Larger test of the smaller MSI MAG B660M Mortar WiFi mobo

CPU temperatures

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

In our tests, we gave praise to Alder Lake CPUs twice, first to the Core i9-12900K and then the Core i5-12400. Sure, they do carry some negatives, but the biggest ones are about the platform as a whole. Especially if it has to include DDR5 memory, which is significantly more expensive per gigabyte compared to DDR4. At least they can be bought now (they were practically unavailable on the retail market in November and December), and since January it’s possible to save with B660 motherboards, which are cheaper compared to Z690 boards after all.

The B660 motherboards’ options are more limited (fewer PCIe 3.0/4.0 lanes, fewer USB and SATA ports, no manual overclocking by changing the multiplier), but they have enough of everything for most types of PC builds. You might not miss anything on the MSI MAG B660M Mortar WiFi, which we’ll go over in detail in our tests, either.

MSI MAG B660M Mortar WiFi

This is a Micro ATX format board. The width is kept according to ATX boards (244 mm) and MAG B660M Mortar WiFi is only shortened in height (244 mm). However, it still fits three PCI Express slots on top of each other, two of which are x16 slots. But beware, the bottom one is derived from the south bridge (B660) and only supports the 3.0×4 standard. It’s only the top PCIe slot that’s connected to the processor, which already supports PCIe 4.0 and is connected by sixteen lanes. Between these slots is a PCIe 3.0 ×1 slot, so you can conveniently connect a better sound card to the board, for example. This will be of interest to those who won’t settle for a mediocre built-in solution in the form of a sound adapter built on the Realtek ALC1200 codec.

There are two M.2 SSD slots, one connected to the CPU, the other to the B660 chip. But here it’s already free of speed restrictions and both have PCI Express 4.0 support, with the lower one having a single PCIe lane shared with a single SATA connector. This means that once this M.2 SSD slot is occupied, you will have “only” five of the original six SATA connectors available, something that most users probably won’t be concerned about.

   

The board has no special connectors, switches or even ARGB LED lighting. The equipment is focused purely on practicality and you would look in vain for more expensive things with marginal use. Of the internal USB connectors, there’s one Type-C (gen. 2, with a theoretical bandwidth of 10 Gbps), one 19-pin for two USB 3.2 gen. 1 ports (5 Gbps), and two for four external USB 2.0 ports.

Quantitatively similar, but faster in this respect are also the USB ports on the rear panel. It also has four USB 2.0 ports (typically for connecting peripherals that don’t demand high transfer speeds), and the remaining connectors are all very fast. The three (red) USB ports are 10 Gb standard 3.2 gen. 2, and USB-C is even 3.2 gen. 2×2 with a theoretical 20 Gbps. MSI focuses on this interface more than other manufacturers, which is good. That means the board can be a plus for photographers, videographers, and even users in other fields who move larger amounts of files on a regular basis.

The board is also well equipped in terms of video outputs, as it’s ready to work with two monitors and iGPUs . Via HDMI 2.1, resolutions up to 4096×2160 px are supported at 60 Hz, and DisplayPort 1.4 can even display up to 7680×4320 px at 60 Hz. Then there’s an RJ-45 connector on the I/O panel for a 2.5 Gb wired network, two SMA connectors for external WiFi antennas (they’re included in the accessories) and finally the typical set of six custom connectors, which also includes an S/PDIF optical output.

Naturally, the B660M Mortar WiFi has its largest heatsinks on the power delivery for the CPU and iGPU. These are rather large aluminum monoliths that can’t be denied the effort to increase their surface area. These heatsinks are quite structured for more efficient cooling. MOSFETs included within the more complex Renesas ISL99360 integrated circuit are robust, with a maximum current capatcity of 60 amps. They can handle even the most powerful processors that can be physically fitted to this board without much difficulty.

   

MSI is counting on the fact that you’ll want to use powerful SSDs, and both M.2 slots are equipped with heatsinks.The M.2 slot heatsink, which is closer to the CPU socket, is slightly larger.

There is one more thing to note in regards to slots, layout, and general component compatibility on the motherboard. Namely, that from the center of the CPU socket to the center/contacts of the first PCIe ×16 slot is 83 mm. Although it is not a very short distance, but still, larger coolers can (at least with fan clips) lean on a graphics or other PCI Express expansion card.

Zatiaľ čo iní na plnohodnotné testy základných dosiek dávno rezignovali, tak my ich práve rozbiehame. Testy s rôzne výkonnými procesormi, bez limitov napájania, ale aj s limitmi nastavenými podľa Intelu. A keď testovať výkon, tak aj v rámci slotov M.2, USB či ethernetu. Analýza spotreby musí byť na úrovni jednotlivých vetiev a termovízia s testami zahrievania (vrátane meraní efektivity chladičov SSD) vo veternom tuneli sú jasná vec.

What it looks like in the BIOS

Traditionally, the entry to the BIOS is via the Delete key. The basic navigation is clearly divided into six sections – Settings, OC, M-Flash, OC Profile, Hardware Monitor and Beta Runner.

Let’s quickly run through the basics. Within the PCI settings, you can easily enable Resizable BAR for graphics cards. However, we don’t use this option and leave it disabled. As you already know from graphics card tests, the ReBAR evolves dynamically, with associated changes in performance, and such a volatile environment is of course undesirable for comparing motherboards.

The board also has a TPM module that is enabled by default, so you don’t have to set anything special in the BIOS before installing Windows 11.

   

Through the “OC” tab it is possible to customize the processor and memory to your own needs. In addition to the management (switching on/off) of the individual P or E cores of the processor, XMP, detailed frequency and memory timing settings are also available. These are all familiar things that you must have encountered many times before. However, the options around “CPU Cooler Tuning” are worth noting.

Once the processor is installed, the BIOS first greets you with a window with a crossroads where you have to set the power limits. To make it easy enough for everyone, MSI has created three profiles according to the indicative power of the cooler. The assumption here is that a liquid cooler (for which the PL1 and PL2 limits are fully unlocked at 4096W) will be more powerful than a tower cooler (the middle profile), and that one more powerful than the box cooler. However, it should be added here that the PL1/PL2 limits are not the same for all processors.

For example, the “box cooler” mode with Core i9-12900K is quite strange and both PL1 and PL2 set to 241 W. This mode (for the box cooler) works better with Core i5-12400, where it sets PL1 to the TDP level (65 W) and PL2 to 169 W. However, everything (including the timeout length for PL2) can be fine-tuned manually and hence for Core i9-12900K you can set the power limits according to Intel’s recommendations as we do for testing purposes, where PL1 equals TDP/125 W and PL2 equals 241 W.

   

Then there are also settings to redefine the values for Thermal Velocity Boost or to set the upper limit of VRM temperatures. This can be useful, for example, within extremely quiet builds where the CPU cooler is significantly oversized, but the temperatures on the MOSFETs can sometimes (for example in summer) be critical.

   

The “Hardware Monitor” environment for fan control is intuitive and functional. The PWM curve can be conveniently adjusted for each of the four available connectors. The development of the speed or PWM intensity can then be dependent on one of the five temperature sensors. Among them, the “CPU socket” or MOS, which makes sense to tinker with if the goal is to always have the power delivery and its surroundings under control as well.

In addition to PWM control, there is also DC control, i.e. linear control by changing the fixed voltage. Among the options there are also step up/down time items, through which you can slow down the PWM cycle, which can prevent unwanted fan speed changes during short-term higher loads, such as typically application initializations and the like.

   

And finally, a look at EZ mode, which you enter by pressing F7. All the key things, whether in terms of settings options (XMP, TPM, boot priority, …) or monitoring (CPU frequency, RAM, temperature, RPM, …) are nicely together on one screen. Switching between memory profiles (XMP) is also possible in this window. Alternatively, this is also possible via the OC tab, but this is generally intended for more advanced users.

   

We have virtually no complaints about the UEFI – everything works properly, reliably, the responses are fast… what more could you ask for? Sure, with exaggerated expectations there would certainly be something, but within the price range everything is sufficient for this board even in terms of tuning details of all kinds.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Gaming tests…

The vast majority of tests is based on the methodology for processors and graphics cards. The choice of games is slimmer for motherboards, but that’s in order to be able to run all the tests with two different processors as promised. Each board will always be tested with a more powerful processor from the top end, but also with a weaker, average one. The more powerful variant on the LGA 1700 platform is the Core i9-12900K and the mid-range one is the Core i5-12400.

Based on tests with processors from different classes, you’ll be able to easily decide whether a more expensive motherboard for a cheaper processor makes sense for you or, conversely, how good of an idea it is to skimp on a cheaper motherboard while using a more expensive and more powerful processor, which naturally also has higher power draw and places higher demands on the overall quality of the motherboard.

We’ve selected five titles from the games and we’re testing them in two resolutions. There are significantly fewer games than in the CPU or graphics card tests, but there is just enough for the motherboard tests. Few people consider performance in a particular game when choosing a motherboard. But an indicative overview of how a motherboard shapes gaming performance (compared to other motherboards) is a must. To avoid significantly skewing the result over time, we reached for relatively older titles that no longer receive significant updates.

These are Borderlands 3, F1 2020, Metro Exodus, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy. For newer games, there might be some performance changes over time (with updates) and especially in high resolutions with high details. This is one of the test setups (2160p and Ultra, or the highest visual detail but without ray-tracing) that focuses on comparing performance, for which the bottleneck is the graphics card. In other words, it will be clear from these tests which motherboard and to what extent can impact the graphics card’s performance for some reason. In contrast, a setup with Full HD resolution and with graphical details reduced to “High” will also reflect the CPU’s influence on the final gaming performance.

We use OCAT to record fps, or the times of individual frames, which are then used to calculate fps, and FLAT to analyze the CSV. The developer and author of articles (and videos) for the GPUreport.cz website is behind both.
For the highest accuracy, all runs are repeated three times and average values of average and minimum fps are displayed in the graphs. These multiple repetitions also apply to non-game tests.

… Computing tests, SSD tests, USB ports and network tests

We test application performance in a very similar way to the processor tests. Almost all tests are included, from the easier ones (such as those in a web environment) to those that push the CPU or graphics card to the limit. These are typically tests such as 3D rendering, video encoding (x264, x265, SVT-AV1) or other performance-intensive computing tasks. As with processors or graphics cards, we have a wide range of applications – users editing video (Adobe Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve Studio), graphic effects creators (Adobe Premiere Pro), graphic designers or photographers (Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom, Affinity Photo, AI applications Topaz Labs, …) will find their own in the results, and there are also tests of (de)encryption, (de)compression, numerical calculations, simulations and, of course, tests of memory.

SSD performance tests are also important for motherboards. Therefore we test the maximum sequential read and write speeds on an empty Samsung 980 Pro SSD (1 TB) in the well distributed CrystalDiskMark, in all slots. We approach the USB port tests in the same way. We use a WD Black P50 external SSD to test them. It supports fast USB 3.2 gen. 2×2, so it won’t be a bottleneck for even the fastest USB controllers. We report only one result for each USB standard. This is calculated from the average of all available ports.

We won’t deprive you of network bandwidth tests either. We move large files in both directions within a local network between the motherboard network adapters and the Sonnet Solo10G 10-gigabit PCIe card. This from the aforementioned Samsung 980 Pro SSD to the Patriot Hellfire (480 GB), which is still fast enough to not slow down even the 10 Gb adapter.

   

The results of all performance tests are averaged over three repeated measurements for best accuracy.

CPU settings…

We primarily test processors without power limits, the way most motherboards have it in factory settings. For tests that have overlap with power, temperature and CPU frequency measurements, we also observe the behavior of boards with power limits set according to CPU manufacturers’ recommendations. We set PL1 to the TDP level, respecting also the tau timeout (56 s) for Intel CPUs. The upper power limit (PL2/PPT) is also set according to the official CPU specifications. Technologies for aggressive overclocking, such as PBO2 (AMD) or ABT (Intel), MCE (Asus) and the like, are not dealt with in our standard motherboard tests.

… and application updates

Tests should also take into account that over time, individual updates may skew performance comparisons. Some applications we use in portable versions that do not update or can be kept on a stable version, but for some this is not the case. Typically games get updated over time, which is natural, and keeping them on old versions out of reality would also be questionable.

In short, just count on the fact that the accuracy of the results you are comparing with each other decreases a bit as time goes on. To make this analysis easier, we’ve listed when each board was tested. You can find this out in the dialog box, where you can find information about the date of testing. This dialog is displayed in the interactive graphs, next to any result bar. Just hover over it.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Methodology: How we measure power draw

Motherboard “power draw” analysis is an extremely attractive topic if approached methodically. What does it mean? Measuring the electric current and voltage directly on the wiring that powers the motherboard. Naturally, the processor, or the processor power supply, has the most significant draw, which we measure separately – just as in processor tests.

In addition to the EPS cable, there is also a 24-pin ATX cable with multiple voltages, which is good to keep track of. The key ones are +3.3 V (from which the chipset is typically powered), +5 V (memory) and +12 V, from which the PCI Express slots are powered, and the biggest draw will be in the case of our test configuration on the graphics card. All of these wires are closely monitored. But then within the ATX connector there are also a few relatively unimportant branches that are no longer even used in modern computers (that is, -12 V and -5 V) or are relatively unimportant in terms of power draw. For example +5 VSB (power supply for USB or ARGB lighting even when the computer is switched off; this can usually be switched off in the BIOS) or PG (Power Good), which is only informative and during operation it is only “an also-run”. These branches (-12 V, -5 V, +5 VSB and PG) always have only one wire and often with a smaller cross section, which is also a sign of always very low power draw.

The 24-pin wires on which we measure the power draw are always connected in parallel and are at least in pairs (+12 V) or greater in number. For example, the +3.3 V branch uses four conductors to increase the cross section and the +5 V branch has up to five. However, this branch is quite oversized from today’s point of view, as historically it was intended to power more HDDs or their logical part (+12 V is used for the mechanical part).

We use a shunt of our own making to measure the draw from the 24-pin. This is built on a very simple principle and consists of very low-value resistors. The value is set so low that the voltage drop is not higher than the ATX standard. Based on the known resistance in the circuit and the voltage drop across it, we can calculate the electric current, and once the output is substituted into the known formula to calculate the power, the mathematics is easy. Samples during the course of the tests are recorded using the Keysight U1231A multimeter array via a service application that allows the recorded data to be exported in CSV. And that’s the final destination for creating line graphs or counting averages (into bar interactive graphs). That’s how simple it is.

For completeness it is good to add that the current clamps for measuring the current draw from the EPS cables (power supply to the processor) are Prova 15. These will soon be replaced by a more practical solution for desktop use, namely a similar shunt we use for the ATX connector. The only reason it is not yet in circulation is its more complex design (as it has to account for very high currents) and the need for thorough testing, which we are yet to get to. Since we place a high emphasis on accuracy in our tests, all measuring devices are properly calibrated.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Methodology: Temperature and frequency measurements

By far the most critical part in terms of temperatures on the motherboard is the power delivery (VRM) for the CPU. This is where we return to the Fluke Ti125 thermal imager, which produces temperature maps that can be used to locate the average temperature, as well as the hottest point. We record both these values (average and maximum temperature on the Vcore) in graphs, and we will later evaluate the efficiency of the VRM heatsinks based on the maximum one. However, we lack a suitable thermometer for that yet. Of course, the thermovision is implemented without a heatsink, and a thermocouple needs to be installed on the hottest MOSFET to detect the reduction of temperature with a heatsink. This will be added soon.

Thermovision always relates to operating with the more powerful of the pair of test processors. With it, the differences and possible limitations or impending risks (for example, even from thermal throttling) become more apparent. In order to have a good view of the VRM, we use an Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora 360 liquid cooler with the fans fixed at full power (12 V) instead of a tower cooler (from the CPU tests). The temperature tests also include CPU temperatures for completeness, and we also test the efficiency of the supplied SSD heatsinks as part of the motherboard tests. These are already included with virtually all better motherboards, and so the question naturally arises whether to use them or replace them with other, more finned ones. We will test these heatsinks on a Samsung 980 Pro SSD during ten minutes of intense load in CrystalDiskMark. Finally, the temperature of the chipset’s southbridge and the cooling efficiency in this direction is noteworthy as well.

All tests are conducted in a wind tunnel, so full system cooling is provided. This consists of three Noctua NF-S12A PWMs@5V (~550 rpm) . Two of which are intake, one is exhaust. But the three fast AIO fans also function as exhaust fans, so there is a vacuum in the case.

The temperature at the entrance to the tunnel is properly controlled and ranges between 21-21.3 °C. Maintaining a constant temperature at all times during testing is important not only for the accuracy of the temperature measurements, but also because a higher or lower ambient temperature also affects the eventual behaviour of the processors’ boost. And we also properly monitor and compare the frequencies, whether under all-core load or even single-threaded tasks. We use the HWiNFO application to record the frequencies and temperatures of the cores (sampling is set to two seconds).

Maintaining a constant temperature at the intake is necessary not only for a proper comparison of processor temperatures, but especially for objective performance comparisons. The frequency development, and specially the single core boost, is precisely based on the temperature. Typically in summer, at higher temperatures than is normal in living quarters in winter, processors can be slower.

Temperatures are always read as maximum (both from the VRM thermovision and average, but still from the local maximum values at the end of Cinebench R23). For Intel processors, for each test we read the maximum temperature of the cores, usually all of them. These maxima are then averaged and the result represents the final value in the graph. From the single-threaded workload outputs, we extract only the recorded values from the active cores (there are usually two of these, and they alternate between each other during the test). For AMD processors it is a bit different. They don’t have temperature sensors for each core. In order to make the procedure methodically as similar as possible to the one we apply on Intel processors, we define the average temperature of all cores by the highest value reported by the CPU Tdie (average) sensor. However, for single-core workloads we already use the CPU sensor (Tctl/Tdie), which usually reports a slightly higher value that better corresponds to hotspots of one or two cores. However, these values as well as the values from all internal sensors should be taken with a grain of salt, the accuracy of sensors across CPUs varies.

Frequency evaluation is more accurate, each core has its own sensor even on AMD processors. However, unlike the temperatures, we write the average values of the frequencies during the tests in the graphs. We monitor the temperatures and frequencies of the CPU cores in the same tests in which we also measure power draw. Thus, sequentially from the lowest desktop idle load in Windows 10, through audio encoding (single-threaded load), gaming load in Shadow of the Tomb Raider to Cinebench R23.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Test setup

Note: Graphics drivers used at the time of testing: Nvidia GeForce 466.77 and OS Windows 10 build 19043

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

3DMark

We use 3DMark Professional for our tests and from the tests, Night Raid (DirectX 12), Fire Strike (DirectX 11) and Time Spy (DirectX 12). In the graphs you will find the CPU sub-scores, the combined scores, as well as the graphics scores. From this you can see to what extent a given CPU is limiting the graphics card.

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Borderlands 3

 

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: None; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

 

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

F1 2020

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Metro Exodus

 

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Extreme; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Highest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

PCMark

Geekbench

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Speedometer (2.0) and Octane (2.0)

Test environment: To ensure that results are not affected by web browser updates over time, we use a portable version of Google Chrome (91.0.472.101), a 64-bit build. Hardware GPU acceleration is enabled as well, as it is by default for every user.

---

Note: The values in the graphs represent the average of the scores obtained in the subtasks, which are grouped according to their nature into seven categories (Core language features, Memory and GC, Strings and arrays, Virtual machine and GC, Loading and Parsing, Bit and Math operations, and Compiler and GC latency).

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Cinebench R20

Cinebench R23

---

Blender@Cycles

Test environment: We use well distributed projects BMW (510 tiles) and Classroom (2040 tiles) and the renderer Cycles. Render settings are set to None, with which all the work falls on the CPU.

---

LuxRender (SPECworkstation 3.1)

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Adobe Premiere Pro (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Premiere Pro is 15.2.

---

---

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

DaVinci Resolve Studio (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests, test type: standard. App version of DaVinci Resolve Studio is 17.2.1 (build 12).

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Graphic effects: Adobe After Effects

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe After Effects is 18.2.1.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

HandBrake

Test environment: For video conversion we’re using a 4K video LG Demo Snowboard with a 43,9 Mb/s bitrate. AVC (x264) and HEVC (x265) profiles are set for high quality and encoder profiles are “slow”. HandBrake version is 1.3.3 (2020061300).

x264 and x265 Benchmarks

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Audio encoding

Test environment: Audio encoding is done using command line encoders, we measure the time it takes for the conversion to finish. The same 42-minute long 16-bit WAV file (stereo) with 44.1 kHz is always used (Love Over Gold by Dire Straits album rip in a single audio file).
Encoder settings are selected to achieve maximum or near maximum compression. The bitrate is relatively high, with the exception of lossless FLAC of about 200 kb/s.

Note: These tests measure single-thread performance.

FLAC: reference encoder 1.3.2, 64-bit build. Launch options: flac.exe -s -8 -m -e -p -f

MP3: encoder lame3.100.1, 64-bit build (Intel 19 Compiler) from RareWares. Launch options: lame.exe -S -V 0 -q 0

AAC: uses Apple QuickTime libraries, invoked through the application from the command line, QAAC 2.72, 64-bit build, Intel 19 Compiler (does not require installation of the whole Apple package). Launch options: qaac64.exe -V 100 -s -q 2

Opus: reference encoder 1.3.1, Launch options: opusenc.exe –comp 10 –quiet –vbr –bitrate 192

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Adobe Photoshop (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Photoshop is 22.4.2.

---

---

---

Affinity Photo (benchmark)

Test environment: built-in benchmark.

---

Topaz Labs AI apps

Topaz DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. These single-purpose applications are used for restoration of low-quality photos. Whether it is high noise (caused by higher ISO), raster level (typically after cropping) or when something needs extra focus. The AI performance is always used.

Test environment: As part of batch editing, 42 photos with a lower resolution of 1920 × 1280 px are processed, with the settings from the images above. DeNoise AI is in version 3.1.2, Gigapixel in 5.5.2 and Sharpen AI in 3.1.2.

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

WinRAR 6.01

7-Zip 19.00

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

TrueCrypt 7.1a

Aida64 (AES, SHA3)

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Aida64, FPU tests

---

FSI (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Kirchhoff migration (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Python36 (SPECworkstation 3.1)

SRMP (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Octave (SPECworkstation 3.1)

FFTW (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Convolution (SPECworkstation 3.1)

CalculiX (SPECworkstation 3.1)

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

RodiniaLifeSci (SPECworkstation 3.1)

WPCcfd (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Poisson (SPECworkstation 3.1)

LAMMPS (SPECworkstation 3.1)

NAMD (SPECworkstation 3.1)

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Memory tests…

… and cache (L1, L2, L3)

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

M.2 (SSD) slots speed

---

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

USB ports speed

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Ethernet speed

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Analysis of power draw (EPS + ATX connector) w/o power limits

---

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Analysis of power draw (EPS + ATX connector) with Intel’s power limits

---

---

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Total power draw w/o power limits…

… and with Intel’s power limits

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Achieved CPU clock speed w/o power limits…

… and with Intel’s power limits

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

CPU temperatures w/o power limits…

… and with Intel’s power limits

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

VRM temperatures w/o power limits…

… and with Intel’s power limits

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

SSD temperatures

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Chipset temperatures (south bridge)

---

While others have resigned from full-fledged motherboard tests long ago, we’re just kicking it off. Tests with differently powerful processors, without power limits, but also with limits set by Intel. And when we test performance, we also test M.2 slots, USB or Ethernet. Power draw analysis done at the level of individual branches, and thermal imaging with temperature tests (including SSD heatsink efficiency measurements) are a no-brainer.

Conclusion

We’ve put the MSI MAG B660M Mortar WiFi board through hundreds of tests and although we don’t have anything to compare it to yet, it seems to be a very good piece of hardware. We didn’t come across anything it couldn’t handle (and admittedly it was tested hard), and even when we compare some of the results to the MEG Z690 Unify’s results from CPU tests, this significantly cheaper board doesn’t perform badly and even the performance on it is often a hair higher while at the same time drawing less power. This shows a very decent efficiency even if the comparison across methodologies is a bit tricky. This is because not the same piece of CPU or memory was used and a different CPU cooler. But it’s the only stepping stone so far. However, there will be other boards coming soon for comparison that will be tested under the same conditions. Then we’ll see how efficient the B660M Mortar WiFi really is. Power management is always efficient under load.

It’s worse off-load in settings with no CPU power limits. The idle power draw is very high, up to 40W. By contrast, with the PL1 (125W) and PL2 (241W) settings as recommended by Intel, off-load power draw drops to almost a third, to 16W even with the Core i9. However, higher idle power draw may not always be the case, and this probably only applies to more powerful K models, which the board also treats more aggressively in other settings (around power saving features and the like) than more power-efficient CPUs, with which power draw is similarly low regardless of the PL profile choice.

Based on detailed measurements of power draw within the 24-pin ATX connector, we can conclude that regardless of the power limit settings the power draw from +12 V, +5 V and 3.3 V is constant. From +5 V and +3.3 V, the power draw doesn’t even change much – it’s the same under heavy processor load as in idle mode. This shows that both the DDR5 memory and the chipset do not go into power saving states off load. For the chipset, this is cross-confirmed by the temperature, which also doesn’t change much under load (and is around 50 °C on the B660M Mortar WiFi). On the +12 V supply of the ATX connector, the power draw varies according to the load on the graphics card. This is because the PCI Express slots are powered by these wires.

MSI has nothing to be ashamed of with the B660M Mortar WiFi’s power delivery quality. The board can handle the 250 W Ci9-12900K even without VRM heatsinks. The maximum temperature is at 90 °C though, and in worse conditions (than our test conditions), the situation could be worse, but it is still a good result. Moreover, with heatsink, the temperature will be at least 15 °C lower. And most importantly, this board is designed to work primarily with processors from lower classes (Core i5 and Core i7), which have significantly lower power draw. Still, the B660M Mortar won’t burn even under the most powerful Core i9s unrestricted by power limits.

In the M.2 slot speed tests, we didn’t notice any differences in performance, the speed with the Samsung 980 Pro SSD is virtually identical.The larger heatsink on the first slot naturally cools better though. But that difference in temperature will also be due to some extent to the inferior position of the bottom SSD under the graphics card (we’ve covered how SSD placement affects SSD temperatures in a thematic article separately). All USB port speeds are fine, but we stopped at the slower upload speed (125 MB/s) of the network adapter. Downloads are fine though, as expected – at the 2.5 Gb bandwidth limit (295 MB/s). So we’ll see how network chips other than the 8125BG will behave in this regard.

The question of how good the MAG B660M Mortar WiFi board is will be clarified over time by the results of other boards. For now, though, we can certainly commend it for power efficiency under load (and with Intel’s recommended power limits and beyond), for excellent features led by a robust VRM , super-fast USB ports including 3.2 gen. 2×2 and three 10-gigabit ports (the trade-off 5 Gb ports are not even on the back panel) or modern video outputs. The price of around 210 EUR/5100 CZK is still quite nice for a board with DDR5 memory support.

Notice: At the end of the week, we’ll expand the MAG B660M Mortar WiFi tests with performance measurements with the Core i5-12400 CPU. We didn’t have time to include them all at once and it might be better to have it separate for a start, split between two articles.

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš

Games for testing are from Jama levova

Special thanks to Blackmagic Design (for licenses for DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI) and Topaz Labs (for licenses for DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI)

• Contents
• MSI MAG B660M Mortar WiFi in detail
• What it looks like in the BIOS
• Methodology: Performance tests
• Methodology: How we measure power draw
• Methodology: Temperature and frequency measurements
• Test setup
• 3DMark
• Borderlands 3
• F1 2020
• Metro Exodus
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Total War Saga: Troy
• PCMark a Geekbench
• Web performance
• 3D rendering: Cinebench, Blender, ...
• Video 1/2: Adobe Premiere Pro
• Video 1/2: DaVinci Resolve Studio
• Graphic effects: Adobe After Effects
• Video encoding
• Audio encoding
• Photos: Adobe Photoshop, Affinity Photo, ...
• (De)compression
• (De)encrypting
• Numerical computing
• Simulations
• Memory and cache tests
• M.2 (SSD) slots speed
• USB ports speed
• Ethernet speed
• Power draw curve (EPS + ATX connector) w/o power limits
• Power draw curve (EPS + ATX connector) with Intel's power limits
• Total power draw (EPS + ATX connector)
• Achieved CPU clock speed
• CPU temperatures
• VRM temperatures – thermovision of Vcore and SOC
• SSD temperatures
• Chipset temperatures (south bridge)
• Conclusion