1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hardware Asrock Z87 Extreme3 Review

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Meanmotion, 2 Aug 2013.

  1. Meanmotion

    Meanmotion bleh Moderator

    Joined:
    16 Nov 2003
    Posts:
    1,650
    Likes Received:
    12
  2. do_it_anyway

    do_it_anyway Member

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    266
    Likes Received:
    11
    77% and a damning conclusion saying there is little to recommend it.

    Then a nice big Bit-Tech APPROVED!! badge.
     
  3. Somer_Himpson

    Somer_Himpson New Member

    Joined:
    22 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    53
    Why not recommend it with the review wording and the score and then say it is approved?
    Total contradiction.
     
  4. murraynt

    murraynt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    4,234
    Likes Received:
    128
    These are much better value in the states. I got my extreme 4 for something like $120
     
  5. Elton

    Elton Officially a Whisky Nerd

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    8,575
    Likes Received:
    189
    I think because the board isn't necessarily bad as it is just average. You can't really go wrong nowadays on Z87.

    I somewhat miss the days of finicky NF4 and absurdly bad NF5 boards. And of course good old SiS and Via boards.
     
  6. S1W1

    S1W1 Active Member

    Joined:
    25 Mar 2011
    Posts:
    235
    Likes Received:
    29
    I presume the approved badge is a mistake?
     
  7. LightningPete

    LightningPete Diagnosis: ARMAII-Holic

    Joined:
    2 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    307
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think if you read a little slower and carefully this is perhaps why

    "it’s important to remember that the margins between boards are incredibly slim. Even at stock the biggest difference between it and a board more than twice its price is just seven per cent, and when overclocked this dropped to no more than two per cent, even with the 100MHz peak-overclock handicap. "

    The fact that it costs HALF as much and gets almost the same performance is a pretty good thing in most peoples books, given we want spanking new systems but MOST of us dont have the wallet to expand on this. The price and performance of ASROCKs have suddenly become something that we would ***** our ears upto where it used to be for really cheap end computing.
     
  8. LightningPete

    LightningPete Diagnosis: ARMAII-Holic

    Joined:
    2 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    307
    Likes Received:
    0
    prik our ears upto*
     
  9. bawjaws

    bawjaws Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    3,414
    Likes Received:
    342
    Perhaps someone from Bit would like to comment on the apparent disconnect between a score of 77% and the "Approved" award?

    I get that most Z87 boards appear to be pretty much of a muchness when it comes to performance, so differentiation on performance isn't really an issue. However, this board doesn't score so well for features or value, so why is it "Approved"? Given that the MSI Z87-G45 Gaming outscores this board on performance, features and value (with an overall score of 85%), and is about 10% cheaper to boot, why does the Asrock get the same Approved award when it's an inferior product according to all of Bit-Tech's metrics?
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page