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

ASRock P67 Extreme6

Those less interested in Fatal1ty branding might prefer ASRock’s P67 Extreme6, a design that includes many of the features from its gamer-centric counterpart, yet strangely uses a completely different circuit board.

Extreme6 buyers still get four external and eight internal USB 2.0 ports, four external and two internal USB 3.0 ports, four SATA 3Gb/s, six SATA 6Gb/, and dual gigabit network ports. One of the internal SATA 6Gb/s ports is still shared with eSATA, and even the x16-length graphics card slots are carried over with x16-x0-x4 and x8-x8-x4 transfer capabilities.

The P67 Extreme6 is similarly blessed with an eighteen-phase voltage regulator and similarly cursed with front-panel audio and front-panel USB 3.0 connectors placed far too distant from the ports of most enthusiast-oriented cases. So, aside from the price, what’s different?

The P67 Extreme6 eliminates the added-cost Ultra ATA controller, but keeps the cable connector for the ubiquitous floppy controller. The Extreme6 also uses a less expensive and far lighter heatpipe, covers the PLX PCIe 2.0 bridge with a die-cast shell that appears to be magnesium, and employs two-sided (rather than single-sided) clips on its memory slots.

A few other things that both boards have in common are onboard power and reset buttons, a port address 80 diagnostics display, rear-panel CLR_CMOS buttons, and a single, socketed BIOS. The lack of that last feature will come back to hurt one of ASRock’s competitors in this very review.

The P67 Extreme6 lacks only the Ultra ATA cable compared to the P67 Professional, since this particular motherboard doesn't include that controller anyway. Builders must still purchase their SATA cables separately if they want to use more than three drives.

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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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!
  • 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)
  • 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.
  • sudeshc
    Nice analysis glad to know ASUS is good to go.
  • Hupiscratch
    Great article. Now it´s time for the high-end overclocking oriented boards, like the ASUS Maximus IV Extreme.
  • 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.
  • Quote:
    Please tell Gigabyte to produce something for this market!


    GA-P67A-UD7 doesn't count?
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • rolli59
    8708 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
  • ammar711
    hope if u can make a review of Asus Saertooth P67
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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?
  • 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.
  • prabal34
    After reading this review I will stay away from future MSI motherboards. What a sham.
  • 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.
  • Crashman
    rrrGA-P67A-UD7 doesn't count?
    It's way more than $250.
    rolli59GA-P67A-UD5-B3 http://www.gigabyte.us/products/pr [...] id=3762#ov
    It's still more than $250.
    jrabbit2FACTUAL ERROR: the asrock boards clearly has FOUR (4) USB 3.0 ports, and 2 front panel USB 3.0 ports supported internally: taken from the asrock website, IN your article it says only 2
    Could you give me a quote and a page number? I didn't see that.
    Max_DTHAt first page we got information that CLR_CMOS Button in ASRock's is Jumper-Only. Why back pannel CLR CMOS doesn't qualify?
    Different sections of the table show internal and external interfaces. There is no internal button for that function, but there is an external button.
    rockitmanThe 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.
    All the motherboards have the same slot layout. You did point out a good market for ASROCK'S connector layout however: In cases that have the bottom of the motherboard next to the drive bays, bottom-edge connectors are superior.
  • Mark Heath
    Based on the specs pages and board layout images from the asus site, the EVO more closely resembles the PRO rather than the Deluxe. Physically the boards (EVO and PRO) are nearly identical. The only differences I could find between the two is that the EVO gains:

    -1x Realtek® 8110SC Gigabit LAN (so it has 2 ports the PRO only has the single Intel one)
    -the addition of a heatsink mid-board next to the topmost pcie x1 slot
    -a physical power and reset switch on the board.
  • Crashman
    Mark HeathBased on the specs pages and board layout images from the asus site, the EVO more closely resembles the PRO rather than the Deluxe. Physically the boards (EVO and PRO) are nearly identical. The only differences I could find between the two is that the EVO gains:-1x Realtek® 8110SC Gigabit LAN (so it has 2 ports the PRO only has the single Intel one)-the addition of a heatsink mid-board next to the topmost pcie x1 slot-a physical power and reset switch on the board.
    And the Pro is slated for a lower-budget market, which is likely why it did better in its review.
  • truchonic
    well one think are really close the same but i didn't saw price $$$$ and you know $50 make the difference the first one looks sick ans also what about low budget AMD? gamers