Buying a lower-end board doesn't mean it's not a good board or made with quality components. I prefer Gigabyte boards, first, but used a low-end ASRock board in a budget build last year... and I liked it; it has proven to be very reliable. Personally, I don't like Asus boards, particularly because of the BIOS and the I/O layout (at least with mine.)
An outfit like ASUS or Gigabyte compete with each other and offer an entire price range broken down into "product-lines" at narrower ranges of price-points.
Take as an example my ASUS P8Z68-V Pro. This is part of a model line that may includes something like a P8Z68-M, P8Z68-V, P8Z68-V-Pro, P8Z68-Deluxe. When Ivy Bridge came along, the chipset was updates to Z77 and the same product line derives replacing "68" with "77." Then, there are the Rampage boards offering a high-end Socket-2011v.3 line of sub-models. The Maximus boards. the Sabertooth boards. These latter are in the high-end price-point range.
You can check certain features, like phase-power-design across these groups, and sometimes find a high-end feature you want on a mid-range board. Otherwise, you can pretty much price out the additional features of a "Deluxe" versus a "V" or "V-Pro."
The low-end range, which would include a Z77-A. H77 and other chipsets, mostly lack some of the overclocking features found in the Z boards and used by the K processors. And there are ranges of varying modesty of features.
This description I've given applies to the Z87 and Z97 motherboards, or other lesser chipsets. And you could parse out the marketed offerings of Gigabyte or EVGA or AsRock, and find similar patterns. Sometimes, an inexpensive line of boards like AsRock can challenge the competition with good overclocking features at a lower price-point. I just sent one back for RMA-Refund because it had bent pins in the socket.