MSI B85M ECO Review: Aiming Green at $73
by Ian Cutress on November 26, 2014 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- MSI
- B85
- ECO
CPU Benchmarks
Readers of our motherboard review section will have noted the trend in modern motherboards to implement a form of MultiCore Enhancement / Acceleration / Turbo (read our report here) on their motherboards. This does several things, including better benchmark results at stock settings (not entirely needed if overclocking is an end-user goal) at the expense of heat and temperature. It also gives in essence an automatic overclock which may be against what the user wants. Our testing methodology is ‘out-of-the-box’, with the latest public BIOS installed and XMP enabled, and thus subject to the whims of this feature. It is ultimately up to the motherboard manufacturer to take this risk – and manufacturers taking risks in the setup is something they do on every product (think C-state settings, USB priority, DPC Latency / monitoring priority, memory subtimings at JEDEC). Processor speed change is part of that risk, and ultimately if no overclocking is planned, some motherboards will affect how fast that shiny new processor goes and can be an important factor in the system build.
For reference, the B85M ECO does not have any form of MultiCore Turbo.
Point Calculations – 3D Movement Algorithm Test: link
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores.
Compression – WinRAR 5.0.1: link
Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second 720p videos.
Image Manipulation – FastStone Image Viewer 4.9: link
Similarly to WinRAR, the FastStone test us updated for 2014 to the latest version. FastStone is the program I use to perform quick or bulk actions on images, such as resizing, adjusting for color and cropping. In our test we take a series of 170 images in various sizes and formats and convert them all into 640x480 .gif files, maintaining the aspect ratio. FastStone does not use multithreading for this test, and thus single threaded performance is often the winner.
Video Conversion – Handbrake v0.9.9: link
Handbrake is a media conversion tool that was initially designed to help DVD ISOs and Video CDs into more common video formats. The principle today is still the same, primarily as an output for H.264 + AAC/MP3 audio within an MKV container. In our test we use the same videos as in the Xilisoft test, and results are given in frames per second.
Rendering – PovRay 3.7: link
The Persistence of Vision RayTracer, or PovRay, is a freeware package for as the name suggests, ray tracing. It is a pure renderer, rather than modeling software, but the latest beta version contains a handy benchmark for stressing all processing threads on a platform. We have been using this test in motherboard reviews to test memory stability at various CPU speeds to good effect – if it passes the test, the IMC in the CPU is stable for a given CPU speed. As a CPU test, it runs for approximately 2-3 minutes on high end platforms.
Synthetic – 7-Zip 9.2: link
As an open source compression tool, 7-Zip is a popular tool for making sets of files easier to handle and transfer. The software offers up its own benchmark, to which we report the result.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
View All Comments
Cygni - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
A Mini-ITX ECO would be right in my wheelhouse.I have an HTPC/NAS/Steam Mini-ITX thats on 24/7 and is several years old. It's next replacement cycle would likely last 5+ years, and the lowered power draw (plus lower heat) would be a no brainer over that lifetime. Could also see a market for personal servers and the like in Mini-ITX.
I would echo the request for undervolting access, even if its rarely worth it. The option would be appreciated to tinker with, if nothing else.
PaulJeff - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
I think the point of these "eco" boards is determined by the economy of scale. For a real world example, you would need to replace dozens if not hundreds of workstations/desktops in an office to realize the true savings potential. If one workstations nets a few dollars a year in savings on power costs, multiply that by the number of workstations that will be replaced, multiply that by the # of years between hardware refresh cycles and that will add up the potential power savings.MSI should be selling this "ECO" brand to OEMs like Dell, HP, etc. and then the savings can be distributed on a mass market scale.
The cost delta between a non-ECO branded board and an ECO board is not worth it for SMB's and home users.
ultimatexbmc.com - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
Good priceDaiz - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
The price of electricity does not take into account the true cost of it's generation.It might be good to also consider the amount of fuel that is required or carbon output
for example 1kWh of electricity requires ~0.5kg of coal and produces ?? kg of carbon dioxide.
so assuming a 5 year upgrade cycle is going to happen no matter what, you are still stopping ~27.5kg of coal from being burned each year or 137.5kg over the life of the mobo. multiple by the number of machines in an office and every little bit helps.
Conficio - Wednesday, November 26, 2014 - link
Should the energy savings and cost savings not also include the cost for air conditioning/cooling? I know that server rooms care about that. So there should be at least some back of the envelope numbers which should increase the amount of savings somewhat.I'm just curious.
Lerianis - Thursday, November 27, 2014 - link
One thing I wanted to point out: 300 Watt power supply? Eh eh...... even a bargain basement, non-gaming intended dicrete graphics card needs 400 Watts minimum, unless it is the REALLY cheap ones sold to HP/Dell/Gateway for their office PC's.A regular person cannot even order one of those unless they go online and 'lie' to the HP parts person telling them "Yeah, my video card died and I want to replace it myself, can I order one of your replacement discrete graphics cards?"
400 Watts is a more realistic minimum for a system with a discrete graphics card, though with the new integrated graphics from Intel being able to push HD 1080p and 1920*1080 resolution other content without a stutter while using less than 2% of the CPU's power on an i5..... they might have an argument that no one needs a discrete graphics card who is not an uber-gamer anymore.
KAlmquist - Friday, November 28, 2014 - link
Actually, a 300 watt power supply should be enough to power a single GTX 980. However, Ian was presumably thinking about the standard business PC, which uses integrated graphics these days. As you correctly note in your last paragraph, the primary market for discrete graphics cards is now gamers.jtd871 - Thursday, December 4, 2014 - link
Ian,Thanks for reviewing a non-flagship board. Like others who have commented here, I could see something like this finding a home in a future personal build for productivity, light engineering and moderate gaming. And it's $25 to $50 less than the Z-series boards. Please, more like this in the uATX and mITX form factors!
Some feedback for MSI (and other board OEMs): ditch the (non-express) PCI already, please? Any business willing to buy enough of these isn't going to stick PCI add-in boards inside (assuming they can still find drivers for use with their modern operating systems). I would suggest eliminating the PCI slot altogether and keeping the x16 slot separated from the other 2 PCIe slots, as a lot of even low-end GPU cards (for business multi-monitor, say) are at least a double-slot width - rendering the 2nd slot unusable in those situations anyway, and make at least 1 of the remaining slots at least physically x8.
azazel1024 - Thursday, December 11, 2014 - link
This seems like a really stupid test of the power efficiency since that is the main focus. A REAL PSU, like a bronze or higher rated PSU in the 350-500w range should have been used. Either a standard B85, or H85/7 or something should have been compared to it. you have a board with an over abundance of features versus one bereft.Otherwise it is apples to oranges.
Also, if MSI's claims are accurate, the ECO frankly sucks. My Sever with a G1610 in it, H67, 8GB (2x4GB) G.Skill Sniper@1.2v, SSD, 2 HDDs plugged in and a pair of Intel Gigabit CT NICs and Antec Earth Watts 380 burned 21w at idle, drives spun down. The ENTIRE system uses less than what MSI claims a typical uATX boards uses at idle. Based on Intel's numbers for some things like the NICs, I have to assume that the board is using at MOST 15w and probably closer to 12w.
Seems like at most we are talking 2-3w of power savings MAYBE comapred to a VAGUELY similar board.
know of fence - Monday, March 2, 2015 - link
Being an enthusiast site AT always played down power consumption numbers. But just making assumptions and low balling 4 different variables (price, hours, efficiency, years of operation) is both cumbersome and somewhat disingenuous.A more elegant way would be to create a realistic range for those variables and combine them into coefficients for min, max and typical scenarios. You could even do typical US, typical EU, UK, India or whatever.
For me every 1 W saved 24/7 equals 2 EUR/annum, also 66 cent per Watt per year assuming 8 hours a day operation. Not to mention that PCs actually last anywhere from 5 to 10 years, though they are much less frequently used, once they are handed down to relatives.