Hardware MSI Z77A-G43 Review

At only £75, the G43 looks like a bargain, but could it be cut too close to the bone?

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/motherboards/2012/06/11/msi-z77a-g43-review/1

 

So the only thing that cripples the board is the limitation on overclocking and slightly lower performance, but still offers PCIE-3 and lots of slots for additional cards and HDD's - its a pretty decent budget board to be fair!

 

For a £60 drop in price (ie: about 30%) we get circa 10% or less drop in performance? Wish GPUs worked like that.

 

Quick correction:

It's full ATX, not m-ATX.

 

You repeated the Gimp graph in the Handbrake section.

(Sorry, I'm not one of those people, but if I can be first with it...)

This board might be something I'd look at for my wife's PC - doesn't need to be OC'd, doesn't need a ton of expandability, etc.

For me, though, no go. I'm too cheap to go for the balls-out ROG boards, but I like a nice EVO or so.

 

Is there anyway to alter the turboboost default setting. Also on the AsRock board?

 

A measly 65%, seriously, you guys need to look hard at why you scored this board so low, for an entry level, non overclocked z77 board, its fantastic value for money, and brings the chipset into a lot of peoples price range, I would expect, after a few months, it will sell for around the £55-£65 mark, too often, you guys score just on sheer performance, I know the site focus is on performance and self build and modding, BUT, it would be nice to see a few budget offerings that dont get slagged, or slapped with a petty score like this, its not an overclockers board, yet you scored it as such, its a perfectly fine board, and I can see a lot of OEM system builders using it, a realistic score for the board would be 80-85%, and, as a budget crossfire solution, its good enough.

 

I fully agree with mingemuncher. You should probably compare it to boards in the same price range like the Gigabyte GA-Z77M-D3H, Asrock Z77 Pro4-M, Asrock Z77 Pro3 and Asus P8Z77-M. All those board are competitive. And then base your score in comparison to the other price range rivals.

Maybe you don't believe it but 90% of users do not do overclock. Although overclocking is a nice item to include and to see how reliable the board is in 'extreme' condition. The conclusion of how good a board overclocks should not be included as part the final score. IMHO scores should be based on features and performance out of the box and compared to other motherboards in the same price range.

 

I've got to disagree with mingemuncher! When you read a Bittech review on motherboards you need to know how much is missing compared to a better motherboard!

For example: this motherboard is missing up to 10.5% on gaming performance. This could easily be the deciding factor in whether to buy a new graphics card or carry on with your old one.

New graphics cards that could bridge this performance gap could easily run into £180 and resale value on ebay of your old card could represent an £140 loss. Therefore, spending an extra £50 on a new motherboard looks like a rational choice.

Secondly, a more expensive motherboard will come with a lot of extra features and last much longer than a cheaper motherboard when overclocking is taken into consideration. I’ve got my old MSI GD70 790FX (AMD premium motherboard Bittech awarded) motherboard going strong in brother’s PC well outside its warranty period.

I’ve got cheapo Gigabyte Z68AP-D3 (£78) for my I5 2500K, which is the worst motherboard I’ve ever owned. You’ve got boot loops, plugging in certain USB devices prevents you getting into the motherboard Bios and I can’t get my GSkill memory to run stably over 1600 MHz. Nor can I install 4 sticks of memory and post at XMP profiles. Nor does it benchmark anywhere close to a better Z68 motherboard. Of course, I use to be on AMD motherboards (the crappiness of Bulldozer made me switch to Intel), which gives you same features as Intel chipset for a bone crunching saving of £50.

I, personally, like the MSI Brand, but this motherboard stinks to high hell and if mingemuncher had paid attention to review he’d appreciate the inherit wisdom shown by the Bittech reviewer. Also, mingemuncher should realise a benchmark review is merely the tip of iceberg and there will many additional problems with this motherboard beneath the surface of the bare benchmark Bittech numbers – a crap motherboard always has extra problems that go unnoticed in a benchmark review!

Therefore, I think Bittech has more or less got it spot on this review!

 

The money I would save with this motherboard can be spend on a better processor. You did read about the less aggressive turbo setting on this board compared to the other higher end boards.

What does a graphics card resell ratio got to do with spending more money on a motherboard.

What extra features do you need other then slot for maybe a graphics card and plugs for a few hard drives. Or do you think that a person buying this board is going to use it for a GTX670 SLI?

Completely irrelevant informational.

Doing Nostradamus predictions on brand new hardware and already knowing the the motherboard stinks without ever smelling it.

In case you where reading between the lines. Mingmucher was basically pointing out that you cant compare a cheap board to a expensive board and then base your scores on how bad it compared to much more expensive boards from a much higher price range. And then I added some comparison material from the same price range to point BT staff in the right direction.

 

Whoa there cowboy, you know what site you're on don't you? What would be the point in an enthusiast site reviewing a motherboard without taking overclocking into account? I think you'll find 90% of this sites readers do overclock.

 

Strange Custom PC Recommend this Board for a mid-price gaming pc! ;-/

 

This is a useful review. I'd like to see some more at the mid priced Z77 boards.

 

I think you should compare it to similarly-priced boards... It has some features like on-board USB 3.0 for front pannel connectors that similarly priced boards do not have.

I just think you can't compare budget boards to expensive boards, they are not even trying to compete. Look at it against direct competitors.

 

Unfortunatly the rating is always done compared to 400£ish board. BT should start to segment review in : Entry, Mid and High end hardware. A 50£ board is not less worth than a 200£ board, all depends on the targeted users.

But it is the way it is ... everything is reviewed the same way, the high end way, and then rated according to the result ...

 

I agree with that Bit Tech has been too harsh. It's a budget board, and you've hit it because you lost 0.4 GHz. Jesus Christ, don't you realise that 75% of the population don't know the word "overclock" exists, and only 10% of those that do, do overclock. It's a great budget board notwithstanding that, although perhaps the SATA port layout sucks a little.

 

Good budget board but I went for the G45, not too much more expensive and it fit my needs.