these boards at x16/x16 against a x8/x8 board and see if there's a notable difference. I wouldn't mind seeing triple-GPU on this against an x8/x4/x4 board, either.
I do have to ask if it's worth complaining about audio headers and potential short cables on $300+ boards, though. Surely if you're spending this much on a board you're planning on multiple GPUs that need good cooling. That typically means a larger, quality case with adequate cables, not some cheapo box.
And once again I see ASRock's dearth of PWM fan headers. Or perhaps I'm wrong and the majority of enthusiast builders use external fan controls for the case fans and not PWM.
I would like to see something like that as well, but I understand if this review had some time constraints. Perhaps a future article where you can pit one of these boards at x16/x16 against a x8/x8 board and see if there's a notable difference. I wouldn't mind seeing triple-GPU on this against an x8/x4/x4 board, either.
I do have to ask if it's worth complaining about audio headers and potential short cables on $300+ boards, though. Surely if you're spending this much on a board you're planning on multiple GPUs that need good cooling. That typically means a larger, quality case with adequate cables, not some cheapo box.
And once again I see ASRock's dearth of PWM fan headers. Or perhaps I'm wrong and the majority of enthusiast builders use external fan controls for the case fans and not PWM.
I would love to know the performance difference that the extra 8 lanes gives, and I'm sure a lot of people wonder the same thing.