F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Have you encountered these motherboards before?

Have you encountered these motherboards before?

Have you encountered these motherboards before?

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next
R
Ryo_The_Pig
Member
56
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#1
I believed I could request insight into what others thought about these motherboards. They’re quite old now, yet they launched during an era when internet cafes still existed and when CPUs weren’t as crucial as they are today because power and cooling weren’t major concerns, and other parts couldn’t handle better chips at the time. I own one with an i7-7700k. Yet, there’s something that doesn’t align with my view... These boards have actually gained traction among those less focused on maximum specs. My research into crypto mining has often led me to notice mining rigs using just this board before. I understand these models were still viable when they were released, mainly because they served a practical purpose at the time—testing improvements before releasing them to the market. They weren’t marketed specifically for CPU enthusiasts; rather, they appeared as reliable options for general use. The Asus Ex-b250m-v7 is an example. It featured integrated Intel 630 graphics, available only on 7th generation CPUs, and in tests it could outperform an NVIDIA 760G. However, a key drawback is its lack of overclocking support due to the B250 BIOS chipset. If this board were brand new today, it would have supported RAM up to 2400 plus CPUs, which it did not. With the i7-7700k, though, it could still be impressive—especially since I was able to push RAM to 2666 and run benchmarks with solid results. The real issue now is that these boards don’t allow overclocking at all. That’s because the BIOS uses a B250 chipset. If you still had it, you could likely upgrade to a Z170 chipset for better performance. I’ve tested this myself; setting RAM above 2400 was possible, and benchmarks showed strong results. While CPU speed eventually limited gains, RAM speed often compensated. I’m considering upgrading to the Z170 if I want more flexibility. It would let me run higher frequencies and take advantage of newer CPUs. I can share an example setup if you’d like. This machine runs a modern i7-7700k with DDR4 2400, Arctic Freezer 2 cooling, Corsair case, and plenty of peripherals. It’s built for demanding tasks and streaming. The audio setup includes HyperX QuadCast mic, Seagate Exos 16TB, and a 74W speaker. Overall, it’s a solid configuration for current needs, though future upgrades could enhance performance further.
R
Ryo_The_Pig
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #1

I believed I could request insight into what others thought about these motherboards. They’re quite old now, yet they launched during an era when internet cafes still existed and when CPUs weren’t as crucial as they are today because power and cooling weren’t major concerns, and other parts couldn’t handle better chips at the time. I own one with an i7-7700k. Yet, there’s something that doesn’t align with my view... These boards have actually gained traction among those less focused on maximum specs. My research into crypto mining has often led me to notice mining rigs using just this board before. I understand these models were still viable when they were released, mainly because they served a practical purpose at the time—testing improvements before releasing them to the market. They weren’t marketed specifically for CPU enthusiasts; rather, they appeared as reliable options for general use. The Asus Ex-b250m-v7 is an example. It featured integrated Intel 630 graphics, available only on 7th generation CPUs, and in tests it could outperform an NVIDIA 760G. However, a key drawback is its lack of overclocking support due to the B250 BIOS chipset. If this board were brand new today, it would have supported RAM up to 2400 plus CPUs, which it did not. With the i7-7700k, though, it could still be impressive—especially since I was able to push RAM to 2666 and run benchmarks with solid results. The real issue now is that these boards don’t allow overclocking at all. That’s because the BIOS uses a B250 chipset. If you still had it, you could likely upgrade to a Z170 chipset for better performance. I’ve tested this myself; setting RAM above 2400 was possible, and benchmarks showed strong results. While CPU speed eventually limited gains, RAM speed often compensated. I’m considering upgrading to the Z170 if I want more flexibility. It would let me run higher frequencies and take advantage of newer CPUs. I can share an example setup if you’d like. This machine runs a modern i7-7700k with DDR4 2400, Arctic Freezer 2 cooling, Corsair case, and plenty of peripherals. It’s built for demanding tasks and streaming. The audio setup includes HyperX QuadCast mic, Seagate Exos 16TB, and a 74W speaker. Overall, it’s a solid configuration for current needs, though future upgrades could enhance performance further.

Z
ZethPlays
Member
195
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#2
The Intel UHD 630 built-in graphics definitely couldn't match the performance of a GTX 760.
Z
ZethPlays
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #2

The Intel UHD 630 built-in graphics definitely couldn't match the performance of a GTX 760.

C
chrisnoble
Member
103
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#3
The GTX 760 isn’t listed on that chart. Did you accidentally write the GT 730 instead? Check the link for a comparison between Intel UHD Graphics 630 and GeForce GTX 760. Integrated graphics here don’t exceed the GTX 660’s speed.
C
chrisnoble
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #3

The GTX 760 isn’t listed on that chart. Did you accidentally write the GT 730 instead? Check the link for a comparison between Intel UHD Graphics 630 and GeForce GTX 760. Integrated graphics here don’t exceed the GTX 660’s speed.

C
CakeSFD
Member
226
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#4
It's a decent option for an integrated GPU, though it was mainly built for the 7th generation CPUs. If you don’t have a dedicated GPU, at least my advice is that you won’t lose much quality in frames using something like this before investing in one.
C
CakeSFD
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #4

It's a decent option for an integrated GPU, though it was mainly built for the 7th generation CPUs. If you don’t have a dedicated GPU, at least my advice is that you won’t lose much quality in frames using something like this before investing in one.

T
tiffanyyeh1
Junior Member
12
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#5
They didn't mean that. What I said was actually quicker than a GTX 760.
T
tiffanyyeh1
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #5

They didn't mean that. What I said was actually quicker than a GTX 760.

H
Hetchok
Member
172
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#6
I understand it doesn't always perform well in games, but there are other factors at play. It's an integrated GPU, yet it might still beat a GTX card if you have the right settings and enough RAM. That's why I mentioned it could be a decent integrated GPU.
H
Hetchok
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #6

I understand it doesn't always perform well in games, but there are other factors at play. It's an integrated GPU, yet it might still beat a GTX card if you have the right settings and enough RAM. That's why I mentioned it could be a decent integrated GPU.

Z
Zelqan
Junior Member
17
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#7
The benchmarks were reached at specific configuration parameters.
Z
Zelqan
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #7

The benchmarks were reached at specific configuration parameters.

J
JayRGamer387
Junior Member
22
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#8
I'ma guess 720 fairly low
J
JayRGamer387
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #8

I'ma guess 720 fairly low

D
Dynabide
Junior Member
30
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#9
I was a bit confused, but this comes from what I saw regarding this.
D
Dynabide
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #9

I was a bit confused, but this comes from what I saw regarding this.

M
mikeltxi1
Member
190
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM
#10
You were just making a completely misleading claim about its effectiveness. I don’t want to debate whether it’s acceptable—I’m pointing out that you stated an inaccurate fact about its results. Another graph doesn’t reflect what the 760 shows.
M
mikeltxi1
07-14-2017, 07:37 AM #10

You were just making a completely misleading claim about its effectiveness. I don’t want to debate whether it’s acceptable—I’m pointing out that you stated an inaccurate fact about its results. Another graph doesn’t reflect what the 760 shows.

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next