Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
Benchmark Results and Final Analysis
Our standard benchmarks and power tests are performed using the CPU’s stock frequencies (including any default boost/turbo) with all power-saving features enabled. We set optimized defaults in the BIOS and the memory by enabling the XMP profile. For this baseline testing, the Windows power scheme is set to Balanced (default) so the PC idles appropriately.
Synthetic Benchmarks
Synthetics offer a valuable method for evaluating a board's performance, as identical settings are expected to yield similar results. Turbo boost wattage and advanced memory timings are areas where motherboard manufacturers can still optimize for stability or performance, though, and these settings can impact specific testing.
Performance on this board was average with benchmarks that aren’t memory-sensitive, and below average with those that are. Because we couldn’t run our standard timings, tests like 7Zip (decompression), Blender, and Procyon office were slower than usual.
Timed Applications
In the timed applications, the song remains the same, as Corona and LAME tests were seemingly affected by the slower RAM timings, while Handbrake didn’t seem to be influenced much.
3D Games and 3DMark
Starting with the launch of Zen 5, we updated our game tests. We kept EA’s F1 racing game and have upgraded to F1 24. We also dropped Far Cry 6 in favor of the even more popular and visually appealing Cyberpunk 2077. We run both games at 1920x1080 resolution using the Ultra preset (details listed above). Cyberpunk 2077 uses DLSS, while we left F1 24 to native resolution scaling. The goal of these settings is to determine if there are differences in performance at the most commonly used (and CPU/system-bound) resolution with settings most people use or strive for (Ultra). We expect the difference between boards in these tests to be minor, with most falling within the margin of error. We’ve also added a minimum FPS value, which can affect your gameplay and immersion experience.
Gaming results were good, with our scores showing below-average performance in the 3DMark tests and average performance in the games. You’d be hard-pressed to see the difference without a frame counter on the screen.
Overclocking
Over the past few CPU generations, overclocking headroom has been shrinking on both sides of the fence while the out-of-the-box potential has increased. For overclockers, this means there’s less fun to be had. For the average consumer, you’re getting the most out of the processor without manual tweaking. Today’s motherboards are more robust than ever, and they easily support power-hungry flagship-class processors, so we know the hardware can handle them. There are multiple ways to extract even more performance from these processors: enabling a canned PBO setting from the BIOS, manually adjusting the PBO settings, or opting for an all-core overclock. Results will vary and depend on the cooling as well. In other words, your mileage may vary. Considering all the above, we will not be overclocking the CPU. However, we will try out all our different memory kits to ensure they meet the specifications.
Although we had trouble running our base sticks, we successfully ran our Team Group DDR5-7200 kit through a 30-minute stress test; the DDR5-8000 kit also failed. AMD’s sweet spot is around 6000-6400 using the tightest timings and the 1:1 ratio; you don’t get much improvement at higher clocks except in bandwidth-heavy tests. That said, the board offers plenty of headroom if you want to tweak your RAM and other processor settings.
Power Consumption / VRM Temperatures
We used AIDA64’s System Stability Test with Stress CPU, FPU, Cache, and Memory enabled for power testing, using the processor's peak power consumption value. The wattage reading is obtained from the wall via a Kill-A-Watt meter, capturing the entire PC (excluding the monitor). The only variable that changes is the motherboard; all other parts remain the same. Please note that we moved to using only the stock power use/VRM temperature charts, as this section aims to ensure the power delivery can handle flagship-class processors.
The ASRock B850 Steel Legend peaked at 244W and idled at 85W, a result that falls roughly in the middle of the pack.
The B850 Steel Legend’s peak VRM temperatures were well within specifications, as you may have guessed. The capable power delivery and oversized heatsinks kept things temperatures at bay. The VRMs peaked at approximately 46 degrees Celsius on our sensors (a close 47 degrees on the internal sensor), and the CPU averaged around 146W. All results are expected for the processor and conditions.
Bottom Line
The ASRock B850 Steel Legend WiFi motherboard offers a compelling package for its price, just under $210. Its striking silver design, robust power delivery, and generous storage options help it stand out. Notably, it's one of the few B850 boards to incorporate a flagship-tier audio codec. While our testing revealed a performance deficit, this was not due to a flaw in the board itself; instead, it was not stable with our normal DDR5-6000 kit. Had we achieved optimal timings, its performance would have aligned with the average of all boards tested.
In comparison to similarly priced alternatives, the ASRock B850 Steel Legend WiFi primarily distinguishes itself through its aesthetics and USB port configuration (speed and quantity). Although slightly more expensive, Gigabyte’s B850 Aorus Elite boasts superior visual appeal and includes heatsinks for all M.2 sockets. Ultimately, for those seeking cost savings, the ASRock B850 Steel Legend presents excellent value, particularly if you desire a silver ATX form factor motherboard to complement a light or white PC build.
MORE: Best Motherboards
MORE: How To Choose A Motherboard
MORE: All Motherboard Content
