Are More Expensive Motherboards Better Motherboards? - [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,602
Are More Expensive Motherboards Better Motherboards?

In this editorial Dan Dobrowolski digs into his lifelong experience in the tech sector as well as his more than 10 years of reviewing motherboards for HardOCP and tries to answer a very simple question. While the question is very simple, the depth of answers may surprise you. We have a list of nine things to consider.
 
A nice editorial for people new to PC building. But let me offer my own bottom line:

Four steps to choosing a motherboard:
1) Decide the features you need and make a list of the motherboards have them
2) Check the [H]ardOCP reviews for the motherboards, eliminate any that had issues
3) Evaluate the cost of each motherboard, adding 10% to any that didn't get a gold [H]
4) Buy the cheapest. :)
 
Have noticed over time the quality gap between lower end models and higher ends isnt as far as it was 10+ years ago. Stick to a major manufacture and their cheaper boards are pretty decent! Lately I just make sure the board has the PCI slots I want, the chipset has enough bus speeds or channels, has adequate amount of USB and SATA ports. Everything else is nice but not necessary for me.
 
just avoid anything that doesn't use the newer solid caps lol, those were always the downfall of most boards..... Abit....lol
 
Killer LAN was a "premium" feature on some high end mobos.

High end and low end are not all that binary.
 
I usually buy ASUS motherboards, never had problems with ASUS boards. I have a five year old ASUS board that's still going on strong.
 
Some of what your getting isn't necessarily beneficial or even tangible.
Click to expand...

That's certainly fine if you can afford it and your honest with your reasoning.
Click to expand...

Who the hell is his editor?!?!?!?!? *twitch* *twitch*

/grammar police

That being said, my circa 2010 ECS was still rock solid stable at stock when I retired it to the closet this January.
 
No. High end usually has stuff that's not needed.
Do you really need that PLX chip to run 3-4 way sli? Do you need 5-10gb lan built in? Do you need built in water cooler headers for the southbridge/cpu. Do you need an excess of voltage regulators? Do you need built in wifi/fancy sound chips?
Most of the time the answer is no. You just need a motherboard that will last. You certainly don't need shit like LEDs and whatnot, but seriously take a look at the extras and ask yourself if you need them, then ask if you want them, then also ask will you ever use those extra features.
 
trparky said:
I usually buy ASUS motherboards, never had problems with ASUS boards. I have a five year old ASUS board that's still going on strong.
Click to expand...

I know that the 2 Prime X370 Pro boards that I purchased last year are quite good. That said, the Asrock Taichi is also good, as long as stock settings with compatible ram is what you are looking for.
 
Gigus Fire said:
No. High end usually has stuff that's not needed.
Do you really need that PLX chip to run 3-4 way sli? Do you need 5-10gb lan built in? Do you need built in water cooler headers for the southbridge/cpu. Do you need an excess of voltage regulators? Do you need built in wifi/fancy sound chips?
Most of the time the answer is no. You just need a motherboard that will last. You certainly don't need shit like LEDs and whatnot, but seriously take a look at the extras and ask yourself if you need them, then ask if you want them, then also ask will you ever use those extra features.
Click to expand...
​
Yeah, unless you are planning a CPU overvolt pulling 300w there isn't much these days to justify the higher end boards.

If you need a second NIC or more storage ports just buy PCIe cards that you can move to your next build when the time comes. What else are you using those slots for? Certainly not GPUs these days
 
ChoGGi said:
There seem to be two discussion threads.
https://hardforum.com/threads/are-more-expensive-motherboards-better-motherboards-h.1956507/
https://hardforum.com/threads/are-more-expensive-motherboards-better-motherboards-h.1956500/
Click to expand...
Yes, they both seem to be posted by the site owner, almost like he wanted that to happen. Hmmmm.

keep-calm-and-lets-get-back-to-the-topic.png
 
ecmaster76 said:
Yeah, unless you are planning a CPU overvolt pulling 300w there isn't much these days to justify the higher end boards.

If you need a second NIC or more storage ports just buy PCIe cards that you can move to your next build when the time comes. What else are you using those slots for? Certainly not GPUs these days
Click to expand...
But specs are almost pointless to check to see how much you can overclock your cpu. You're better off going to sites which list the highest overclock gotten and that list the motherboard they use. Surprisingly there doesn't seem to be a relation between how many phases/regulators/fancy heat sink design and the top speeds gotten (not using ln2). And that's after considering if you win the silicon lottery to get those extra ceiling cpus since motherboards are typically secondary.
 
As I almost build exclusively with iTX boards I am not sure I know what a cheap board is anymore but of the cheapest iTX boards I have found them all to be rock solid.
 
When I built my systems every one to two years, well I tended to not worry too much about quality and longevity and features were what I looked at. Now that I build my system to last, at the very least, five years longevity is a much greater factor in my decision. Also features still factor high as in will it still serve me well in five years and something I don't care much about now may be very important five years from now (i.e. I'm more willing to pay for some extra things I may or may not use...the extra cost is now amortized over a much longer period).
 
Power phases are generally pretty irrelevant, so long as the phases are well designed. Now of course it tends to be the case that the high end boards have not only higher quality components for each phase, but more of them. So higher end gear is better, but not always for the reasons people think. It's pretty hard to quantify the quality of a phase for a end user versus the easily-marketed number of phases.

Higher end boards have that "luxury" sheen, and typically get a bit more going-over before they leave the factory, so turds are less likely regardless of component selection. These companies do really care about the perception of their brand, especially in flagship lines. There's also a higher likelihood of firmware updates longer down the road for them. Bottom end stuff will always be a bit pump-and-dump.
 
Gigus Fire said:
No. High end usually has stuff that's not needed.
Do you really need that PLX chip to run 3-4 way sli? Do you need 5-10gb lan built in? Do you need built in water cooler headers for the southbridge/cpu. Do you need an excess of voltage regulators? Do you need built in wifi/fancy sound chips?
Most of the time the answer is no. You just need a motherboard that will last. You certainly don't need shit like LEDs and whatnot, but seriously take a look at the extras and ask yourself if you need them, then ask if you want them, then also ask will you ever use those extra features.
Click to expand...

Right, this whole "article" happened because I called out Dan for having unrealistic needs compared to his readers. Because he has a long experience with ultra-high-end motherboards.

While reviewing fancy motherboards may get [H] MANY MORE CLICKS, it doesn't translate to need when the costs of various features on a board are are tallied.

When you're building a system and have a specific price in-mind, the first thing to go is a fancy motherboard. Because for 99% of users a $200 Z motherboard overclocks the same as a $600 Z motherboard. But the vast majority of people will not use the majority of features on that $600 Cadillac.

There are always people who will go high "just in case," but it should always be the last suggestion in a motherboard recommendation.

They might get more lots tested, but you can be sure these things aren't individually tested before they leave the factory. And the parts used on cheaper boards are high enough MTBF that, unless you're keeping the board for 10+ years you won't notice the difference.
 
Last edited:
Gigus Fire said:
No. High end usually has stuff that's not needed.
Do you really need that PLX chip to run 3-4 way sli? Do you need 5-10gb lan built in? Do you need built in water cooler headers for the southbridge/cpu. Do you need an excess of voltage regulators? Do you need built in wifi/fancy sound chips?
Most of the time the answer is no. You just need a motherboard that will last. You certainly don't need shit like LEDs and whatnot, but seriously take a look at the extras and ask yourself if you need them, then ask if you want them, then also ask will you ever use those extra features.
Click to expand...
ahh i might not need extra VRMs and such but I will take them. Personal preference to not skimp even if it doesn't do anything, I don't like knowing my CPU could be starved.
 
I agree that cheap does not always mean better value, but I would disagree a motherboard that cost 4 times as much offers 4 times as much for your money.

$150 Asus motherboards have served me well for years for basic features and OCability.
 
bigdogchris said:
I agree that cheap does not always mean better value, but I would disagree a motherboard that cost 4 times as much offers 4 times as much for your money.

$150 Asus motherboards have served me well for years for basic features and OCability.
Click to expand...

Right, I've used $150 or less overclocking motherboards since the 1990s. My experiences:

BH6: lasted 8 years running an Celeron overclocked to 800, until I retired it.
Cheap $95 Nforce4 motherboard running Athlon 64 x2 3800+, overclocked. Lasted 9 years until I retired it.

The only motherboard I've ever had fail was an Intel $115 P67 and that's because they cheaped-out on the VRMs. And it still lasted me 6 years overclocked!

Every other motherboard I've owned has been retired before it failed. I have stock chips running today on 8-year-old motherboards, and expect to get even more life from them. The PSU died before the motherboard did!

Overclocked boards need more VRMs than some $100 z-series special, but they really don't need $600 worth. THIS HAS BEEN MY EXPERIENCE.

Once you get beyond the $150 mark, I have not noticed any more cases of faulty motherboards than the high-end models. Not after years of prowling these forums.
 
Last edited:
bigdogchris said:
I agree that cheap does not always mean better value, but I would disagree a motherboard that cost 4 times as much offers 4 times as much for your money.

$150 Asus motherboards have served me well for years for basic features and OCability.
Click to expand...

With any manufactured good, there is very rarely a linear correlation between cost and quality. You can always get the 80% solution for 50% of the money. Personally, I'll throw a few more bucks at a subsystem which uses provably better components. The good stuff has a verified supply chain, and are (now) very unlikely to be spoofed with counterfeit crap.
 
Sure they might be better but I am a cheap bastard who doesn't care about features and military grade materials.
 
I have had only two Mobo's fail on me. One was a Soyo (remember them?) it had capacitors explode. A common issue at the time with most vendors. I also had an Dell SC420 die of the same issue. Also during this time I had a few video card failures.

Nothing within the last decade has had problems. I ran and original i7 rig on an x58 Asus board until just a year ago. What a solid machine that was. Only reason I retired it was I needed more memory.
 
How to buy a motherboard.

1) Go to store or website
2) Look for image below
3) Hand over money.


IMG_20180316_180906.jpg

If manufacturer did not put it on the box, check here.

The same can be applied to nearly any piece of hardware.
 
my rules have always been features i want>bios support>price.. if a cheap motherboard has what i want i'll buy it, if an expensive board is the only way to get what i want then i'll buy it. the idea of expensive equaling better build quality went out the doors years ago for me.
 
IMHO nope. I buy middle of the road chipsets Haswell 4690K on a 9 series chipset... runs great

Gigabyte H97M-D3H
 
I tend to buy boards with great power efficiency and performance additionally seldom is it expensive.

More recently I have been using taichi boards due to cost/ performance/ feature mix having all I want.

Kinda funny, from rampage and dark boards to taichi...
 
IMO for the most part you pay for features you don't really need. I don't even consider MB of more than $150 dlls. Even lower if I'm not overclocking.
 
I'm going to be that jerk who notes that "better" is subjective, so of course the net result will be along the lines of, "Well, that's like, your opinion, man."
 
Stoly said:
IMO for the most part you pay for features you don't really need. I don't even consider MB of more than $150 dlls. Even lower if I'm not overclocking.
Click to expand...
Me too typically. RGB, killer nic/sound can GTFO my motherboards.
 
For many years I did perfectly fine on the $99 Intel board ot the day. Bummed me out when they got out of that business. I have an ASUS now that was in that price range and it's ok but I miss the Intel simplicity on the rare occasion I end up in the BIOS. I'm also confused why it is semi-gamer marketed but has VGA and LPT1 and COM headers.
 
To me, only reason to buy expensive motherboards is to overclock. Paying an extra $100~$200 for a motherboard just doesn't make sense.
 
Oddly enough I usually start with audio and price. Almost all budget boards have ALC8xx/9xx. Mid range+ mostly all have ALC1220. I eliminate everything without ALC1220 then set a max price of $200 and start shopping. With so many boards being made now it is just a quick way to eliminate a bunch.

It is crazy how many boards are made by each manufacturer now. Asus makes 11 different ATX Z370 boards.
 
Der8auer did a YouTube called "battle of the cheap" which shed some light on this. And higher price definitely doesn't translate linearly to higher performance.

At the same time though, if you go too cheap, corners got cut on components - they had to.

My tendency is to overspend because I worry that power regulation will be subpar if I cheap out. And since I usually want to OC to the big dot-o number, that means 33% more spent on a MB to get what appears to me as better power regs - or at least more numerous and properly heatsinked - on the board.

And then when Kyle and [H] continually review highly the same lines I've tended to buy anyway Strix 270 & 370 for example - it just reinforces my buying pattern. BIOS options and familiarity within brands also factors.
 
i have bought expensive motherboards because i needed 4 x8 slots on a motherboard.

i never use the fancy gimmick crap.

also i refuse to pay HEDT prices.
 
I try to look for boards with as few things as I don't need, but with the highest concern for heat dissipation and clean power distribution. It's really not as common a criteria as it should be, though. I always end up paying for a bunch of crap I don't need. Slightly off topic, but relevant to my point: if you skim through this guy's video card reviews, he discusses how each manufacturers design compares to the reference model in terms of power and heat concerns. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrwObTfqv8u1KO7Fgk-FXHQ/featured

He also covers motherboards, but they are not so easily compared. Some manufacturers tend toward the bare minimum, which often causes problems or at least performance limitations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top