I could almost be called an ASUS fanboy, since I have bought ASUS boards almost exclusively for at least 20 years now. But this thread raises a question for me that will be very important in 12-18 months, when I upgrade my rig again. Among the other major motherboard makers. which has the best record for defects and RMA repairs. Same question for BIOS quality and number of years of BIOS support. What do you guys think?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Hardware Nexus: ASUS Scammed Us
- Thread starter Blade-Runner
- Start date
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,457
In particular motherboards tend to have a lot of problems and drivers are more important so I have little reason to look to an ASUS motherboard. They also tend to be the most expensive. Though I believe MSI and Gigabyte RMA quality is not good from what I have been told, it does seem like ASUS is notably worse. But that is just based off of reading online and I have no data to back it up. It would be interesting to see some investigation done between the three, and maybe ASRock and see which brand has the least problematic warranty process.
As for the ROG Ally, I don't see what the point is. It seems like quite the niche product. Even Steam's offering has been a poor seller but at least it is well built and seemingly Valve should stand behind their product. I can't see what the Ally can do that the Steam Deck, or the next release of it, can't do better. Lets not get started on the MSI Claw and other things. Seems like companies are burning money chasing a super niche market. Realistically Valve has this cornered. I just doubt there is a market big enough for both. Switch for casual gamers/purpose built handheld games, Deck for higher end enthusiasts.
As for the ROG Ally, I don't see what the point is. It seems like quite the niche product. Even Steam's offering has been a poor seller but at least it is well built and seemingly Valve should stand behind their product. I can't see what the Ally can do that the Steam Deck, or the next release of it, can't do better. Lets not get started on the MSI Claw and other things. Seems like companies are burning money chasing a super niche market. Realistically Valve has this cornered. I just doubt there is a market big enough for both. Switch for casual gamers/purpose built handheld games, Deck for higher end enthusiasts.
pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 52,898
ask again in 18 months...
The Steam Deck has not been a poor seller, I’m not sure who told you that. They’ve sold millions of Decks and proved the viability of handheld PC gaming in the process. I have one and I love it. It’s a product designed by gamers who understood their target customer.
The Ally has some nice design ideas to it, but with their fatal design flaw with the SD card, and now this warranty insanity means I’ll be sticking with Valve, and I’m absolutely ok with that. The Deck has been awesome to play around with and reports of Valve’s support have been very positive.
KazeoHin
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 9,058
Brands leapfrog all the time. Especially in this small, niche market with so many players. The market for enthusiast PC parts is so zero-sum that once you ''win" and become top player in a crowded market, the ONLY way to make more profit (and thus continue the larp of perpetual exponential growth, pleasing shareholders: your REAL customers) is to reduce costs but keep the price static. Then you have to increase profits next year, so you reduce costs again. repeat this cycle until you burn through all of your brand loyalty and some other brand leapfrogs you.
Then that brand becomes top dog, has saturated the market and the only way for them to continue exponential profit growth is to cut costs... etc. etc.
There was a while where Gigabyte was MFing TOP DOG and people would get into knife-fights over anyone saying they weren't the absolute pinnacle of sapient engineering. But the cycle hit them and between 2005-2015 they were pretty terrible and I wouldn't touch them, in that time, Asus became the new orgasm-inducing apex of life, and people now get into knife-fights over Asus's honour.
Moral of the story is NEVER be loyal to one brand. Trust experienced people and do research.
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,457
In around two years they sold 3-4 million. To give you an idea, Nintendo sold around that much in a few months. I'm also assuming in two years there have been more than 3-4 million gaming laptops sold. I assume more gaming laptops sold than the Deck, Ally and Claw combined over the past two years.
It is a niche product. I doubt there is enough room for more than one brand in the market. It will always be a niche as long as Nintendo sells a cheaper handheld console and gaming laptops exist.
Brackle
Old Timer
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,593
Actually I would have to disagree. There are so many people in the world that use steam for games. You can easily just login with your account on the steam deck and you have all your games at your disposal. Nintendo can't offer that at all.
That is why the steam deck will always be superior. Nintendo will make a new switch, probably wont be backward compatible with the original switch games or you have to buy them all over again. With steam...you buy the games on your PC enjoy them, and have the ability to play those same games on the the fly.
I can tell you with having over 500 games on my steam account. Nintendo switch just cannot do that for a lot of people.
When the Steam Deck 2 comes out....guess what I already own 500 games for it if I do get it. Which I do plan to do when they release it.
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,457
It is hard to compare the two so early in the Deck's short market time. But what we do know is the sale numbers aren't even close when we compare the Switch sales to Deck sales at the two year mark. It isn't a matter of disagreeing, but just a matter of facts.
But that won't translate into sales for a niche piece of hardware. You can use Steam on a laptop, which is better at being a computer than the Deck.
More than likely it will be backwards compatible. Nintendo has a decent history of backwards compatibility. You could use your Gameboy games in the Gameboy Advanced, your DS games in the 3DS, etc. Though after the "Switch 2" I assume backwards compatibility for Switch games may not be done. Part of the problem is due to game design itself. Games are designed around the consoles, unlike the Deck, in which games are either not designed around it or the developers have to add in a new UI and whatnot. 3DS games would need to have the UI and in some cases controls completely re-done if ported to the Switch because the 3DS relies on two screens. Often times menus were on the bottom screen and gameplay/real time action on the top scene.
The Deck's issues won't be as drastic as almost all PC games are designed around using a single screen. And sure, you can load up your old Steam games, but the UI might result in an almost un-usable experience.
The Deck is certainly an interesting concept. But it is a niche one. Valve can get away with it due to brand/image and Steam. It will certainly fill a bit of a market niche but I cannot see it ever becoming more than that. A handheld computer is a neat idea, but the moment you want to use a computer you'll opt for a laptop because using what is essentially a big ass gamepad for regular computer stuff is... just not going to work well.
Nobu
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 10,159
They're two different markets, imo. While they carry many similarities, a person who owns a switch may also own a steam deck, because you cannot play Mario Party on the deck ("above board").
That said, Valve doesn't need the deck to do very well, because they make a lot of money on the games they sell. And they'll sell more games just because some people got a deck to play them on. Selling more decks is always welcome, of course, but selling games is always the main focus.
Other competitors in the market are at a disadvantage from the start. I'm kinda surprised they didn't try partnering with Microsoft or Epic, or maybe they did but couldn't convince them yet.
That said, Valve doesn't need the deck to do very well, because they make a lot of money on the games they sell. And they'll sell more games just because some people got a deck to play them on. Selling more decks is always welcome, of course, but selling games is always the main focus.
Other competitors in the market are at a disadvantage from the start. I'm kinda surprised they didn't try partnering with Microsoft or Epic, or maybe they did but couldn't convince them yet.
Brackle
Old Timer
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 8,593
Also do not forget you can use the steam deck as a PC, and use it to emulate DS and 3DS games. Basically the steam deck is a laptop all in one for handheld gaming. The Switch just cannot compete with that.
But, they are 2 different markets. Steam deck is a PC, the switch is not.
DukenukemX
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 8,035
I go by personal experience, which sucks because that means I learn the hard way. Also, no manufacturer will stay consistently good, assuming they were good. What often happens is that once a company has a fanbase, they will often start lowering the quality of their products, while also raising their prices. I used to like Asus products back when Windows XP was the OS to use. The problem was a lot of motherboards just ended up dying, and well past their warranty. I built computers for friends and family, and it was Asus motherboards that died. There was a time period I used nothing but Gigabyte, until those motherboards started to die. Mostly because Gigabyte motherboards during the AMD FX era had trash for VRMs. The Gigabyte I had eventually took out my FX 8350. There are stories of people having their motherboard warp due to the heat from the VRMs. Now I stick with MSI, because so far they've been good to me. Not a fan of ASRock though I do have a few of them still working. The problem with ASRock is their bios support sucks, and they like to trick people with motherboard names. I bought the ASRock 970DE3/U3S3, which you'd think the name suggests it runs an AMD 970 chipset, but it actually has the 770 chipset. Felt so damn scammed. The ASRock AB350 Pro4 which is still in use was a dumpster fire with it's BIOS. There was a feature that was missing that would have made my Ryzen 7 1700 stable with four sticks of memory, but I was tired of waiting and bought MSI. ASRock did eventually update the BIOS, but it's stupid that a needed feature was missing on this motherboard but their more expensive models had it.
Today it's more of a per product basis, because you never know when a company actually gets their shit together. When I first got a Ryzen motherboard, I was really interested in Asus. Buildzoid mentions an Asus motherboard with really good VRMs that has a B350 chipset, because most B350 boards had crap for VRMs. I think it was the Asus B350 Prime, but I don't remember. The issue is again dealing with Asus RMA, when things go wrong. In my experience it took a long time, and they would sometimes deny RMA, which is why I avoided Asus. I haven't had to deal with MSI's RMA process, because the stuff hasn't failed yet. That MSI B350 Tomahawk is the best motherboard I've ever owned, because it still works. That motherboard sits in my nephews computer now. To give you an idea how bad the motherboard situation is, just look up motherboards for older computers. If you find them, they'll cost more now then they were new. The CPU's are dirt cheap, because CPU's are usually more durable. Motherboards are generally not built very well.
Prince Valiant
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 3, 2023
- Messages
- 368
Seems like a crapshoot to me. I'd settle on 'least complaints' once you narrow the list of MBs.
I think the video title is kind of misleading. In the end, ASUS repaired their device. Communication was poor with ASUS and ASUS did TRY to get an unnecessary piece replaced at ridiculous expense. But the video title seems a little hyperbolic.
That's not to say that ASUS hasn't scammed others, I think the content and complain is valid, but the title is not wholly accurate. Title is clickbaity.
That's not to say that ASUS hasn't scammed others, I think the content and complain is valid, but the title is not wholly accurate. Title is clickbaity.
Did you watch the whole video? It’s not just GN. They showed evidence of ASUS doing it to others as well.
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,576
I just hope this causes Asus to reform their support department. This is just pathetic it's still happening.
pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 52,898
doubt it. theyve been pulling shit like this for 25 years.
Were they doing this stuff back in the Athlon XP days? I was a youngster back then and not paying as much attention. I do remember that ugly orange board though…
pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 52,898
i dont remember it ever not happening. my current board is the only asus product ive ever owned because i was always wary of it, that and its a bit like buying nike(paying extra for the name), but it was what was in my price range... it has been totally fine though, so far.
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,788
MSI RMA has been good for me during the Phenom II X6 VRM fiasco and then during X58 and X79. Not the most intuitive bios layout but usable. I hear generally good things about ASRock so MSI and ASRock are where I'm leaning for my next build.
yes, i did watch the video start to finish, and that is why i said "That's not to say that ASUS hasn't scammed others..."
EDIT: Video title is "ASUS Scammed US" which is debatable. They got the correct repair in the end, under the assumed pleb identity.
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,576
So you're saying they should have paid Asus whatever it asked so they could have a video title that is 100% factual?
no. i think the CLICKBAIT TITLE should be changed.
Furious_Styles
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2013
- Messages
- 4,576
To what, Asus tried to scam us?
That would be more accurate for sure. Something better would be "Our Experience with ASUS sleazy RMA"
Prince Valiant
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- May 3, 2023
- Messages
- 368
Appending "attempted to" would be accurate. They tried to squeeze out a repair for cosmetic damage that wasn't mentioned.
Domingo
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2004
- Messages
- 22,699
I've been lucky with ASUS, but this definitely isn't good. That said, it's better than Gigabyte which seems to operate all services in the west via Google translate.
On the positive side, I've had nothing but great service from Corsair going back 15+ years. It's one reason my PC's are filled with their gear.
On the positive side, I've had nothing but great service from Corsair going back 15+ years. It's one reason my PC's are filled with their gear.
Nintendo also has decades of experience creating and marketing console systems and video games with a devoted following built up over many years. Valve created a device for a market which, outside of a few niche players, basically didn’t exist, and when it did consisted of devices from small companies with limited marketing capacity that cost orders of magnitude more, and they did it using Linux and a comparability layer. To sell 3-4 million units in a couple of years, especially considering one was coming out of COVID with huge supply shortages and long delays, and get enough attention from other major players that they’re basically inventing a new category for gaming, I’d say that’s a notable accomplishment.
Probably the most important thing said so far in this thread.+1
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,457
Which is my point. It is a niche market, and Valve essentially has it cornered as is. But you cannot say the Deck has sold better than a Switch, in terms of sales numbers. It is not even close.
As long as gaming laptops and Nintendo handhelds exist it will always be a niche. The Deck fits in an odd place. It is more expensive than Nintendo's offerings and is more bulky when the Switch itself was borderline too big for a handheld system. And it doesn't really have the advantages of being a PC, namely upgrading or diversity of hardware. You can upgrade storage, but so can a Switch. Now with the Deck you can upgrade the SSD which is certainly better than an SD card but perhaps Nintendo will change that with the next console.
It can do some other PC like stuff, but to really use it in any practical way you're going to need to lug around a keyboard and mouse which renders the concept pointless. If you're going to do that you're going to get a regular gaming laptop.
I never said the Deck was selling better than a Switch. I never even made that suggestion. I do think it's sold well under the circumstances it was launched, in an emerging market. Valve seems to agree, because they've already said they will be making a Deck 2, which they would not be doing if sales were not satisfactory.
I do agree with you that the field will get crowded by more than enough players and many will drop away, but that's perfectly normal with every industry. Asus and Lenovo have interesting competitive offerings, but Valve's support is unbeatable. This incident with Asus only further reinforces that. As for the MSI Claw, I know that one's not selling. Not just from what Steve on GN said, I was at a local retailer for it here in Canada just the other day, and they told me they've sold none. It's a vastly inferior product in every respect and it's way too expensive.
Not sure how much you've played around with one, but there are a lot of modding opportunities, and many users have taken advantage of it. I've personally really enjoyed playing with and tinkering with mine and it's been a great travel companion for me. Plays well while sitting on a plane, is a lot more compact than a gaming laptop, and costs SIGNIFICANTLY less, so I wouldn't put them in the same category. I've even used it as a makeshift LAN PC at a buddy's place using a USB hub and my travel peripherals. Much easier than lugging around that giant CRT monitor and tower like I did back in the day.
Just wondering. I seem to recall reading somewhere that ASUS sells more boards to OEMs to guys like us, . Does ASUS supply roughly the same motherboard designs for its OEM customers as it does for retailer to sell to guys like us and small custom builders? And what motherboards in its own systems?
DukenukemX
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 8,035
I don't know. I'm not saying that Asus has the worst build quality, but more often than not I see these boards just die. Even people with Ryzen based Asus motherboards seem to just quit. Even Buildzoid thinks that MSI is the motherboard manufacturer who hasn't given him issues. He also hasn't bought many MSI boards, but I can also say the same for myself.
View: https://youtu.be/GqVRiOdpZnU?t=3866
DukenukemX
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 8,035
d3athf1sh
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2015
- Messages
- 1,267
i usually go with asus too myself. and i remember quite a few years back now when they announced that their motherboards were suppose to be 100% built by robots now, so it was suppose which was suppose to boost reliability and over the years i've had good luck with them but i'm usually buying their mid to high end stuff that's built with military grade components, can't speak for their low end stuff. but MSI would be my second pick, they've also been around as long as i can remember, that was exclusively who a local computer shop use to use where i live back in the 90's.
see i had one cheap asrock board in a budget build for a friend and it worked out ok, so on my next AMD FX build i did i got an asrock 990fx-extreme4 that was suppose to support my fx-8370 no problem and when it was like 2 weeks out of warranty it just cut off one day and wouldn't start back up. lights and fan still worked, so i bought a new power supply thinking that was the issue and it wasn't. bought a new motherboard an asus sabertooth 990fx and that's still kicking to this day as a second computer. i'm guessng the vrm blew on it? idk but i did notice the asus board was substantially heavier with less flex and board and chip ran a lot cooler. ever since then i haven't even looked at asrock and look at them as kind of a budget brand because if i would've just spent the extra $50 or whatever it was i saved over going with them over asus or msi i would've never had that problem and would've saved more than $50 in the long run. that and the headache because at that point i didn't have a backup computer so you can imagine my frustration when that power supply came and it still didn't work and i had to order something else and wait for it to come. now days i keep a spare.
not saying you can't have good luck with asrock maybe they've gotten better being now people like hardware unboxed tests vrm's or maybe i just got really unlucky? (that seems happen a lot too) i don't know but just something to think about.
I basically swore off Asus boards back in the Athlon days. I had an A7V-133, A7V-266a and an A7N8x-DLX. A buddy who usually built/upgraded the same time as me also had the exact same boards in his system. Every single one of them died within months. The system would either shut down when turned on and never start again or refused to start up one day. All the boards did this. At the time Asus was decent with RMAs and every single board was replaced in a decent timeframe; probably around two weeks in total and gave us no problems at all. Oddly enough every single one of the RMA replacements worked flawlessly until they were sold or retired. However, I was sick of dealing with dead computers, shipping costs and downtime so I didn't bother with another Asus board. Keep in mind that by this time Asus was a premier motherboard maker for the retail/enthusiast market and charged accordingly.
Money became a bit of an issue so I was running the replaced A7N8x-DLX board with a mobile Barton 2400+ for a few years until the release of Core2. At that point I started buying Gigabyte and so did my buddy. Not once did we ever have a problem with the Core2 965p and P35 chipset Gigabyte boards. Eventually there was a problem which caused a melted AUX CPU power connector on one of my P35 boards which made the board unusable but that issue was likely user error/foreign object debris as it happened right after I had done a full teardown and clean of the system (ironically.) I still have the 965p chipset board in working condition. I also have an Abit P35 board which should still work as well and never had to be RMA'd despite the fact this was the time that Abit was dying as a company.
Since then I've had one Asus b450 board for my Ryzen 2600x system. I only got that board because it was part of a bundle at Microcenter. Luckily it is still working to this day with that same CPU as my server but I still don't trust Asus and won't look at Asus boards. They still try to command a premium price when the product is no longer premium and all the Asus RMA horror stories put me off.
Asrock has a mixed history. It began as an offshoot of Asus to make budget motherboards. Quality was definitely an issue at that time. There were occasional gems but for the most part those boards were to be avoided. Eventually the company was spun off on its own and quality slowly improved to the point where I think they are one of the better board manufacturers for the price. Most of their motherboards tend to be priced well with good features and few quality control problems. I'm hoping to build an AM5 system before too long and Asrock is one of the few choices along with Gigabyte. MSI seems decent enough but I've never been a fan of their products and my son's x570 Tomahawk board probably has the worst BIOS implementation I ever seen. One of the strong points for Asrock is that they seemed to have the fewest issues with AM5 since release.
Money became a bit of an issue so I was running the replaced A7N8x-DLX board with a mobile Barton 2400+ for a few years until the release of Core2. At that point I started buying Gigabyte and so did my buddy. Not once did we ever have a problem with the Core2 965p and P35 chipset Gigabyte boards. Eventually there was a problem which caused a melted AUX CPU power connector on one of my P35 boards which made the board unusable but that issue was likely user error/foreign object debris as it happened right after I had done a full teardown and clean of the system (ironically.) I still have the 965p chipset board in working condition. I also have an Abit P35 board which should still work as well and never had to be RMA'd despite the fact this was the time that Abit was dying as a company.
Since then I've had one Asus b450 board for my Ryzen 2600x system. I only got that board because it was part of a bundle at Microcenter. Luckily it is still working to this day with that same CPU as my server but I still don't trust Asus and won't look at Asus boards. They still try to command a premium price when the product is no longer premium and all the Asus RMA horror stories put me off.
Asrock has a mixed history. It began as an offshoot of Asus to make budget motherboards. Quality was definitely an issue at that time. There were occasional gems but for the most part those boards were to be avoided. Eventually the company was spun off on its own and quality slowly improved to the point where I think they are one of the better board manufacturers for the price. Most of their motherboards tend to be priced well with good features and few quality control problems. I'm hoping to build an AM5 system before too long and Asrock is one of the few choices along with Gigabyte. MSI seems decent enough but I've never been a fan of their products and my son's x570 Tomahawk board probably has the worst BIOS implementation I ever seen. One of the strong points for Asrock is that they seemed to have the fewest issues with AM5 since release.