ECS Z270H4-I Reviewed

[Bosco]

Tonight Frank takes a look at the ECS Z270H4-I Motherboard.

 

Check out his review here:

 

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/ecs_z270_h4_itx/

[drarchmonk]

Has Frank not looked at the back of an Intel-based ITX motherboard in the last few years? An M.2 slot on the back is standard-issue. Counting it in the "Cons" is like saying its only having two DIMM slots is a "Con". Not having an M.2 slot at all, now that would be a "Con".

[ir_cow]

That was a typo, Frank didn't write the review, it was me. Anyways I have not noticed the M.2 slot on the back of any motherboard, though I'm sure some do have it. It doesn't solve the problem that any NVME on the back will have throttling issues because lack of airflow and heatsink. It is a poor design choice unless the Optane drives are the main reason for it.

 

As for 2-Dimms only, find me a Z170 or Z270 motherboard that has 4 dimm slots on a ITX form factor. I don't think it can be considered a con if the competition doesn't have it either. Considering it is a ITX motherboard, I think 2 slots are fine for 99% of users.

[Waco]

Almost every ITX board I've touched in the past 5 years or so has had either an mSATA or M.2 slot on the backside of the board. :shrug:

[ir_cow]

I've seen plenty of mSATA, just not M.2. Maybe I'm just getting the wrong type / brands . In any case as I stated before, high performance NVME drives need airflow and / or heatsinks. Having it on the backside isn't ideal. I also think it not a deal breaker because it is A) a ITX form factor and B) on the cheaper side (price wise). If that M.2 was on the front, it would be a no brainer as the prefect budget z270 ITX setup.

 

Don't get the wrong impression, I like the board, but it isn't a home run / knock it out of the park per say.

[cchalogamer]

Honestly after seeing reviews where the MSI boards with M.2 heat spreaders caused throttling on high end SSDs when installed and considering the heat load dumped on M.2 drives by video cards and CPUs on many boards I'm willing to bet the itx standard of putting the slots on the back isn't really any worse.  Would be fun to test but with so few ITX boards having front side M.2 slots (ignoring ones used for wifi cards obviously) it might be a little hard to setup.  (Unless someone wants to send me $180 or a board that has slots on both sides)

[drarchmonk]

As for 2-Dimms only, find me a Z170 or Z270 motherboard that has 4 dimm slots on a ITX form factor. I don't think it can be considered a con if the competition doesn't have it either. Considering it is a ITX motherboard, I think 2 slots are fine for 99% of users.

 

Yes, very good, that was my point. It would be unreasonable to call two DIMM slots a drawback, because that's just how mini-ITX boards are, right? Now let's apply that to M.2 slots. Putting an M.2 slot on the back is just how Intel-based mini-ITX boards are for the past few generations

[ir_cow]

 

.... No, it's not optimal, but that's how it is, it's one of the compromises necessary for the form factor. The drawback would be if the board did not have an M.2 slot at all.

 

And it's not optimal because it's a pain to disassemble your system to get at the drive, not because of heat. Sure, we want our stuff to run cool, but NVMe thermal throttling is not a real-world problem. It happens in benchmarking and stress tests, not in actual usage. The rest of the PC cannot move data fast enough to keep an NVMe drive busy enough to get that hot.

 

It is optional just like U.2, SATA Express, mSata and M.2 which are all optional connections because SATA is currently the standard. It might be something else next year or M.2 does take over, but for now that is the standard every motherboard should have. That makes everything else optional.

 

For NVME thermal throttling, its a real thing outside of benchmarks and because of that putting such drive in a ITX setup defeats the purpose of a drive that fast. I will give you that it is unlikely someone would put a 1TB NVME drive in, but someone would and I think warning them that it would be a waste of money (because of throttling issues) is necessary to point out. I think that back M.2 slot is best for Optane or a small drive just for boot. Anyone using this as a HTPC will have 3+ SATA TB drive anyways for movies. Someone who is doing a gaming build "may" find issues running a single drive from that M.2 slot. I hope that clears thing up for you.

[Waco]

Throttling issues with these drives are extremely rare in real world use. Can you name any real workload that would cause such an arrangement to throttle that isn't a benchmark?

 

Enterprise workloads aside (of which I am very aware), what consumer would ever care? Just like MLC drives being crap, just like TLC drives being crap, there's almost no evidence to back up this stigma.

 

I will say that I think you confused optimal and optional in your last post...

[ir_cow]

Good catch with the optional thing. That's what I get for being on OCC at work :whistling: . But I did mean optional as "available to be chosen but not obligatory." not optimal "best or most favorable.".

 

I'll give you that Waco that the average "gamer" will not see the throttling. Though I would say it is better to advise the buyer than ignore it in the review just because the average consumer wouldn't care or have any clue what I am talking about. I never said TLC or MLC drives are crap, in fact those are going to be a better option than spending extra money on a M.2 drive for this particular setup.

 

If someone wants the basics "this is great go buy it" for every review than here you go http://www.pcgamer.com/

 

Edit:

I guess my point I'm trying to make is mute though.... Because If you are using a Samsung 960 Pro in this motherboard, than you have some strange priorities.

[Waco]

I never said TLC or MLC drives are crap, in fact those are going to be a better option than spending extra money on a M.2 drive for this particular setup.

I was just making a reference to when MLC drives first launched, everyone said they'd be useless because benchmarks hammered them into submission.

The same was said when TLC drives launched, yet they're still pretty amazingly awesome unless you're doing something write-intensive (which almost nobody does).  QLC drives, I'm sure, will be met with the same stigma.

 

So yes, you can make fast M.2 drives throttle through artificial means.  I've just never seen it on any real consumer workload.

 

Sorry, but as a storage architect/admin by day, I tend to be more harsh about such things.