Well honestly if I had it I'd probably use it. I'm getting to the point where it would be appreciated. Just because I might be a gamer (I hate that term) doesn't mean I don't do millions of other things on my computer and network.
To sell more chips to the gaming and non-gaming but still power thirsty public, AMD would better push for dual-CPU mobos. Upcoming 16-core AMD chips will likely perform worse on games then two 8-core ones.
If you worry about power, few dirty cheap solar panels from eBay will solve your extra consumption power forever.
You seem to have a misunderstanding with how solar works with the grid. It is not a "cheap, let's buy it off amazon" solution for supplemental power. That works if your power system is off the grid.
Also dual CPU is not and likely will never be even power user territory. Threadripper's 64 PCIe lanes is already insane. If you have 2 GPUs and 5 NVMe drives all running at their max rated lane usage you'd still have 12 lanes leftover. I've heard something about bumping to six channels of memory. That's the future tbh.
My guess is probably not on the first 2. I wouldn't expect to see either of them until the new architecture launches with Icelake in 2019. Other than adding mainstream 6 core designs I wouldn't expect any major changes in the CPUs; and Intel's equally loath to make substantive changes to the chipset outside of architecture changes so I'm doubtful on USB3.1g2 integration. I'm also skeptical about the TB3 integration in "future chips" meaning cannonlake/coffeelake for the same reasons, and am not expecting to see it until Icelake.
I don't know what you've got, but I've got a Haswell system and am reasonably confident I won't be upgrading for another 2 or 3 years. I want PCIe4 which I'm not expecting for at least 2, at least 4 USB3.1g2 C ports and 4 USB3.x A ports to cover forward and backward compatibility. Given the currently glacial progress with USB C availability I'm not expecting that for a few more years either. Waiting a few years also lets me see if/how much the low hanging fruit AMD says they know about let them improve relative performance in areas that Intel still has a substantial advantage.
All the RAID-0 arrays built out of non-Intel storage you want, but NOT BOOTABLE without a VROC chip. Also, If this is anything liek the way Gigabyte set it up, probably only two M.2 slots are usable in RAID without the VROC chip.
So I have to ask: When will VROC upgrade keys ever go on sale? How much will they be? I mean, if you've already spent $1500 on an X299 motherboard and an i9-7900X, what's a few hundred more to enable features that should just be included?
I run two Plextor NVMe stick in my Gigabyte Z170X Gaming 5 system in a bootable RAID-0 array. It doesn't have Intel's latest RAID technology, so it bottlenecks at just above 3GB/s, plus, as I understand it, there are latency issues. At any rate, it works great.
The X299 chipset's RAID is optimized for SSD and NVMe, and supposedly doesn't bottleneck until 20GB/s... but the VROC is the sticking point. You might think, well, the VROC obviously provides some sort of extra capability, but in fact, all it really does is provide DRM, much like a 90s-era dongle, that tells Intel's chipset to accept non-Intel branded storage for bootable RAID-0 arrays.
Obviously, if the X299 can create an NVMe RAID-0 array, there is no reason why it shouldn't be bootable just because it uses Samsung or Plextor sticks - except for Intel specifically blocking them.
The backplate design seems really really odd. If you are going to add a backplate to reinforce the mobo from flex due to heavy weight being exerted on the mobo by components, why only reinforce the area of the mobo that has the PCH and SATA connectors since they are both relatively light???? The bulk of the weight strain on the mobo will come from the PCIe slots due to heavy GPUs or from the CPU area due to a heavy cooler being attached. MSI's previous Z1270 MPower Titanium and Z270 MPower Titanium, along with Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9 all use a full backplate that covers the entire mobo. Even though that adds to the overall weight, it would seem to be more beneficial that this one-third backplate design.
You can't really reinforce the CPU area if you want it to be accessible from the underside. The GPU segment is already reinforced by the metal sockets, which really do help.
What they've obviously done is reinforced the areas that are going to get the most access and pressure, the SATA ports and the ATX24 Pin (needed) the buttons and the primary ram bank that they believe most of their customers will use.
Well, if you look at the backplate designs on MSI's previous Z170 MPower Titanium and Z270 MPower Titanium, along with Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9 (which I mentioned in my original post), they all reinforce close to the CPU socket area, while still being totally accessible from the underside.
And the GPU segment is already using metal sockets on MSI's Z270 MPower Titanium and Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9, but the reinforcing backplate underneath those PCIe slots still helps to prevent any slight flexing of the mobo due to really heavy GPUs. I have two MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X GPUs in 2-way SLI, and all the third-party 1080 Ti GPUs are big, fat, and heavy. The issue is not the reinforced PCIe sockets themselves, but the torsional strain on the mobo area around the sockets exerted by heavy GPUs.
The RAM banks do not exert any weight burden, even with 8 big-finned XMPed RAM sticks. I like the backplate on the Z270 MPower Titanium and Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9 far better. But this X299 XPower Gaming AC's 12+1+1 phase power design is far better than Gigabyte's 8+1+1 that they use on their top-of-the-line X299 Gaming 9. I have MSI's excellent Z270 XPower Gaming Titanium (not their Z270 MPower with the backplate), and it has a very robust 14+1+1 phase VRM design, along with the extra 8-pin CPU/EPS connector, and an extra on-board 6-pin PCIe connector for adding more power to the PCIe slots. In several ways, that Z270 XPower Gaming Titanium beats any X299 mobo released so far, including this X299 XPower.
True, well there are only so many guesses and judgements you can make from a set of pictures. The ram banks are metal reinforced too but sometimes a bit more pressure is required just to get the clips to lock.
I'm currently on the X99A XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM board. It was very expensive, much more than I'd normally be willing to pay. I'd say MSI has gotten better since the days of the P67A.
Taking another look, you're right. The end of the ram-banks that could be reinforced definitely aren't. I do wish I got to handle more hardware but life is just not what I wanted it to be.
Umm, the obvious inspiration for that design is the Iron Man Arc Reactor. MSI even refers to it as "XPower Reactor with Mystic Light" on their product page. But they obviously could not exactly copy the Arc Reactor pattern without either paying royalties to Marvel Comics or stepping onto trademark infringement. I wish they used an RGB MSI dragon logo on the PCH, like what they used on their X299 M7 and previous X370, Z270, Z170, and X99A XPower mobos.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
25 Comments
Back to Article
stanleyipkiss - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
If only they had added a 10GbE LAN port... All that M.2 throughput and nowhere for it to go.shabby - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Honestly how many gamers need to transfer stuff at those speeds to another computer in their home/basement?HomeworldFound - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Well honestly if I had it I'd probably use it. I'm getting to the point where it would be appreciated. Just because I might be a gamer (I hate that term) doesn't mean I don't do millions of other things on my computer and network.edzieba - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Five! Five Optane drives! Ah ha ha ha ha!bigboxes - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
:Dprophet001 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
lolThis comment is underrated. Not that there's a rating system but still.
SanX - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
To sell more chips to the gaming and non-gaming but still power thirsty public, AMD would better push for dual-CPU mobos. Upcoming 16-core AMD chips will likely perform worse on games then two 8-core ones.If you worry about power, few dirty cheap solar panels from eBay will solve your extra consumption power forever.
shabby - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
You're likely wrong.willis936 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
You seem to have a misunderstanding with how solar works with the grid. It is not a "cheap, let's buy it off amazon" solution for supplemental power. That works if your power system is off the grid.Also dual CPU is not and likely will never be even power user territory. Threadripper's 64 PCIe lanes is already insane. If you have 2 GPUs and 5 NVMe drives all running at their max rated lane usage you'd still have 12 lanes leftover. I've heard something about bumping to six channels of memory. That's the future tbh.
CMDMC12 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Just because they bundled the add-in card doesn't mean this board has 5 M.2 slots.I came in here fully expecting some monstrosity with 5 actual on-board M.2 slots.
Flunk - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Exactly, this has 3 M.2 slots.saratoga4 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Any idea if the dual m.2 in 8x pcie adapter will work with other boards? That would be really handy.Bullwinkle J Moose - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Will Cannon Lake have bootable USB 3.1 Gen 2 in the chipset?PCIe 4.0?
Thunderzolt 3?
Massive Power Savings?
Do I really need this or can I wait a couple months?
Decisions Decisions
DanNeely - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
My guess is probably not on the first 2. I wouldn't expect to see either of them until the new architecture launches with Icelake in 2019. Other than adding mainstream 6 core designs I wouldn't expect any major changes in the CPUs; and Intel's equally loath to make substantive changes to the chipset outside of architecture changes so I'm doubtful on USB3.1g2 integration. I'm also skeptical about the TB3 integration in "future chips" meaning cannonlake/coffeelake for the same reasons, and am not expecting to see it until Icelake.I don't know what you've got, but I've got a Haswell system and am reasonably confident I won't be upgrading for another 2 or 3 years. I want PCIe4 which I'm not expecting for at least 2, at least 4 USB3.1g2 C ports and 4 USB3.x A ports to cover forward and backward compatibility. Given the currently glacial progress with USB C availability I'm not expecting that for a few more years either. Waiting a few years also lets me see if/how much the low hanging fruit AMD says they know about let them improve relative performance in areas that Intel still has a substantial advantage.
BenJeremy - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Ah, the VROC scam.All the RAID-0 arrays built out of non-Intel storage you want, but NOT BOOTABLE without a VROC chip. Also, If this is anything liek the way Gigabyte set it up, probably only two M.2 slots are usable in RAID without the VROC chip.
So I have to ask: When will VROC upgrade keys ever go on sale? How much will they be? I mean, if you've already spent $1500 on an X299 motherboard and an i9-7900X, what's a few hundred more to enable features that should just be included?
willis936 - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
I'd also love to know more about this. Is there any reason the NVMe protocol itself can't handle RAID arrays?BenJeremy - Thursday, July 13, 2017 - link
I run two Plextor NVMe stick in my Gigabyte Z170X Gaming 5 system in a bootable RAID-0 array. It doesn't have Intel's latest RAID technology, so it bottlenecks at just above 3GB/s, plus, as I understand it, there are latency issues. At any rate, it works great.The X299 chipset's RAID is optimized for SSD and NVMe, and supposedly doesn't bottleneck until 20GB/s... but the VROC is the sticking point. You might think, well, the VROC obviously provides some sort of extra capability, but in fact, all it really does is provide DRM, much like a 90s-era dongle, that tells Intel's chipset to accept non-Intel branded storage for bootable RAID-0 arrays.
Obviously, if the X299 can create an NVMe RAID-0 array, there is no reason why it shouldn't be bootable just because it uses Samsung or Plextor sticks - except for Intel specifically blocking them.
Dug - Wednesday, July 19, 2017 - link
Thanks for pointing this out.HardCore - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
The backplate design seems really really odd. If you are going to add a backplate to reinforce the mobo from flex due to heavy weight being exerted on the mobo by components, why only reinforce the area of the mobo that has the PCH and SATA connectors since they are both relatively light???? The bulk of the weight strain on the mobo will come from the PCIe slots due to heavy GPUs or from the CPU area due to a heavy cooler being attached. MSI's previous Z1270 MPower Titanium and Z270 MPower Titanium, along with Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9 all use a full backplate that covers the entire mobo. Even though that adds to the overall weight, it would seem to be more beneficial that this one-third backplate design.HomeworldFound - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
You can't really reinforce the CPU area if you want it to be accessible from the underside. The GPU segment is already reinforced by the metal sockets, which really do help.What they've obviously done is reinforced the areas that are going to get the most access and pressure, the SATA ports and the ATX24 Pin (needed) the buttons and the primary ram bank that they believe most of their customers will use.
HardCore - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Well, if you look at the backplate designs on MSI's previous Z170 MPower Titanium and Z270 MPower Titanium, along with Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9 (which I mentioned in my original post), they all reinforce close to the CPU socket area, while still being totally accessible from the underside.And the GPU segment is already using metal sockets on MSI's Z270 MPower Titanium and Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9, but the reinforcing backplate underneath those PCIe slots still helps to prevent any slight flexing of the mobo due to really heavy GPUs. I have two MSI GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X GPUs in 2-way SLI, and all the third-party 1080 Ti GPUs are big, fat, and heavy. The issue is not the reinforced PCIe sockets themselves, but the torsional strain on the mobo area around the sockets exerted by heavy GPUs.
The RAM banks do not exert any weight burden, even with 8 big-finned XMPed RAM sticks. I like the backplate on the Z270 MPower Titanium and Gigabyte's X299 Gaming 9 far better. But this X299 XPower Gaming AC's 12+1+1 phase power design is far better than Gigabyte's 8+1+1 that they use on their top-of-the-line X299 Gaming 9. I have MSI's excellent Z270 XPower Gaming Titanium (not their Z270 MPower with the backplate), and it has a very robust 14+1+1 phase VRM design, along with the extra 8-pin CPU/EPS connector, and an extra on-board 6-pin PCIe connector for adding more power to the PCIe slots. In several ways, that Z270 XPower Gaming Titanium beats any X299 mobo released so far, including this X299 XPower.
HomeworldFound - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
True, well there are only so many guesses and judgements you can make from a set of pictures. The ram banks are metal reinforced too but sometimes a bit more pressure is required just to get the clips to lock.I'm currently on the X99A XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM board. It was very expensive, much more than I'd normally be willing to pay. I'd say MSI has gotten better since the days of the P67A.
HomeworldFound - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Taking another look, you're right. The end of the ram-banks that could be reinforced definitely aren't. I do wish I got to handle more hardware but life is just not what I wanted it to be.HomeworldFound - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Apart from the UFO that's a really sexy board.HardCore - Wednesday, July 12, 2017 - link
Umm, the obvious inspiration for that design is the Iron Man Arc Reactor. MSI even refers to it as "XPower Reactor with Mystic Light" on their product page. But they obviously could not exactly copy the Arc Reactor pattern without either paying royalties to Marvel Comics or stepping onto trademark infringement. I wish they used an RGB MSI dragon logo on the PCH, like what they used on their X299 M7 and previous X370, Z270, Z170, and X99A XPower mobos.