POST Time

Different motherboards have different POST sequences before an operating system is initialized.  A lot of this is dependent on the board itself, and POST boot time is determined by the controllers on board (and the sequence of how those extras are organized).  As part of our testing, we are now going to look at the POST Boot Time - this is the time from pressing the ON button on the computer to when Windows starts loading. (We discount Windows loading as it is highly variable given Windows specific features.)  These results are subject to human error, so please allow +/- 1 second in these results.

POST (Power-On Self-Test) Time

Both the ECS and EVGA motherboards offer big POST time gains when controllers are turned off, whereas the ASRock is very quick by default.  The G1.Sniper 3 on the other hand gives us the slowest stripped time out of any motherboard tested.

Overclocks

Here at AnandTech we want to provide quick and easy ways to determine if a board is good for you (with in-depth analysis of course).  So here is a quick round up of our overclocking results.  Overclocks are tested for stability with PovRay and OCCT - while these may not be the most strenuous of stability tests, it does offer a quick check for memory errors under high load (and also balances testing time with getting the next board on for review!).

  CPU Speed
(MHz)
BIOS Voltage
(Volts)
PovRay Peak
Temp (ºC)
OCCT Peak
Temp (ºC)
Notes
ASRock
Fatal1ty Z77
Professional
4700 1.200 89 89 PLL Overvoltage enabled
ASRock
Z77 Extreme4
4700 1.175 86 86 LLC Level 1
ASRock
Z77 Extreme6
4700 1.175 81 82 LLC Level 1
ASRock
Z77 Extreme9
4700 1.200 92* 94* *High Ambients
LLC Level 1
ASUS
P8Z77-V Deluxe
4700 1.225 89 84 PLL Overvoltage enabled
ASUS
P8Z77-V Pro
4700 1.200 83 86 PLL Overvoltage enabled
ASUS
P8Z77-V Premium
4700 1.225 93 96 High Ambients
Biostar
TZ77XE4
4700 1.180 84 85 None
ECS
Z77H2-AX
4700 1.125* 87** 90** *Odd VDroop Behaviour
**High Ambients
VDroop Disabled
EVGA
Z77 FTW
4700 1.175 82 84 VDroop Disabled
Power Limits Raised
Gigabyte
Z77X-UD5H
4700 1.225 88 88 LLC Extreme
Gigabyte
Z77X-UD3H
4700 1.200 82 86 LLC Extreme
Gigabyte
Z77MX-D3H
4700 1.200 80 84 LLC Extreme
Gigabyte
G1.Sniper 3
4700 1.200 85 88 LLC Extreme
MSI
Z77A-GD65
4700 1.250 90 - PLL Overvoltage enabled

 

Test Setup, Power Consumption System Benchmarks
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • ultimatex - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    I got this MOBO from Newegg the first day they had it available , I couldn't believe the price since it offered 8x8x8x8x , Picked it up the first day and havent looked back. Doesnt look as cool as the Asrock extreme9 but it still looks good. Awesome Job Gygabyte , Anandtech should have given them a Gold not bronze though since the fan issue is a minor issue.
  • Arbie - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    For gaming, at least, how many people are really going to build a 2xGPU system? Let alone 3x or 4x. The are so few PC games that can use anything more than one strong card AND are worth playing for more than 10 minutes. I actually don't know of any such games, but tastes differ. And some folks will have multi-monitor setups, and possibly need two cards. But overall I'd think the target audience for these mobos is extremely small.

    Maybe for scientific computing?
  • Belard - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    Yep.... considering that most AAA PC games are just ports from consoles... having 3-4 GPUs is pointless. The returns get worse after the first 2 cards.

    Only those with 2~6 monitors can benefit with 2-3 cards.

    Also, even $80 Gigabyte boards will do 8x x 8x SLI/CF just fine.

    But hey, someone wants to spend $300 on a board... more power to them.
  • cmdrdredd - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    "Only those with 2~6 monitors can benefit with 2-3 cards."

    Oh really? 2560x1440 on a single card is garbage in my view. I am not happy with 50fps average.
  • rarson - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    If you're going multi-GPU on a single monitor, you're wasting money.
  • Sabresiberian - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    Because everyone should build to your standards, O god of all things computer.

    Do some reading; get a clue.
  • Steveymoo - Thursday, August 23, 2012 - link

    Incorrect.

    If you have a 120hz monitor, 2 GPUs make a tonne of difference. Before you come back with a "no one can see 120hz" jibe. That is also incorrect.... My eyes have orgasms every once in a while when you get those ultra detail 100+ fps moments in battlefield, that look great!
  • von Krupp - Friday, August 24, 2012 - link

    No. Metro 2033 is not happy at 2560x1440 with just a single HD 7970, and neither are Battlefield 3 or Crysis. The Total War series also crawls at maximum settings.

    I bought the U2711 specifically to take advantage of two cards (and for accurate colours, mind you). I have a distaste for multi-monitor gaming and will continue to have such as long as they keep making bezels on monitors.

    So please, don't go claiming that multi-card is useless on a single monitor because that just isn't true.
  • swing848 - Monday, December 8, 2014 - link

    At this date, December 2014, with maximum eye candy turned on, there are games that drop a refrence AMD R9 290 below 60 fps on a single monitor at 1920x1080 [using an Intel i5-3570K at 4GHz to 4.2GHz]
  • Sabresiberian - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 - link

    This is not 1998, there are many games built for the PC only, and even previously console-oriented publishers aren't just making ports for the PC, they are developing their games to take advantage of the goodness only PCs can bring to the table. Despite what console fanboys continue to spew, PC gaming is on the rise, and console gaming is on the relative decline.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now