MB VRMs: do they matter more than features?

[humbug]

I like Hardware Unboxed but i think Steve's obsession with VRMs even on mid and lower end Motherboards is becoming a problem.

Essentially what he does is take a £120 motherboard and stress test a 3950X in it, if the VRMs biol the motherboard's no good...

On a high-end board yes sure... but on a budget board? Ridiculous...

Here's the thing, if reviewers start making it all about how well VRMs handle high-end CPU's then those vendors will improve those VRMs, high quality VRMs are expensive, vendors are not going to absorb that cost, they will pass it on to you or you will get fewer features, or a combination of both.

If i'm looking for a £120 Motherboard its not for a 3950X, as long as the VRMs can run a 3700X its fine.

Way back when Steve reviewed the Motherboard that i now own, he dropped an 1800X in it, overclocked the proverbials off it and concluded "its crap, don't buy it the VRMs are junk" i'm paraphrasing...

I ignored him and bought it, it was £90. It has:

2X USB2
4X USB3
2X USB3.1
1X USB Type C
PS2
2X M.2
X4 RAM Dimms
8X Sata
4X PWM Headers

And the usual
DVI
D-Sub
HDMI
RJ-45
Line In
Audio Out

Lots and lots of connectivity, including all 3 Video out types, 2X M.2 of which both are in use.

I have had it for 3 and a half years, i have the RAM tuned to within an inch of its life and it has never put a foot wrong, i haven't been in the BIOS since in installed the 3600 more than a year ago, i do a lot of high stress work with it and the VRMs never go much over 70c while rated at 125c.

It is the most solid and stable board i have ever owned.

Steve said its junk, don't buy it... all because it couldn't handle the VRMs being abused.

With sub $150 boards you're going to get the features you need or overkill VRMs, not both, those are high end boards, and if reviewers place too much emphasis on VRMs you're going to get good VRMs but no features.

 

[HACO]

I think if a motherboards lists a part as compatible, it should be able to run it effectively at its rated speed. So if the £120 board says it supports a 3950X, then stress testing a 3950X on it is 100% fair game, and actually a good thing to do during a review.

 

[humbug]

I think if a motherboards lists a part as compatible, it should be able to run it effectively at its rated speed. So if the £120 board says it supports a 3950X, then stress testing a 3950X on it is 100% fair game, and actually a good thing to do during a review.

Not overclocked.

 

[Tetras]

I guess part of the problem is that there's such a huge range in potential power draw now, cos you can stick a 16 core CPU in a crappy desktop board. A lot of these lower-end boards continue to support the CPUs even though they really can't, especially with no VRM cooling. OEMs usually stick a TDP limit on their boards which I'm surprised more retail boards don't do. Not that this is a guarantee of anything, but if the manufacturer sticks to the recommended power specs for Intel and AMD, it's reasonably safe.

There's also that most features can be added if necessary, but VRMs can't, so you're locked-in to whatever it can realistically support.

 

[LtMatt]

I like Hardware Unboxed but i think Steve's obsession with VRMs even on mid and lower end Motherboards is becoming a problem.

Essentially what he does is take a £120 motherboard and stress test a 3950X in it, if the VRMs biol the motherboard's no good...

On a high-end board yes sure... but on a budget board? Ridiculous...

Here's the thing, if reviewers start making it all about how well VRMs handle high-end CPU's then those vendors will improve those VRMs, high quality VRMs are expensive, vendors are not going to absorb that cost, they will pass it on to you or you will get fewer features, or a combination of both.

If i'm looking for a £120 Motherboard its not for a 3950X, as long as the VRMs can run a 3700X its fine.

Way back when Steve reviewed the Motherboard that i now own, he dropped an 1800X in it, overclocked the proverbials off it and concluded "its crap, don't buy it the VRMs are junk" i'm paraphrasing...

I ignored him and bought it, it was £90. It has:

2X USB2
4X USB3
2X USB3.1
1X USB Type C
PS2
2X M.2
X4 RAM Dimms
8X Sata
4X PWM Headers

And the usual
DVI
D-Sub
HDMI
RJ-45
Line In
Audio Out

Lots and lots of connectivity, including all 3 Video out types, 2X M.2 of which both are in use.

I have had it for 3 and a half years, i have the RAM tuned to within an inch of its life and it has never put a foot wrong, i haven't been in the BIOS since in installed the 3600 more than a year ago, i do a lot of high stress work with it and the VRMs never go much over 70c while rated at 125c.

It is the most solid and stable board i have ever owned.

Steve said its junk, don't buy it... all because it couldn't handle the VRMs being abused.

With sub $150 boards you're going to get the features you need or overkill VRMs, not both, those are high end boards, and if reviewers place too much emphasis on VRMs you're going to get good VRMs but no features.

You make some valid points there bug.

 

[LePhuronn]

I think if a motherboards lists a part as compatible, it should be able to run it effectively at its rated speed. So if the £120 board says it supports a 3950X, then stress testing a 3950X on it is 100% fair game, and actually a good thing to do during a review.

But there is a difference between 100% load at stock and 100% load overclocked. Basing a "it's crap" opinion based on overclocking a budget board does not serve anybody.

 

[HACO]

I think if a motherboards lists a part as compatible, it should be able to run it effectively at its rated speed. So if the £120 board says it supports a 3950X, then stress testing a 3950X on it is 100% fair game, and actually a good thing to do during a review.

But there is a difference between 100% load at stock and 100% load overclocked. Basing a "it's crap" opinion based on overclocking a budget board does not serve anybody.

Sure, but if the motherboard supports 3950X and claims to have overclocking features, it's again 100% fair game to test out these features to determine the extent to which they are up to par.

If the board fails to perform adequately it just means it failed at doing that specific task. It doesn't mean it's a crap board for all CPUs and all users. But it is a 100% legitimate test to run.

 

[LePhuronn]

There is this little wrinkle called warranty: overclocking voids warranty. So a board and a CPU can have all the overclocking features it wants, but using them is out of spec of the hardware and therefore voids warranty. So then it is not the responsibility of the board vendor to support such out-of-spec behaviour, even if such features were offered, and therefore not in their remit to make said features "good enough".

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Just because you could overclock a 3950X on a cheap-ass board with cheese VRMs doesn't mean you should, and basing a "it's crap" opinion on unrealistic expectations or bullish "but it has the features so ner!" mentality is counterproductive.

Basically don't call an A-series board crap because your all-core 4.6GHz 3950X set it on fire, that's just a retarded statement.

 

[HACO]

There is this little wrinkle called warranty: overclocking voids warranty. So a board and a CPU can have all the overclocking features it wants, but using them is out of spec of the hardware and therefore voids warranty. So then it is not the responsibility of the board vendor to support such out-of-spec behaviour, even if such features were offered, and therefore not in their remit to make said features "good enough".

This isn't unique to cheap motherboards, applies to every single motherboards out there. So are you claiming no review should ever mention or test overclocking? That'd be absurd.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Just because you could overclock a 3950X on a cheap-ass board with cheese VRMs doesn't mean you should, and basing a "it's crap" opinion on unrealistic expectations or bullish "but it has the features so ner!" mentality is counterproductive.

Basically don't call an A-series board crap because your all-core 4.6GHz 3950X set it on fire, that's just a retarded statement.

How do you know whether you should or shouldn't do something that's included on the features? You read reviews which try these out to tell you if you should or shouldn't do them!

The entire point of a review is to try things out, push the products to their limits and see how they perform, find the limits of hardware, compatibility, overclock, etc...

I seriously don't understand your take on this. Should we just not review products to their limits at all?

 

[Joxeon]

Before I bought the B450 tomahawk max I did some research and one of the vids was a HW unboxed test, the board with a 3950X and the conclusion being it does a great job with VRMs in the 70s then fast forward to the B550 he did another vid and tested some of the new boards against the tomahawk max but this time it throttled the CPU as the VRMs hit 115.

HW unboxed proceeded to state that now the tomahawk max wasn't good enough and that you should go and buy a B550 instead but what was a bit ambiguous was the fact the this time they tested with zero airflow on the VRMs and a set vcore of 1.4v which is unrealistic at best since no one buys at case without fans and I doubt many would set a vcore that high for daily use.

My point is that they will rig the test set up to show the best and worse case when it suits them.

 

[LePhuronn]

2 words for you: unrealistic expectations.

That is the key point here. Yes, test a product to its limits but do so with realistic expectations. The results are then fair and meaningful. You would have to be an idiot, troll or shill if you expect a budget board to perform like a top-end one.

Would you decry a Fiat Punto as "crap" because its 0-60 time is magnitudes slower than a Ferrari? No of course you wouldn't, because you wouldn't expect a Punto to have the same level of acceleration in the first place. It's the same here. Don't decry a budget board as "crap" because it cannot deliver power like a top-line halo product.

It really isn't rocket surgery.

I seriously don't understand your take on this.

I seriously don't understand why you'd expect a budget board to behave like a top-end board and then cry "rubbish!" when it obviously won't.

 

[HACO]

2 words for you: unrealistic expectations.

That is the key point here. Yes, test a product to its limits but do so with realistic expectations. The results are then fair and meaningful. You would have to be an idiot, troll or shill if you expect a budget board to perform like a top-end one.

Would you decry a Fiat Punto as "crap" because its 0-60 time is magnitudes slower than a Ferrari? No of course you wouldn't, because you wouldn't expect a Punto to have the same level of acceleration in the first place. It's the same here. Don't decry a budget board as "crap" because it cannot deliver power like a top-line halo product.

It really isn't rocket surgery.


I seriously don't understand why you'd expect a budget board to behave like a top-end board and then cry "rubbish!" when it obviously won't.

I've never done that, and never expected that. So I repeat:

Sure, but if the motherboard supports 3950X and claims to have overclocking features, it's again 100% fair game to test out these features to determine the extent to which they are up to par.

If the board fails to perform adequately it just means it failed at doing that specific task. It doesn't mean it's a crap board for all CPUs and all users. But it is a 100% legitimate test to run.

Please tell me where you disagree.

 

[LePhuronn]

I've never done that, and never expected that.

Figurative "you", not literal. But you're in essence agreeing with me then. You (literal) would not expect a budget board to behave like a top-end board, so why is it OK for a reviewer such as HWUB Steve to do so? Because based on what humbug put in his original post, Steve clearly had unrealistic expectations going into the test, and when the board did not live up to those unrealistic expectations he decries it as "rubbish don't buy".

Do you see what I'm saying here?

You clearly must do because you've confirmed exactly what I've said yourself:

If the board fails to perform adequately it just means it failed at doing that specific task. It doesn't mean it's a crap board for all CPUs and all users. But it is a 100% legitimate test to run.

You (literal) wouldn't decry a board as crap because it failed 1 thing, but that's exactly what Steve did according to humbug's post.

 

[Connell]

I've never done that, and never expected that. So I repeat:



Please tell me where you disagree.

I think the issue exist where reviewers will outright disregard a board that fails such tests, regardless of its other merits. As you say, it's a reasonable test to perform as it provides information to those wishing to run such a configuration, but the board's other features should have as much influence in the overall verdict as the VRM performance.

Simply stating "bad VRM. DO NOT BUY" is a bit unfair for a board that has been developed on a budget to prioritise other features. And, given the most likely use cases (cheaper, less demanding processors), VRM performance shouldn't be considered the benchmark for a good budget board.

 

[SonicSW20]

Hardware Unboxed are catering for their audience. Their audience are primarily enthusiasts, and enthusiasts are likely to be interested in overclocking ability. Therefore their overall assessment will be made with that in mind.

OP has done the right thing and made their own choice based on the information presented.

 

[humbug]

If you're buying a £120 motherboard what do you want? do you want to be able to (As @LePhuronn rightly pointed out) run a 3950X at 4.6Ghz or do you want plenty of USB connectivity, more than one M.2, more than 2 Dimms, enough PWM headers....?

Because you can't have it all in a £120 motherboard and if that's what you're buying you're not also buying a £700 CPU and cooling to go with it that costs more than the motherboard.

The idiocy is in swapping something useful or needed for something useless, too much emphasis on what people buying in this segment don't need and if that takes hold those board vendors will put big VRMs on those boards but at the expense of what we actually want.

Its when Youtubers with large followings start seeing themselves as influencers and proclaim to hold vendors to account when they never have to think about what they buy themselves.... yes its a problem.

Hardware Unboxed are catering for their audience. Their audience are primarily enthusiasts, and enthusiasts are likely to be interested in overclocking ability. Therefore their overall assessment will be made with that in mind.

OP has done the right thing and made their own choice based on the information presented.

Enthusiasts don't buy £90 motherboards.

 

[SonicSW20]

Enthusiasts don't buy £90 motherboards.

The term "enthusiast" does not exclude people on a budget.

 

[humbug]

The term "enthusiast" does not exclude people on a budget.

People on a budget don't buy £700 CPU's and glue £150 coolers on them.

 

[SonicSW20]

People on a budget don't buy £700 CPU's and glue £150 coolers on them.

They do buy higher end parts when they're a few generations old as a cheap upgrade. Seems you're just salty about a man on the internet saying the thing you purchased is "bad".

 

[humbug]

They do buy higher end parts when they're a few generations old as a cheap upgrade. Seems you're just salty about a man on the internet saying the thing you purchased is "bad".

Salty? Why degrade the conversation into personalities? its not that i'm trying to make a point that you can agree or disagree with, i have a personality problem....

I'd be salty if the price of Motherboards goes up because Vendors are now finding they can't sell boards with VRMs that don't pass the Hardware Unboxed should or should you not buy it test, or i don't get enough USB connectivity, fan headers, M.2 slots... because the VRMs are designed around overclocking 16 core CPU's that 1% of the people buying this board might want.

Yes i would be salty if i can't find what i'm looking for because Steve says the only thing that matters are overkill VRMs.

You spent £700 on a CPU, spend a bit more on the motherboard...