Four LGA-1150 Motherboards Under $60
Here at Tom's Hardware, we have a lot of fun testing the most expensive, highest-end gear. So can we really get excited about $60 motherboards?
Top-tier tech is simply alluring. Whether we're talking about benchmark bragging rights, multi-GPU rigs with high refresh monitors or eight-core CPUs for hardcore number-crunching, we love exploring premium components. But the cold truth is that a vast majority of enthusiasts don't buy those flagship components. Quite frankly, most of us don't even need the latest and greatest. Yeah, yeah, that's heresy. But put away the torches and pitchforks for a second. How many of you have built computers for family or friends? And how many of those builds were for simple office use? How many parents have pieced together a mini rig for little Jimmy? How many would like to have a cheap project computer to tinker with? And really, how many people simply have tight budgets, but still want something as a daily driver that runs more than just Excel and PowerPoint?
In the Q3 and Q4 2014 System Builder Marathons, Paul Henningsen explored some low-budget LGA 1150 motherboards that supported unofficial CPU overclocking. We received encouraging feedback on those stories, along with requests to do more. So, Tom's Hardware sent out invitations hoping to identify a few "sleeper" motherboards. The rules were simple: we wanted LGA 1150 boards that sold for $60 or less that unlocked CPU multipliers. These boards also needed publicly-available firmware, not beta builds cooked up specifically for our story. Three companies let us know they had hardware that qualified.
| Features | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chipset | Intel B85 | Intel H81 | Intel H81 | Intel H81 |
| PCB Revision | 1.01 | 1.05 | 1.03 | 1.0 |
| Voltage Regulator | 3-Phase | 4-Phase | 3-Phase | 3-Phase |
| 100.0MHz BCLK | 99.94 (-0.06%) | 99.94 (-0.06%) | 99.98 (-0.02%) | 99.98 (-0.02%) |
| I/O Panel Connectors | ||||
| PS/2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| USB 3.0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| USB 2.0 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 |
| Network | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| CLR_CMOS Button | No | No | No | No |
| Digital Audio Out | No | No | No | No |
| Digital Audio In | No | No | No | No |
| Analog Audio | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Video Out | VGA, DVI-D | VGA, DVI-D, HDMI | VGA, DVI-D | VGA, DVI-D, HDMI |
| Other Devices | None | None | None | None |
| Internal Interfaces | ||||
| PCIe 3.0 x16 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| PCIe 2.0 x16 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| PCIe 2.0 x1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| USB 3.0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| USB 2.0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| SATA 6.0 Gb/s | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| SATA 3.0 Gb/s | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 4-Pin Fan | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3-Pin Fan | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Front Panel Audio | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| S/PDIF I/O | None | None | 1 | None |
| Internal Buttons | None | None | None | None |
| Internal Switch | None | None | None | None |
| Diagnostics Panel | None | None | None | None |
| Other Devices | None | None | None | None |
| Mass Storage Controllers | ||||
| Chipset SATA | 4x SATA 6Gb/s | 2x SATA 6Gb/s 2x SATA 3Gb/s | 2x SATA 6Gb/s 2x SATA 3Gb/s | 2x SATA 6Gb/s 2x SATA 3Gb/s |
| Chipset RAID Modes | None | None | None | None |
| Add-In SATA | None | None | None | None |
| Add-in USB 3.0 | None | ASMedia ASM1042 | None | VIA VL805 |
| Networking | ||||
| LAN Controller | Realtek RTL8111GR Gigabit | Realtek RTL8111G Gigabit | Realtek RTL8111G Gigabit | Realtek RTL8111G Gigabit |
| Wi-Fi | None | None | None | None |
| Bluetooth | None | None | None | None |
| Audio | ||||
| HD Audio Codec | ALC662 | ALC662 | ALC887 | ALC887 |
| DDL/DTS Connect | None | None | None | None |
| Warranty | One year | One year | Three years | Three years |
The Limitations Of H81/B85
These are all H81- and B85-based boards. That means you give up a few features you otherwise may not think about with a Z87/97 or even H87/97 board. Until now, the biggest limitation of a non-Z chipset was the locked CPU multiplier. But the boards we're testing were selected specifically for overclocking, so that's no longer a limiting factor.
I did run into one common problem with these platforms, though: OS- and application-level overclocking. Changing the CPU multipliers in each company's overclock utility imposed significant restrictions and more than a little funny behavior. I'll get into more detail later, but suffice it to say that any overclocking and tuning done on these boards should be done in the UEFI and not through software. We contacted ASRock, Asus and MSI about these problems and they all said basically the same thing. While you can bypass the multiplier lockdown on H81 and B85 through software, there are limits to how you can do it. This applies to all chipsets in the 8- and 9-series outside the Z and X lines.
While this constraint is something to consider, I won't hold it against a $60 motherboard. Each of today's contenders is admirable in its overclocking capabilities. None of them have near the power regulation circuitry that premium Z models sport, so I'm not recommending you crank a Core i7-4790K to the max in one of these. And speaking of VRMs, none of today's contenders include a heat sink or fan cooling those hot components. That means downdraft coolers are your friend. As the Pentium G3258's stock cooler is the same model bundled with the Core i7, featuring a big copper slug, there's usually no reason to swap it out.
If a G3258 and single PCIe x16 slot don't turn you off, then the lack of Small Business Advantage and Rapid Storage probably isn't a concern either. The table below outlines the differences between H81, B85, H87 and Z87. The H97 and Z97 chipsets add support for M.2, SATA Express and Thunderbolt, as well as baked-in support for Intel's Haswell refresh.
| H81 | B85 | H87 | Z87 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chipset PCIe Lanes (from PCH Controller) | 6 | 8 | 8 | 8< |
| Supported PCIe Lane Configurations(from CPU PCIe controller) | 1 x 16 | 1 x 16 | 1 x 16 | 1 x 16 2 x 8 x 8/x 4 /x 4 |
| No. of Displays (iGPU) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| No. of DIMMs per channel / Maximum DIMMs | 1/2 | 2/4 | 2/4 | 2/4 |
| SATA Ports / SATA 6Gb/s Ports | 4/2 | 6/4 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| USB Ports / USB3 Ports | 10/2 | 12/4 | 14/6 | 14/6 |
| Supported CPU PCIe Revision * | 2.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Rapid Storage Technology | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Smart Response Technology | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Small Business Advantage | No | Yes | Yes | No |
| Rapid Start Technology | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
*Per Intel's site, "The processor's actual PCI Express revision will be determined or limited by the value of this chipset attribute, even if the processor is designed to a higher revision."
MORE: Best Motherboards
MORE: How To Choose A Motherboard: A Guide For Beginners
MORE: How To Build A PC: From Component Selection To Installation
MORE: All Motherboard Articles
MORE: Motherboards in the Forums
I think it's fixed now.
Oh, and about his voltage comment in the article, I believe the board he tested is the first in several years on this site to not force a higher-than-set DIMM voltage.
Something with solid power section, lasting capacitors, good component layout, silent, but intended for mainstream gaming, so no M.2, no SLI, single network interface etc. Basic features, but solid foundations.
The plan from here is to cover Z97 Micro ATX, then $80 to $120 Z97 boards. We've also gone "sideways" with boards that aren't designed to overclock. And, there's a Z97 Mini ITX article in the publishing queue as we speak
And then, after all that has been done, we'd still like to get back to a $120-$160 segment repeat, to cover the new products that have been released since the last round of mainstream LGA 1150. motherboards
It all depends on what you are doing. I had to abandon my C2Q as my main machine a long time ago because it simply choked on bandwidth when doing HD video editing and some games... But it still had a few years left over as my wife's main computer and was perfectly adequate for audio editing, office apps, light games, etc. I eventually replaced her system with an i3 Ivy Bridge setup due to a GPU failure and complaints of the C2Q being too loud in general... so now the C2Q is running as my home server, and will probably remain as my home server for a few years yet until it is a 10 year old chip (and 10GbE becomes more affordable).
Point being, it is an extremely capable 8 year old chip, with a long life ahead of it still. But to say that there is no advantage to upgrading is a bit short-sighted. New chips allow for much smaller silent (or near silent) systems that literally sip power in comparison. New chips have enough iGPU power to compete with some of the midrange dGPUs from 8 years ago... and again as part of the 50-70W CPU package rather than a separate 150-250W GPU card. Not to mention the perks of being able to install faster/cheaper/more RAM with DDR3/4 compared to DDR2, or having lots of SATA3, USB3, and PCIe3 interfaces. Even running as a NAS the Core2Quad is limited to a max of 3TB HDDs where even the cheap motherboards listed here can take 8TB drives if you wanted to. Things like sound cards were still a necessity in the C2Q era, but now onboard audio is so good that even ardent audiophiles would be hard pressed to tell the difference. RAID was a costly feature back in the day, and now it is built into most motherboards (even the B-series chipsets, though it is listed as not having it on the charts here for some reason).
I guess what I am trying to say is: If the older platform still meets your needs, then great! Enjoy it as long as you can, because there is value in that. But saying that the chip and the platform are not starting to show their age, or that there are not lots of advantages in moving to a newer platform (granted those advantages may not directly apply to you) is overlooking a lot of considerations.
There was a much higher level of detail than I'd have expected to describe these low-end boards. Good to know about that fan cable placement. As non-tweaker boards though, I suspect most people who buy one of these will set it once and forget it.
Also, comments on VRM temps are a joke, a few degrees difference does not matter, especially when you do not explain how testing was completed nor the rated specs for the VRMs.
Why not test the Asus H81M-D Plus board with the front USB 3 header and significantly better overclocking than the older -E board, even at $55. Same for the Gigabyte HD2 or DS2V boards, still better choices than the flaky MSI or Asrock products.
I had the MSI E34 board (which cost $65 a couple of months ago) and it had flaky USB 3 ports, a problem that is well known in their support forum and online. It also had issues with power management on a core i-3 that was never fixed. Sent that board back in two weeks after nothing but troubles but hey, guess that fits right in with it being recommended here now.
Do you guys even test or is it just run four benchmarks now and name a winner based on price and advertising. I used to think the reviews here were worth something but it has gone downhill in a hurry the past few months. Not coming back unless I need a good laugh.
On a single-board sample, there is no way to test for general quality issues. Ahead of any review, on any site, for any product, readers should add "Assuming it works;" that is something we have to do. Unless a review indicates that the product possesses a liar label, there's really no way to meaningfully comment on QA issues.
As far as "questionable test results," did you expect the benchmarks to show large differences? In all the years I've been reading motherboard reviews, I don't recall seeing big differences, and often skip over the benchmarks because I don't believe they're going to show me anything remarkable.
They didn't send one at all bud. Same as ASUS. So yes, let's not have the industrie's leading motherboards there, great comparison.
That would be great! I guess I need to hold off on my next build until then.
I'm surprised that ASRock sent two boards, while Gigabyte sent nothing. Have they been losing in the low-end market, or something else that I do not know about?
On a similar note, I am disappointed in Biostar for not sending in a sample! They have several offerings at this price point which could have been quite competitive in their feature-set, not to mention their overall cost.