Best Motherboards (Archive)

[Crashman]

I'm really disappointed at how much Tom's is missing out on Asus Mobo's. I understand they chose not to participate, but does that really mean that a site such as Tomshardware, that is seriously trusted in the market can truly put their award on a product unless they've tested all possible products?

It puts a bad taste in my mouth, it's like CarAndDriver recommending Hyundai just because Toyota didn't send them a car. People actually rely on your website for purchasing and building decisions. You won't do anything but lose trust by simply missing testing an entire lineup of products.

This comment will get bashed, but with more than 10 years under my belt in hardware, ASRock shouldn't be anywhere but the choices for budget-oriented customers. The number of problems I've seen that happen again and again, even after 3 or 4 swaps with their boards is atrocious quality. Yes Asus has had problems as of recent, but none of them are as bad as an overall failing board.

Also, what the heck happened to EVGA? Also didn't choose to participate?

By simply recommending whatever manufacturers send you to test, you're basically being bought by the manufacturers.

You have to understand that the reason Asus dropped out is because it wasn't getting awards. That means it wouldn't be here anyway. That is, unless its representatives decided to shoot straight past all the value awards and go for Choice (formerly Elite) with something over-the-top.

That's what EVGA did. Unfortunately, the high-end model they sent went up against a Gigabyte board with better features. Gigabyte got the award.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I'm really disappointed at how much Tom's is missing out on Asus Mobo's. I understand they chose not to participate, but does that really mean that a site such as Tomshardware, that is seriously trusted in the market can truly put their award on a product unless they've tested all possible products?

It puts a bad taste in my mouth, it's like CarAndDriver recommending Hyundai just because Toyota didn't send them a car. People actually rely on your website for purchasing and building decisions. You won't do anything but lose trust by simply missing testing an entire lineup of products.

This comment will get bashed, but with more than 10 years under my belt in hardware, ASRock shouldn't be anywhere but the choices for budget-oriented customers. The number of problems I've seen that happen again and again, even after 3 or 4 swaps with their boards is atrocious quality. Yes Asus has had problems as of recent, but none of them are as bad as an overall failing board.

Also, what the heck happened to EVGA? Also didn't choose to participate?

By simply recommending whatever manufacturers send you to test, you're basically being bought by the manufacturers.

EVGA participated.

You have to understand that the reason Asus dropped out is because it wasn't getting awards. That means it wouldn't be here anyway. That is, unless its representatives decided to shoot straight past all the value awards and go for Choice (formerly Elite) with something over-the-top.

Out of curiosity, what in particular causes Asus boards not to get awards? And about when was the last time one was reviewed by Toms?

 

[Crashman]

I'm really disappointed at how much Tom's is missing out on Asus Mobo's. I understand they chose not to participate, but does that really mean that a site such as Tomshardware, that is seriously trusted in the market can truly put their award on a product unless they've tested all possible products?

It puts a bad taste in my mouth, it's like CarAndDriver recommending Hyundai just because Toyota didn't send them a car. People actually rely on your website for purchasing and building decisions. You won't do anything but lose trust by simply missing testing an entire lineup of products.

This comment will get bashed, but with more than 10 years under my belt in hardware, ASRock shouldn't be anywhere but the choices for budget-oriented customers. The number of problems I've seen that happen again and again, even after 3 or 4 swaps with their boards is atrocious quality. Yes Asus has had problems as of recent, but none of them are as bad as an overall failing board.

Also, what the heck happened to EVGA? Also didn't choose to participate?

By simply recommending whatever manufacturers send you to test, you're basically being bought by the manufacturers.

EVGA participated.

You have to understand that the reason Asus dropped out is because it wasn't getting awards. That means it wouldn't be here anyway. That is, unless its representatives decided to shoot straight past all the value awards and go for Choice (formerly Elite) with something over-the-top.

Out of curiosity, what in particular causes Asus boards not to get awards? And about when was the last time one was reviewed by Toms?

In enthusiast platforms, probably two years ago. The company more recently sent a couple budget boards to our budget board guys, but those evidently didn't get awards either.

 

[RedJaron]

Remember this used to be called "Best Motherboards for the Money." Asus makes a quality board, they just usually charge at least $5 - $10 more for their boards than a competitor's board with similar features. Or in the case of equal price, the Asus board typically doesn't have as many features. Refer to my sub $60 H81/B85 roundup. Asus submitted a board that cost more than its competition yet didn't have things like an internal USB 3.0 header or additional fan headers ( which all its competitors had ). Asus' says their extra work in BIOS features and offering longer warranties merits the price difference, and they're not wrong. However, the E34 matched Asus' 3-yr warranty, and I didn't have a single complaint about their UEFI or the features there. With this in mind, how could you recommend that Aus board as a better value than its competitor's boards except out of brand loyalty?

Next consider the Z97M-Plus At time of review, it was selling as the same price as the ASRock Z97M OC Formula. However, the OCF not only OC'd better, it offered additional features that Asus didn't. I pointed out in that review that the Plus wasn't a bad board at all, I simply didn't consider it as good a value as the OCF. It was basically offering a similar feature set as the Pro4 and G43, but charging more money.

Now, if you looks at the RoG boards, those are absolutely fantastic. You're hard pressed to find a board better overall equipped. But those boards are never about value. They're about packing in as many features as possible, which draws a price premium. And that's ok. That's what our Choice award is for. Few people will be able to afford an MSI Godlike mboard or In-Win tempered glass case, but that doesn't mean they're not fine pieces of work. Most of us drive Civics and Corollas because we can't afford Hellcats and GT-Rs. Doesn't mean those latter cars are bad.

 

[Onus]

I don't think I've ever been sent an Asus board. I've bought three boards myself, and Asus did not meet my criteria (typically a specific feature or features, and cheap). ASRock has sent the most boards by far, so with the exception of Scrooge I've not bought any ASRock for my articles.
The latest was a MSI H110. As absolutely sparse as that board is, it is yielding useful data.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I don't think I've ever been sent an Asus board. I've bought three boards myself, and Asus did not meet my criteria (typically a specific feature or features, and cheap). ASRock has sent the most boards by far, so with the exception of Scrooge I've not bought any ASRock for my articles.
The latest was a MSI H110. As absolutely sparse as that board is, it is yielding useful data.

I'm looking forward to that review!

 

[Onus]

I wanted to finish it this extended holiday weekend, but lost most of my off-day yesterday helping a retired friend deal with a phone problem (she lives over an hour away), which will hopefully allow her to deal with additional issues. I should be able to submit it some time this next weekend.

 

[hamoo]

not so fast onus,

- before you go on the defense. ..., consider this: that i have posted numerous complaints that amazon is selling at twice the msrp (manufacturer's suggested retail price), and every single post is taken down.
so my suggestion to you would be to take down every single amazon button ($NN.nn at amazon) and replace them with newegg buttons ($NN.nn at newegg)

then, i am not entirely convinced by your reply "asus chose not to participate". really ? why not ? why would a leading hardware manufacturer choose not to participate ? that, raises the red flag.

that this article is biased in a variety of fronts is just too obvious. fortunately, that doesn't invalidate most of the details. i will read your articles with my tongue in my cheek

 

[Onus]

A request goes out to vendors from TH, asking them to submit boards meeting certain criteria if they'd like them reviewed. Asus has lately chosen not to submit any boards. That's on them. Lately, ASRock, Biostar, and MSI have been sending me boards, and TH bought a few others.
As to the ad buttons, I have no control over those. Crashman might be able to give more information on that, but I can't.
As to the board I bought, counting shipping I believe it was the cheapest H110 Newegg had when I ordered it. My criteria were simply "cheapest H110 that isn't ASRock" (because they send me a LOT of boards). You're welcome to call that bias of some sort, but I'd be very unsure of how it would matter.

 

[Crashman]

i am not entirely convinced by your reply "asus chose not to participate". really ? why not ? why would a leading hardware manufacturer choose not to participate ? that, raises the red flag.

that this article is biased in a variety of fronts is just too obvious. fortunately, that doesn't invalidate most of the details. i will read your articles with my tongue in my cheek

Asked and answered, but to keep this on track I'll say it again: Asus expected more value awards, they didn't get them. The reviews don't use Amazon pricing when assessing value, they use web pricing (Google Product Search and manually adding Newegg if it doesn't appear in the product results), so the flag isn't red it's yellow
Gigabyte had a similar problem of not getting value awards, and got around it by shooting straight for the non-value Editor's Choice award with the Z170X-Gaming G1. That worked. Asus could have attempted the same thing in X99 with the Rampage V Extreme/U3.1. The firm sent one specifically for testing DRAM, and doing so did further Asus's DRAM overclocking notoriety. But, being upset about the lack of value awards on cheaper boards, its representatives decided not to participate in the Editor's Choice race through the review process.

We're even buying some samples to fill some coverage holes, I'm just being extra cautious about where that money goes.

 

[frank1nyc]

GAMEBRIGADA Jul 5, 2016, 7:41 PM
I'm really disappointed at how much Tom's is missing out on Asus Mobo's. I understand they chose not to participate, but does that really mean that a site such as Tomshardware, that is seriously trusted in the market can truly put their award on a product unless they've tested all possible products?

Agreed. P.S. Negatived GAMEBRIGADA's comment by mistake--can't undo.