News ASRock DeskMini B660: A LGA1700 barebone with PCIe 5.0 SSD, USB 3.2 Gen2×2 and DDR4



LINK: https://www.asrock.com/news/index.asp?iD=4807
Other sources: LINK LINK

ASRock DeskMini B660
  • Intel12th Gen Core processors up to 65 watts TDP
  • 2× SO-DIMM DDR4 3200Mhz
  • 2 x 2280 M.2 slots (1 PCIe 5.0 and 1 PCIe 4.0)
  • 1x USB 3.2 Gen2x2 Type C , 1x USB 3.2 Gen1 Type A and 3.5mm audio jack in front
  • 1× USB 3.2 Gen-2x1 Type-C with ALT mode in back offering DP and PD (60w) connectivity in rear I/O
  • Supports 3 monitors USB-C, Displayport 1.4a and HDMI? (assuming, not stated)
  • Intel Gigabit lan and M.2 2230 Wi-Fi/BT slot
  • 155 × 155 × 80 mm (L×H×W)
  • External power adapter
 
Last edited:

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
Got one in today



Unfortunately the excitement ended shortly after opening the packaging



The plastic socket cover had a defective fitment allowing it to come loose with a light tap.

Unless it was already damaged, presumably the socket cover then damaged the pins by bouncing around in the chassis during shipment.
 
Last edited:

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
Alright, I did manage to get it running but not sure if there is hidden damage. Indeed there is a 75 watt hard limit on package power & it won't permit you to exceed this under any circumstances, even for short duration. Which is understandable given the tiny vrm area.

So the ideal chip would be a 12300 or less for general use (89w max turbo).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valantar

Valantar

Shrink Ray Wielder
Jan 20, 2018
2,201
2,225
Alright, I did manage to get it running but not sure if there is hidden damage. Indeed there is a 75 watt hard limit on package power & it won't permit you to exceed this under any circumstances, even for short duration. Which is understandable given the tiny vrm area.

So the ideal chip would be a 12300 or less for general use (89w max turbo).
That depends on your use case though - even ADL is very efficient if clocked low, so something like a 12600 at that power limit would make for a very good compact workstation. But for anything single threaded, fewer cores would indeed likely be better!
 

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
Allright, here's my quick review of the b660 Deskmini.

I'll make comparisons to the x300 at each step.




1) Appearance, Accessories and I/O

Appearance and packaged accessories are identical to the x300. Identical 120w Brick. Front I/O is identical. The difference is the rear I/O, offering 2 more USB-A and 1 more USB-C Gen 3.2. Internally it has the same 2x Sata and 2x M.2, but supports 4th and 5th gen Pci-E.

Winner: b660 hugely due to much better I/O and 4th/5th gen Pcie




2) Internal Board Layout and VRM


No it did not come with that copper bit...

The board layout is funky because it has to accommodate the b660 chipset. The RAM and M.2 slot locations are swapped compared to the x300. The other differences are the fan headers are not next to each other, they are on opposite corners of the board ( this is a good thing - so you can use the best located fan header). You'll also notice that funky battery sticking out.

Asrock did not provide any chipset heatsink and it gets quite hot. It could use something. But you cannot use a large chipset cooler because it will be blocked by the edge of the m.2 card on one side and by the CPU socket keep-out zone on the other!

I used a small Gpu RAM sink made by Enzotech here. This is sub optimal but forgivable. With a little creativity you could solve it. It will be getting active cooling in this area anyway.


This is all I could do here

Now the VRM area... it's TINY and the heatsink is about 1/4th the size of the one on the x300 (which wasn't that large to begin with). Possibly because there was less board real estate, and also because this is a b660 board.


Tiny VRM

However, Asrock advertises compatibility with 12th gen processors up to the 12900 non-K. This is sort of misleading, because there is no way this board will be able to deliver the potential performance of most of the 12th gen lineup with that wimpy VRM (in fact, as you'll find out soon, it cannot even deliver enough power for the 12300). Whereas the x300 - it can actually deliver 100%+ of the potential performance of the 5700g for a brief period (until it thermal throttles).

Winner: x300, due to no cramming of the board for a Chipset, and having larger VRM and VRM heatsink


3) CPU & Memory Performance

Test Setup
Processor: Intel 12600 Non-K
Memory: 2x 8GB DD4 - Corsair CMSX32GX4M4X3800C18 @ 4000mhz CL-17-17-17-34 1T, 360 tRfc cycles (~180ns tRfc)
Cooling: Intel Stock
GPU: igp, UHD 770

Aida64 Memory
The Corsair memory used is identical to the x300, it's from the same quad-channel kit, with identical main timings + tRfc (except for some minor sub timings). However memory latency was coming in much higher on Aida64 latency testing. About 65-69ns on the b660 vs as low as 51-55ns on Ryzen 5700g. 69ms memory latency is comparable to what the 5700g has @ 3200mhz. I am unable to explain why, but it is not a good result. Read and Write performance however was great @ 60GB/s.

Cinebench r23 Single Core
The 12600 scored approximately 1800 in CBr23 Single core, which is ~20% more than my 5700g. This is an excellent score, however I suspect it is less than what the typical score should be by a noticeable amount. The 12600 scores I was seeing on google and Hwbot with different m-Itx / ATX b660 boards is closer to 1900. The i5-12400 is supposed to score =~1700, i5-12500 =~1800, and i5-12600 =~1900.

A little penalty for for being on this tiny form factor might be expected, but this seems like a larger discrepancy indicating poor optimization. Especially because the x300 doesn't suffer nearly any "form factor tax". For proof of this you can compare my x300 CBr23 single core result in this list against the others with similar clock speed and see that people on the m-Itx / Atx b550 boards didn't have any better frequency scaling than the x300 did.

Winner: b660

Cinebench r23 Multi Core
This is, unfortunately, where things start to fall apart for the DeskMini b660. The b660 has a hard limit of 75w power for the entire CPU socket (and, less than 75w if the iGpu is doing anything by the way).

This isn't that horrible by itself, as it is somewhat close to the limit of what the best thermal solution can cool for an extended period (~85 watts is really the most you want to put into a DeskMini for a sustained period, IMO).

What really hurts is that the board will not allow more than 75w power draw even for very short durations. The 12600, kneecapped to a 75w limit, only can manage about 10K in Cinebench multi, so only about 71% of it's expected score (14,000). Average clock speed was approximately 4.1ghz (& without Power Limit would be 4.8ghz). Thus, any chip higher than a 12300 will be wasted, as it can't even turbo past this limit for a few short moments.

The efficiency of the turbo algorithm trying to behave itself within this 75w limit is just terrible. To test this, I normalized the 5700g to the same core and thread count, and normalized the clock speed to 4000mhz to yield the same ~10k Cbr23 score. Same Cores, same Threads, same performance. The 5700g only drew 45 watts while the 12600 drew it's cap of 75 watts (66% more power draw) for the same performance.

Is Alder Lake really 66% less efficient for the same performance? I don't know. But you won't want to run a high spec 12th gen processor on this thing and hope it will scale down gracefully. It will not. The way that it is scales down the voltage / clocks to stay within the 75w TDP limit is sub optimal. The idea of someone putting a 12900 in this thing is ludicrous.

Winner: x300

3) iGPU Performance

The 12600 has an Intel 770 UHD igp which offers about ~60% of the performance of the 5700g. I did not bother running extended benchmarks but just loaded Heaven and Witcher 3 for a few moments to verify this. Considering that that Ryzen APU's already struggle to deliver 1080p performance in most modern games, the Intel igp is basically obsolete for all modern games as it won't even be able to deliver acceptable 720p performance. Running 4000mhz CL17 memory didn't seem to help much.

Winner: x300.

4) dGPU Performance with 4th Gen Pci-e m.2 Riser

Test Setup
Processor: Intel 12600 Non-K
Memory: 2x 8GB DD4 - Corsair CMSX32GX4M4X3800C18 @ 4000mhz CL-17-17-17-34 1T 360 tRfc (~170ns)
Cooling: Intel Stock
GPU: Evga 3060ti XC
Riser: ADT R43UH-4.0 Riser

Pretty much the reason why I wanted to test the b660 Deskmini in the first place is because it has 4th gen Pci-e, which in theory can unlock another 5-10% performance with a dGpu (depending on the gpu used) compared to 3rd gen. 3rd Gen M.2 Riser is equivalent to "Gen 1.5 x16" and 4th gen M.2 is thus equivalent to "Gen 2.0 x 16" or Gen 3.0 x8 - so approaching only a tiny loss compared to Gen 4.0 x16 with the 3060ti.

Unfortunately despite having 20% better single core performance than my 5700g, and being on a 4th gen Pci-e riser, the b660 failed to produce any performance gains over the x300 with the Gen3 riser (it was within the margin of error).

That might be normal.

The 3060ti is not really bandwidth limited in the first place. It is unknown if the b660 system would produce better results at 4K, or how much more it would improve with a more bandwidth hungry card such as a 3080, which will increase the significance of the Gen3 vs Gen4 difference.


Note- Average GPU clock speed is actually the same within ~10mhz despite what is indicated.


Winner: Draw.

5) Conclusion

There is potential here as a budget system, or file server.
The Deskmini b660 is potentially a nice little system for low budget general use and can take advantage of 12th Gen intel processors with excellent single threaded performance such as the 12100 ($129 for ~1650 cbr23 Single core perf -- it's higher than a 5600x overclocked). With the Gen4 storage it could be a nice platform for a file server or something like this. So the use case is ultra low end, with a 12100.

However at the time of this writing it costs about $60 USD more than the x300 Deskmini ($299 vs $240). So any savings on a cheaper processor are going to be a wash, since you could just get the cheaper x300 with the more expensive 5600g ($178). So it doesn't present a great value.

The x300 is better value overall, right now.
The x300 is also much much better for igp gaming, multi threaded workloads, and better supports modding, due to the ability to undervolt for better efficiency or overclock the iGPU for up to ~35% higher gaming performance over stock. And also it has a nice VRM - which can output as much as 140 watts, compared to the b660's crippled 75 watt limit. So you can unlock even more performance from the x300 for free with a larger cooler.

If going the dGpu route, both are about even. Slight edge to the b660 as it should scale better, and possibly improve as the microcode improves further.
 
Last edited:

robbee

King of Cable Management
n3rdware
Bronze Supporter
Sep 24, 2016
861
1,349
Hmm that's a shame, I was actually planning an Intel mini-stx build due to PCI 4.0 but I don't like what I'm reading here. Guess I'll reconsider the x300 one.

Here's hoping that Asrock releases an AM5 version when it hits!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valantar

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
There was a new bios release today with a description of "Support next Generation Intel Processors". I don't know what that means (perhaps E-Core support?) but I'll try it out and see if it changes anything.

 

Valantar

Shrink Ray Wielder
Jan 20, 2018
2,201
2,225
There was a new bios release today with a description of "Support next Generation Intel Processors". I don't know what that means (perhaps E-Core support?) but I'll try it out and see if it changes anything.

Given that B660 is 12th gen only, I would assume E-cores are supported already? Next generation would be 13th gen/Rocket Lake, which will use the same socket, but it seems awfully early for BIOS support for that generation, especially on a niche product like this. That's definitely a weird one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msystems

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
So the salvaged b660 died unfortunately. Maybe the cpu pins bent out of place again.

It turns on with the switch but I get no video.

Then when I hard-OFF to power down, it reboots itself after 3 seconds. So the only way to get it to stay off is to unplug it.

I will do a new performance review of the new Bios if I can get it working

At least in it's broken state its still useful for case prototyping, and checking if my diy switches work.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Valantar

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
Update-

ASRock release new bios and updated microcode. You can now unlock the power limit past 75w for more performance by increasing the short term and long term power limit in the bios.

So far have tested up to 100 watt draw, now CB23 multi-core perf is about 11,700 with the 12600, and this is with my one single channel Dimm (one dimm was dead and causing the problem). So it's safe to say that the performance bottleneck is much improved now but not perfect for the 12600.

Previously I recommended 12100 or 12300 due to the power limit, but the ideal CPU could be the 12400 or 12500 or even 12600 now since it can turbo nicely to 100 watts. The tiny VRM heatsink will get really toasty for extended duration, but at least it can boost for a short time.

I settled on 95w short term and 80w long term power limit after 30 seconds. Temps spike to 80c then settle to mid 70c. It's boosting nicely now like it should. It's looking like a more attractive platform now
 
Last edited:

mknrls

Caliper Novice
Oct 12, 2019
30
50
Seem like this board has potential but the vrm / power limit seem to be the issue.
Although i would be interrested running it with i5-13600(K), watercooling it might be the answer for the cpu / vrm.
I also do wonder if a higher wattage psu could be used?

NEWS: A user was able to test i7-13700k / i9-13900k on this board with BIOS ver11.02 (not yet realsed but provided from ASRock Support).
 
Last edited:

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
I guess you can run any processor but I don't think you can get more than 100 watts. A 55mm cooler will handle 100 watts fine but won't fit in the stock chassis. 47mm fits but is a little loud maybe.


Edit: one of the ideas suggested there is to run a K processor and then undervolt it with XTU. Potentially leaving very little performance left out with the 12600k if that actually works.

I've had zero success undervolting in the bios with the 12600 non k and xtu is disabled for me so I can't test this.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mknrls

mknrls

Caliper Novice
Oct 12, 2019
30
50
I guess you can run any processor but I don't think you can get more than 100 watts. A 55mm cooler will handle 100 watts fine but won't fit in the stock chassis. 47mm fits but is a little loud maybe.


Edit: one of the ideas suggested there is to run a K processor and then undervolt it with XTU. Potentially leaving very little performance left out with the 12600k if that actually works.

I've had zero success undervolting in the bios with the 12600 non k and xtu is disabled for me so I can't test this.
Completely agree with you, Different cooler and case would definity required.

Now to peak everyone interest 100w can be surpass but require a different PSU and undervolting can be enable via a bios-mod.
A user by name of "ren" from computerbase.de forum explain the process and test it too. (Page 9 to 11)

The vrm and chipset might still need some better cooling options but this board now open some new opportunities.
Link this one... 13900K @ 65-90w with almost not difference in performance 🔥
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: msystems

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
Thats really interesting. It makes sense but I hope they could make a little more detailed guide. It sounds like they are saying the VRM is totally unlocked in 8.02 even without microcode modification. And the microcode modification is what allows undervolt (but not necessary to unlock vrm).

UV was a feature shown in the initial bios 3.02 - I tried it but it didn't work on the 12600 processor I was using (strangely it would let me increase the offset voltage but not decrease it). Then in later bios, the feature was completely removed.

The value of the this thing changed significantly over the last few months then. When it first came out, it was only 75w locked vrm and was $299 Usd. It is now $169usd and unlocked VRMs and confirmed working with K processor. Hard to believe.
 

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
Seem like this board has potential but the vrm / power limit seem to be the issue.
Although i would be interrested running it with i5-13600(K), watercooling it might be the answer for the cpu / vrm.
I also do wonder if a higher wattage psu could be used?

NEWS: A user was able to test i7-13700k / i9-13900k on this board with BIOS ver11.02 (not yet realsed but provided from ASRock Support).
If you do attempt this and bios mod, perhaps you can write up or translate how to do it as it seems like a lot of potential.

I have a spare board I might attempt this on with the 12600k
 
  • Like
Reactions: mknrls

Wolfix

Efficiency Noob
Dec 22, 2022
6
7
Hi, I have one Asrock Deskmini B660 with a i5-12400 and I don't know why but I only achieve 841pts in single core and 7772 in multicore in Cinebench R23. I have other build with a Asrock H610M-ITX/ac and with the same processor I scored 1600/13000 respectively (350W PSU).

I know that in multicore we have power limitation with the Deskmini B660 but I don't know what it's going on with my single core performance because I only achieve the half normal punctuation.

I tested it with the default bios settings and after with the Long Duration Power Limited = 80w and Short Duration Power Limited = 95w (thank you @msystems) with the same results. 58

What I'm doing bad? 😑

My build:
  • ASrock Deskmini B660
  • I5-12400
  • Kingston FURY DDR4 3200MHz 16GB (2x8GB)
  • Crucial P3 Plus 500GB M.2 NVMe
  • Noctua NH-L9i-17xx
  • Stock 120W PSU
  • (NO Chipset heatsink or M.2 heatsink for now)

  • Windows 11 - 21H2 with the last chipset drivers, etc
  • Bios 8.02
Bios setup:



Single Core Performance:



Multi Core Performance:



Thank you in advance! 🙂
 

Wolfix

Efficiency Noob
Dec 22, 2022
6
7
I'm sorry for the low resolution screenshots. These are better!

Single Core Performance:



Multi Core Performance:

 

msystems

King of Cable Management
Apr 28, 2017
786
1,373
I have the same issue where the multi core underperforms,m. I thought it was power starved, but after increasing the PL to 100 watts it still underperforms (about 10k score with 12600). Maybe it is still power starved. However the single core is within ~5% of expected. But your single core result is broken too, its almost 50% worse than expected. So this can't be explained by power starvation.
 
Last edited: