Motherboard Incoming AM4 Mini-ITX boards
- Thread starter MarcParis
- Start date
-
- Tags
- am4 mini itx
I am waiting for an ASUS Strix Z270l type board, but with an AM4 socket... (Front panel USB C, M.2 heatsink).
I'll probably be waiting until coffee lake comes out... sigh.
I'll probably be waiting until coffee lake comes out... sigh.
Does anyone know of a Mini_ITX AM4 motherboard with 2 M.2 slots (for storage) and 2 1GB NICs? Can't seem to find anything out there...
there are only 4 mini itx motherboards currently out on the AM4 socket. You can compare them via the posted above by carbonitetoast
to answer the question, no there isn't.
It's not that simple. The Gigabyte board has the same audio chipset. However, the ASRock board has optical audio.
The biggest concern with the ASRock board is it's lack of USB 3.1, which makes it even harder to justify the model an X370 model. For me, this was a deal breaker. The biggest concern with the Gigabyte board is the unusual placement of the 24 pin and 8 pin power connectors, which make it potentially unusable in some cases... this could be a nightmare if you don't do your research.
What AM4 board to get based on paper specs
Get the Gigabyte AB350N board if:
- You want LED lights; this board has strip of lights built in on one side and connectors for extra for lighting strips
- You require USB 3.1 Gen 2 and more USB ports (it has more back panel USB ports than the other mobos, and the ASRock board has no USB 3.1 Gen 2 support)
- You want a more neutral theme; this board has some red accents, but it is less obvious than the ASRock board. The back-plate is matte black on the Gigabyte board, but the ASRock board has a stylised back-plate with a strong red decal that could clash with your case.
- You plan on using integrated graphics, and require DisplayPort (the ASRock board lacks this port)
- (UNVERIFIED) You intend to use a custom wireless antenna (the ASRock board has small spacing between the connectors which might make it unsuitable for some antennas)
Get the ASRock AB350 board if:
- Your case or PSU cable length demands the 24 pin and 8 pin connectors to be in a traditional place (the Gigabyte board has these in a position which may be unsuitable for some cases, especially ultra small cases)
- You require optical audio, perhaps for home theatre use (the Gigabyte board lacks the optical port)
- You require USB-C (the Gigabyte board does not have this port either)
- You plan on using integrated graphics, and require two HDMI outputs (the Gigabyte board has 1x HDMI and 1x DisplayPort, potentially annoying for a multi-monitor setup)
- You want to use it as a server, or some other application involving heavy outgoing network traffic. The ASRock board has Intel NIC, compared to the Gigabyte board which has Realtek NIC. There is a belief that Intel solutions tend to be more reliable and better equipped to deal with top-end networking applications (this does not include playing online games or downloading files necessarily, so look out for speed test comparisons as and when they are published).
Get the ASRock X370 board if:
- You want PCIe bifurcation and SLI support
- (UNVERIFIED) Possibly faster wireless networking.... it's not clear if this is because it has better wifi built in, or just because it has two antennas (the B350 has one and it looks like 3rd party antennas might not fit because of the spacing, but this is unverified)
Get the Biostar X370GTN board if:
- You want USB 3.1 Gen 2 AND the X370 chipset (the ASrock X370 has no type A USB 3.1 Gen 2)
- You're budget conscious and don't need wireless networking (the Biostar board is slightly cheaper than the Gigabyte or ASRock RRPs at the time of writing, possibly due to having no wifi/bluetooth card)
- You won't be overclocking (this board allegedly has a complicated bios, and HardwareCanucks claims it gets too hot for serious overclocking: see here)
- This board might be better suited in very compact, flatter cases. Tek Everything has some first hand experience with the ASRock and Biostar boards, and believes the Biostar offering was less cramped and had more room for customisation and cable management thanks to the placement of the SATA ports, the 24-pin connector, and the lower IO shroud. Tek cites the S4 Mini as an example of a case which benefits from the Biostar layout.
Please correct me if any of this is wrong.
Last edited:
Just to add one more point, get the Asrock if you want Intel NIC vs Realtek NIC in the Gigabyte. At least that's what swayed me to Asrock.
A good list! Honestly the Biostar ones should also be added. I don't think they're bad boards per se, just a less known brand (and the lack of WiFi seems to understandably disappoint mITX users). Used Biostar for 8 years on AM2 before and never had any problem.
Among what we have, Gigabyte is my go-to choice. Four USB ports on the ASRock is just simply inadequate, and I don't think most people use network in such a way that they'd notice the reduction in WiFi speed on a Realtek.
A warning to those who do make the same choice: Gigabyte's placement of its 24-pins is the same as MSI H81i that I currently use. In very small cases (I use a Customod SFX), that connector is a source of major pain. Definitely takes effort and patience. A lot of them.
I didn't add the Biostar board because I don't know who would buy it at this point. As you mentioned, it has no wifi or bluetooth, but it also has a cheaper build quality compared the the other boards, and yet it costs the same as the ASRock B350 after rebate (via Newegg).
Get the Biostar board if you can find it selling for a great discount. It's not a bad board, it's just priced the same as two other superior motherboards. If you already have the Biostar board and you don't need wifi, it isn't worth switching, certainly.
Get the Biostar board if you can find it selling for a great discount. It's not a bad board, it's just priced the same as two other superior motherboards. If you already have the Biostar board and you don't need wifi, it isn't worth switching, certainly.
Well I will probably buy one: Your negative statements require some clarification, if not qualification. What do you base these observations on? Hearsay? I think your opinion will be found to be subjective rather than objective, and as such are meaningless in a technical forum.
So over to you on that one:
Plenty of very happy Biostar Ryzen MB users out there in Google land.
So over to you on that one:
Plenty of very happy Biostar Ryzen MB users out there in Google land.
I just received my B350 board and can confirm it has two antennas with dedicated cables to the two standard snap-on posts on the Intel 3160 Wi-Fi card. I am replacing it with my own 8260 card I pulled from my old system that also only came with just a 3160 card stock. Since I prefer these right angle antennas to the standalone antennas, this makes the B350 board actually slightly preferrable over the X370 one.
Last edited:
I'm happy to explain why I said this.
The lack of wifi and bluetooth is undeniable. At the time of posting, this board does not have this functionality according to the Biostar website. As for build quality, for one, the Gigabyte and the ASRock boards both have metal reinforcement of the PCIe slots. You can see this without looking at a spec sheet, because the metal is exposed. Is this reinforcement necessary? That is debatable, but it is an example of superior build quality.
I don't deny that the Biostar board is capable, I just can't find a reason to recommend a board that costs the same as the ASRock offering but has less functionality and less attention to detail. If you can think of a good reason, I'd be glad to put it on the list.
EDIT: forgot to add, see here for proof of reinforced PCIe slots (link 1, link 2). Gigabyte board also has LEDs for $5 more than the Biostar one, so again, more bang for buck.
Last edited:
Wifi and Bluetooth are not present, I do not recall denying that, however that in itself would be no great loss to me and if I wanted these features would avail myself of some of the many perfectly adequate dongles n the market.
You cite the metal cladding ( not reinforcement really, just a skin) as a beacon of build quality: Well I for one use ITX as a basis for APU use, so that slot is never used, but granted, it will be used in ITX format by many. But probably populated by the itx sized GPU range rather than the Zotac Extreme range............so the metalwork is merely "go faster " stripes, just bling and gimmick.
You mention the "must have" feature of LED lighting, which again ( for me) is gimmick rather than useful function, but I draw your attention to inbuilt features of the Biostar MB, Vivid LED DJ and 5050 LED Fun Zone ( Crass I know, but it is LED)
I suggest you have a good read of this:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ostar-x370gtn-itx-am4-motherboard-review.html
Yes, the Biostar board has shortcomings, but none insurmountable and for users such as I that intend 4 or 6 core Ryzen use, more than adequate.
I feel the ASrock offerings for Ryzen ITX are poor, and currently run ASR AM3 ITX, ASR H97 ITX and ASR AM1 ITX, so if anything am an ASR fanboy.........................But not for ASR Ryzen ITX so far.......Gigabyte I gave up on years ago, same with MSI, both for quality and stability issues.......
You cite the metal cladding ( not reinforcement really, just a skin) as a beacon of build quality: Well I for one use ITX as a basis for APU use, so that slot is never used, but granted, it will be used in ITX format by many. But probably populated by the itx sized GPU range rather than the Zotac Extreme range............so the metalwork is merely "go faster " stripes, just bling and gimmick.
You mention the "must have" feature of LED lighting, which again ( for me) is gimmick rather than useful function, but I draw your attention to inbuilt features of the Biostar MB, Vivid LED DJ and 5050 LED Fun Zone ( Crass I know, but it is LED)
I suggest you have a good read of this:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...ostar-x370gtn-itx-am4-motherboard-review.html
Yes, the Biostar board has shortcomings, but none insurmountable and for users such as I that intend 4 or 6 core Ryzen use, more than adequate.
I feel the ASrock offerings for Ryzen ITX are poor, and currently run ASR AM3 ITX, ASR H97 ITX and ASR AM1 ITX, so if anything am an ASR fanboy.........................But not for ASR Ryzen ITX so far.......Gigabyte I gave up on years ago, same with MSI, both for quality and stability issues.......
I don't think it would be rational to buy the Biostar board and then spend more money getting an inferior wifi dongle. It would be more expensive, less convenient, and take up a port.
Your opinion on LED lights, steel PCIe slots, and wifi isn't important here. I was only giving examples of the extra features that the other boards have. Even if you personally don't care about those extra features, you are still getting more for your money. Why would you choose to get the board that has less and costs the same?
I do not think the Biostar board is a bad board, I just can't think of a reason it could be recommended over the other two. Once again, if there is something unique about the Biostar board that I am not aware of, and that you believe is significant in comparison to the Gigabyte and ASRock boards, then please be specific and I can add it to the list.
EDIT: I just wanted to add that you seem to be personally invested in defending the Biostar board, which makes me think you own one already. Please understand that the list I wrote is for people who have the option of buying any of the AM4 boards at this time. It isn't about a competitive assessment of which board is "better". The whole point of the list is to illustrate that there is no clear cut winner.
Last edited:
I think his opinion is valid, I personally also don't see the use of metal-reinforced PCIe slots (in SFF cases), don't really need LED lighting or Wi-Fi. You're making a list solely on what you think is the best choices out there. But not everyone will have all those options available or dislikes any of the other brands for whatever reason.
I currently have both the Biostar X370GTN and the Asrock AB350.
The Asrock board is a much better imo. The only reason I could see going for the Biostar board would be the superior layout when dealing with extremely compact builds (S4 Mini etc.).
I have been benchmarking both boards with a 1700 at stock settings. WIth the AB350 I am seeing a slight performance boost across most synthetic benchmarks. I was not expect that at all, but it is repeatable.
The BIOS of the two boards is also night and day... Asrock provides a simple to use, well laid out BIOS. While the Biostar BIOS is one of the worst I have used in the last 5 years. Even the fan control is confusing.
Just my initial thoughts, and findings.
The Asrock board is a much better imo. The only reason I could see going for the Biostar board would be the superior layout when dealing with extremely compact builds (S4 Mini etc.).
I have been benchmarking both boards with a 1700 at stock settings. WIth the AB350 I am seeing a slight performance boost across most synthetic benchmarks. I was not expect that at all, but it is repeatable.
The BIOS of the two boards is also night and day... Asrock provides a simple to use, well laid out BIOS. While the Biostar BIOS is one of the worst I have used in the last 5 years. Even the fan control is confusing.
Just my initial thoughts, and findings.
Similar threads
