The EVGA X299 Micro Motherboard Review: A Smaller Take on X299
by Joe Shields on February 9, 2018 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- U.2
- X299
- Skylake-X
- Kaby Lake-X
Benchmark Overview
For our testing, depending on the product, we attempt to tailor the presentation of our global benchmark suite down into what users who would buy this hardware might actually want to run. For CPUs, our full test suite is typically used to gather data and all the results are placed into Bench, our benchmark database for users that want to look at non-typical benchmarks or legacy data. For motherboards, we run our short form CPU tests, the gaming tests with half the GPUs of our processor suite, and our system benchmark tests which focus on non-typical and non-obvious performance metrics that are the focal point for specific groups of users.
The benchmarks fall into several areas:
Short Form CPU
Our short form testing script uses a straight run through of a mixture of known apps or workloads and requires about four hours. These are typically the CPU tests we run in our motherboard suite, to identify any performance anomalies.
| CPU Short Form Benchmarks | |
| Three Dimensional Particle Movement v2.1 (3DPM) | 3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, derived from my academic research years looking at particle movement parallelism. The coding for this tool was rough, but emulates the real world in being non-CompSci trained code for a scientific endeavor. The code is unoptimized, but the test uses OpenMP to move particles around a field using one of six 3D movement algorithms in turn, each of which is found in the academic literature. |
| The second version of this benchmark is similar to the first, however it has been re-written in VS2012 with one major difference: the code has been written to address the issue of false sharing. If data required by multiple threads, say four, is in the same cache line, the software cannot read the cache line once and split the data to each thread - instead it will read four times in a serial fashion. The new software splits the data to new cache lines so reads can be parallelized and stalls minimized. | |
| WinRAR 5.4 | WinRAR is a compression based software to reduce file size at the expense of CPU cycles. We use the version that has been a stable part of our benchmark database through 2015, and run the default settings on a 1.52GB directory containing over 2800 files representing a small website with around thirty half-minute videos. We take the average of several runs in this instance. |
| POV-Ray 3.7.1 b4 | POV-Ray is a common ray-tracing tool used to generate realistic looking scenes. We've used POV-Ray in its various guises over the years as a good benchmark for performance, as well as a tool on the march to ray-tracing limited immersive environments. We use the built-in multi threaded benchmark. |
| HandBrake v1.0.2 | HandBrake is a freeware video conversion tool. We use the tool in to process two different videos into x264 in an MP4 container - first a 'low quality' two-hour video at 640x388 resolution to x264, then a 'high quality' ten-minute video at 4320x3840, and finally the second video again but into HEVC. The low-quality video scales at lower performance hardware, whereas the buffers required for high-quality tests can stretch even the biggest processors. At current, this is a CPU only test. |
| 7-Zip 9.2 | 7-Zip is a freeware compression/decompression tool that is widely deployed across the world. We run the included benchmark tool using a 50MB library and take the average of a set of fixed-time results. |
| DigiCortex v1.20 | The newest benchmark in our suite is DigiCortex, a simulation of biologically plausible neural network circuits, and simulates activity of neurons and synapses. DigiCortex relies heavily on a mix of DRAM speed and computational throughput, indicating that systems which apply memory profiles properly should benefit and those that play fast and loose with overclocking settings might get some extra speed up. |
System Benchmarks
Our system benchmarks are designed to probe motherboard controller performance, particularly any additional USB controllers or the audio controller. As general platform tests we have DPC Latency measurements and system boot time, which can be difficult to optimize for on the board design and manufacturing level.
| System Benchmarks | |
| Power Consumption | One of the primary differences between different motherboads is power consumption. Aside from the base defaults that every motherboard needs, things like power delivery, controller choice, routing and firmware can all contribute to how much power a system can draw. This increases for features such as PLX chips and multi-gigabit ethernet. |
| Non-UEFI POST Time | The POST sequence of the motherboard becomes before loading the OS, and involves pre-testing of onboard controllers, the CPU, the DRAM and everything else to ensure base stability. The number of controllers, as well as firmware optimizations, affect the POST time a lot. We test the BIOS defaults as well as attempt a stripped POST. |
| Rightmark Audio Analyzer 6.2.5 | Testing onboard audio is difficult, especially with the numerous amount of post-processing packages now being bundled with hardware. Nonetheless, manufacturers put time and effort into offering a 'cleaner' sound that is loud and of a high quality. RMAA, with version 6.2.5 (newer versions have issues), under the right settings can be used to test the signal-to-noise ratio, signal crossover, and harmonic distortion with noise. |
| USB Backup | USB ports can come from a variety of sources: chipsets, controllers or hubs. More often than not, the design of the traces can lead to direct impacts on USB performance as well as firmware level choices relating to signal integrity on the motherboard. |
| DPC Latency | Another element is deferred procedure call latency, or the ability to handle interrupt servicing. Depending on the motherboard firmware and controller selection, some motherboards handle these interrupts quicker than others. A poor result could lead to delays in performance, or for example with audio, a delayed request can manifest in distinct audible pauses, pops or clicks. |
Gaming
Our gaming benchmarks are designed to show any differences in performance when playing games.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
casteve - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
"This showcases one of the downsides of a HEDT system: while other platforms (like Z170) were getting under 100 regularly, the additional featureset of these large platforms results in a higher DPC Latency."I don't think it's the feature set. It just showcases that Intel failed to optimize for DPC latency with this chipset. eg: z77 good dpc latency, z87 bad, z97 and 170 good... sometimes Intel is on the ball, sometimes it isn't.
jabber - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
Excellent, a X299 board for the over 25's!wolfemane - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
Hey some of us over 25's are kids at heart... and have kids. I love RGB. I'd happily add RGB to a system with this board.DanNeely - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
OTOH even at 18 I'd've probably been like "Really?!?!?" Other than being brushed aluminum when that was still far from common the case I used for the system built right after my 20th was mundane as they come.Samus - Saturday, February 10, 2018 - link
Ditto. Even when I was a teenager I preferred the look of my corporate-class Prolinea or industrial design of a boxy Lian-Li to something with a window and lights. The most adventurous thing I've done is put a LED in my water pump so I can tell when the coolant is flowing.peevee - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
Isn't having only 2 memory slots defeats the purpose of X299-compatible CPUs?DanNeely - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
It has 4, 2 on each side. It's still quad channel so you get the double bandwidth vs the mainstream dual channel CPUs. You're still down 50% on capacity; but between the larger socket size of LGA20xx (AMD Epyc with a ~3500 pin socket is even worse, to the extent that something like half the board for it are the even larger E-ATX form factor that's rarely been used outside of 2 socket boards in the past) and all the extra stuff the bigger CPUs can support there's not enough space on the PCB to do everything that the CPU itself could do on anything smaller than a full ATX. Micro ATX with these CPUs requires picking and choosing what features you need instead of just taking everything.Samus - Saturday, February 10, 2018 - link
Basically, if you need more than 32GB of memory, you are better off spending more on a bigger board because the cost of high-density DDR4 will effectively kill any cost savings. ie, 4x8GB DIMMs are substantially cheaper than 2x16GB DIMMs.cosmotic - Friday, February 9, 2018 - link
On the first page: "This specific review will cover the ASRock X299E-ITX/ac." (probably pasted from said review to this one, which is for an EVGA board)Joe Shields - Monday, February 12, 2018 - link
Updated.