PSA: Don't Buy This Asrock Motherboard

[Steve]

In testing new Intel B660 motherboards for an upcoming VRM roundup, we felt compelled to stop and look at the Asrock B660M-HDV, only because Asrock is at it again, misleading consumers with a garbage product.

Read the full article here.

https://www.techspot.com/review/2424-asrock-motherboard-fail/

 

[psycros]

Need more pieces like this. Sooo much deception going on in the industry right now.

 

[Irata]

Thanks for looking into this.

I do have a remark:

Intel has since made some attempts to solve this, though sadly they’ve only done so for their 12th-gen K processors, where PL1 now equals PL2, meaning the default behaviour for K series parts is to run at the maximum turbo power.

If PL2=PL1 is the default, why mention PL1 in the first place ? This includes Intel, store descriptions but also reviews. If the CPU is a 2xx W rather than 1xxW, why not mention this rather than PL1 ?

The same is true for all other CPU regardless of manufacturer that run on permanent Turbo per default.

 

[DZillaXx]

The real issue is Intel for the lack luster specs.

On intel's higher end chips, even 125w is not enough in default state. So even if the board did do 125w as a hard cap, supported higher end chips would not run at their best.

Intel has been behind on the performance per watt game, and even though alder lake was a massive improvement on that front. Intel's higher end chips are still power hungry.


I don't think people will be buying this board for 125w chips, and not supporting 125w chips would just piss off people years down the road for cheap upgrade paths. But it really should have been a 125w board.

 

[Dimitriid]

Even for AMD boards I usually refuse to buy any board that doesn't at least puts a 50 cents, rough aluminum heatsink on the VRMs that should be the bare minimum outside of maybe the kind of ultra low power CPUs you would usually find on single-board-computers like Atoms, Celerons and those Ryzen Embedded types too that are designed to be passively cooled and running off modest battery power.

 

[HardReset]

Basically this means you cannot buy Any LGA1700 motherboard and put "65W" CPU on it without problems.

I don't recall similar examples from AM4 motherboards exists.

 

[merikafyeah]

Intel and their power-spec shenanigans again. I miss the days when the wattage rating was actually useful.

 

[Arbie]

It's a shame to see a hugely complex, ultra high-tech, zillion component, micro-tolerance, multi-layer, copper and gold, wave soldered, tested, boxed and shipped etc product be kneecapped by a poor basic design choice. If you're going to do all that, Asrock - do it right.

 

[wiyosaya]

Interesting and insightful review. I've had several ASRock MBs in the past, mostly AMD, and one Intel X77 board, and I am happy with them, but I will stay away from ASRock in the future.

It sounds like ASRock/Intel are up to the usual marketing shenanigans, and that is something that should never happen, IMO. But crappy companies will be crappy companies - and I won't support them.

I built a system for my wife last year with a Gigabyte X570 board, and both she and I could not be happier.

 

[seeprime]

Great information that will help mem chose boards in upcoming customer builds. Thanks!

 

[Nintenboy01]

In fairness even my previous MSI B450M Pro-VDH board had no trouble running my 5800X at the max 142 watts

 

[nodfor]

I don't agree that mobos like these shouldn't exist. They should, with the right price and clarification on their capabilities.
If one only needs an 12100 he shouldn't be forced to buy a board with 19 power phases and half a kilo vrm heatsinks.

 

[EdmondRC]

I steer clear of Asrock products in general. I am not saying they don't have any good products, but the experience I have had with them has not been good.

 

[brucek]

Months from now I'll no longer remember exactly which board had this problem or what the problem even was, only that Asrock is the manufacturer with the trap motherboard I need to avoid.

Not sure why manufacturers think this is a worthwhile game, especially in a marketplace where most gear is selling even if it's not particularly great.

 

[Ojref]

Not buying Asrock motherboards is a way of life. Which is kind of sad, considering Asrock is a spin-off from Asus (Asustek - Pegatron)

 

[kiwigraeme]

Given most home PC builders do their research - this is pretty stupid . A few years ago I though Asrock were meant to be the value boards = ie you can get a lot of bang for your buck - but also their might be niggling problems .
For my PCs I do a lot of research on M/B - I am limited as don't want stupid tier - but I want a decent amount of M2/sata/USBC ports and maybe wifi6/BT - I do other things than game. - I did build a gaming PC last year and got a nice solid Asus board.
It seems all the big names have some problem boards esp V1 MSI. Asus. Gigabyte etc

Well as others stated won't be buying a Asrock board till they can prove themselves .

Pay those extra $50 for a better M/B , PSU , even case etc - let's say $150 more combined - over a life of 5 years plus ( again assuming excellent CPU/GPU/Memory/M2 drives etc )

 

[Fastturtle]

And my experience with AsRock is that they've been solid boards and I don't have any problem buying them for AMD. On the other hand though if it's an Intel board from them, I've had three (3x) of them in the last 20 years and everyone of them has bricked itself so they couldn't post. Not sure what the issue is with them and Intel but I will not buy AsRock for an Intel build.

As to Intel, their drivers and software tend to leave me shaking my head in amazement it even works. Yes I'm serious. How in the Fleagle does a Network Adapter need 2GB of files to work when anyone else either has very limited 5mb worth of driver or the drivers are built into windows?

 

[mrSister]

Well, at least is not AMD who gets sabotaged by an OEM this time.

 

[Angga B]

I think it's a bad thing for tech and review site to issue such PSA with such title. I mean, of course you can have opinion to a product, you can put it on the body, or in ratings since that what rating means. You can give it 0 rating, up to you.

But to do it in activist style with such provocatively judging title, don't buy this product, or even titled buy this product for product too good to be true. I don't thnk it's the good way to keep running in this business, not to mention that you really think your reader could not think for themselves. Rather condescending I guess.

I believe the company in question would also appreciate it much better, as their feedback.

Just my 2 cents. Have some moderation, pretty please?

 

[Uncle Al]

Good catch, thanks for spreading the word!!!

 

[NoLifeDGenerate]

I find it odd everyone shitting on Asrock now. I've built rigs with Asus, Gigabyte, etc over the years, and the only board that hasn't found a way to piss me off is the Asrock board I built my AM3 system with a few years ago (X470 Taichi Ultimate).

I still remember the last Gigabyte board I used. One of the SATA controllers refused to work if IOMMU(?) was turned on but the usb keyboard and mouse wouldn't work on linux without it. Always had to do a workaround when I wanted to run a LiveCD or install a new distro.

 

[JomeyQ]

I have two of these motherboards, and they're great. They have features that are unavailable from any other board without spending at least 30 percent more, and they give me the max performance from i3 12100 CPUs that I've been putting in them. They're perfect, and they're even small enough to fit in some very small form factor cases that I use (the SGPC k30) without having to pay double for the cheapest itx boards.

This article was a huge disappointment. The b560 roundup was so useful, and I've referred to it many times when building systems for people. Not because I want to get them THE MOST POWERFUL B560 BOARD IN EXISTENCE, but to see things like "will this cheap board be enough to run a 10400?". I was really hoping for something similar this generation, and am baffled that the article doesn't even mention trying any 6 core or lower CPUs. This is the cheapest b660 motherboard you can buy. The people looking for this board are people buying the cheap CPUs, the ones that media outlets (including this one) have been praising, specifically the 12100 and the 12400. Well people buying those value CPUs want to know if there are good value motherboards to go with them. Is this such a motherboard? I certainly think so, but this article says nothing useful to answer the question. It instead follows a disturbing tech media trend I've seen of stirring up drama, which in this case is totally uncalled for.

Not every motherboard needs to run every CPU in the lineup at its maximum boost forever. When I'm building cheap systems, I don't want to pay extra for capability I'm never going to need or use. This is a good motherboard for its intended purpose, and a great value for at least i3 chips, and hopefully 6 core i5s. For the latter, I'll have to continue to wait for a better quality review.

 

[VaRmeNsI]

Assrock

 

[BadThad]

Personally I'd drop down a CPU level to spend the money on a better motherboard. It's easy to upgrade components around a good mobo but not so easy to upgrade your mobo. BUY THE BEST MOBO YOU CAN AFFORD AND BUILD AROUND IT.

 

[Athlonite]

The problem with Asrock is that unless you are buying their premium products you're going to get stung by shortcomings like this on a regular basis
Premium = Great
mid range = OK
low end = Total garbage/ DO NOT TOUCH with a 50mtr barge pole