System Performance

Not all motherboards are created equal. On the face of it, they should all perform the same and differ only in the functionality they provide - however, this is not the case. The obvious pointers are power consumption, but also the ability for the manufacturer to optimize USB speed, audio quality (based on audio codec), POST time and latency. This can come down to manufacturing process and prowess, so these are tested.

Power Consumption

Power consumption was tested on the system while in a single GPU configuration with a wall meter connected to the Corsair HX 750 power supply. This power supply is Platinum rated. As I am in the US on a 120 V supply, leads to ~87% efficiency > 75W, and 92%+ efficiency at 375W, suitable for both idle and multi-GPU loading. This method of power reading allows us to compare the power management of the UEFI and the board to supply components with power under load, and includes typical PSU losses due to efficiency. These are the real world values that consumers may expect from a typical system (minus the monitor) using this motherboard.

While this method for power measurement may not be ideal, and you feel these numbers are not representative due to the high wattage power supply being used (we use the same PSU to remain consistent over a series of reviews, and the fact that some boards on our test bed get tested with three or four high powered GPUs), the important point to take away is the relationship between the numbers. These boards are all under the same conditions, and thus the differences between them should be easy to spot.

Power: Long Idle (w/ GTX 980)

Power: OS Idle (w/ GTX 980)

Power: Prime95 Blend (w/ GTX 980)

In our Long Idle test, the EVGA X299 FTW K used the least amount of power compared to all X299 boards we have tested far. During the long idle, the system sat at 62W, while the OS idle was 66W. The Prime 95 Blend load yielded 183W, 20W less than the next board and up to 60W less than the SLI Plus which used the most power. The reason we see this result is due to the BIOS, by default, setting the AVX offset to -3 which is something we haven't seen so far in our testing. When you are doing less work, the system draws less power.

Non UEFI POST Time

Different motherboards have different POST sequences before an operating system is initialized. A lot of this is dependent on the board itself, and POST boot time is determined by the controllers on board (and the sequence of how those extras are organized). As part of our testing, we look at the POST Boot Time using a stopwatch. This is the time from pressing the ON button on the computer to when Windows 10 starts loading. (We discount Windows loading as it is highly variable given Windows specific features.

Non UEFI POST Time

Post times for the FTW K also managed to be the fastest tested so far at 24.8 seconds with everything enabled and at default, while the stripped setting dropped a bit more than a second to 23.7. The FTW K has a very short time to access the BIOS during POST; If you blink, you will likely not get into it. A 'goto BIOS' function would be a plus on this board or at least an option to delay startup in order to enter the BIOS. 

Rightmark Audio Analyzer 6.2.5

Rightmark:AA indicates how well the sound system is built and isolated from electrical interference (either internally or externally). For this test we connect the Line Out to the Line In using a short six inch 3.5mm to 3.5mm high-quality jack, turn the OS speaker volume to 100%, and run the Rightmark default test suite at 192 kHz, 24-bit. The OS is tuned to 192 kHz/24-bit input and output, and the Line-In volume is adjusted until we have the best RMAA value in the mini-pretest. We look specifically at the Dynamic Range of the audio codec used on board, as well as the Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise.

Due to circumstances currently out of our control, we were unable to get RMAA results for this board. The problem does not lie with the board itself. Once we are able to get it working properly, the space will be updated with data. 

DPC Latency

Deferred Procedure Call latency is a way in which Windows handles interrupt servicing. In order to wait for a processor to acknowledge the request, the system will queue all interrupt requests by priority. Critical interrupts will be handled as soon as possible, whereas lesser priority requests such as audio will be further down the line. If the audio device requires data, it will have to wait until the request is processed before the buffer is filled.

If the device drivers of higher priority components in a system are poorly implemented, this can cause delays in request scheduling and process time. This can lead to an empty audio buffer and characteristic audible pauses, pops and clicks. The DPC latency checker measures how much time is taken processing DPCs from driver invocation. The lower the value will result in better audio transfer at smaller buffer sizes. Results are measured in microseconds. 

Deferred Procedure Call Latency

DPC Latency is in the expected range, below 300 with an X299 board leading results of 271ms. This was towards the higher end of our group, but again, its well within the expected range. 

Benchmark Overview System Performance: Short Form
Comments Locked

23 Comments

View All Comments

  • jordanclock - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    Any chance we could see comparison numbers on the Intel and Killer NICs?
  • Flunk - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    There is almost no difference, type "intel vs killer nic" into Google. It's been done to death.
  • jordanclock - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    By that logic, they shouldn't bother including half their benchmarks for motherboards because they are almost always to same for a given chipset.

    My interest is in this particular motherboards implementation of the dual NICs.
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    Aside from doing a peak throughput test, we're looking into doing something more substantial for NIC testing. Still a WIP
  • jordanclock - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    Awesome! Glad you're looking to do something more meaningful than peak throughput. It's kind of like the average FPS of networking, in that it gets a lot of attention but isn't the most useful number.
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    Whew, I'm glad there's finally a mobo with two u.2 ports.

    It's so annoying to have all of these u.2 drives without the ability to use more than one at a time!
  • bug77 - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    Ha, I was just thinking the same thing when I read the article :P
  • Yuriman - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    Maybe it's just me, but I find those heatsinks pretty ugly.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    It's supposed to align with their For The Win 3 (FTW3) series video cards styling.

    http://hexus.net/media/uploaded/2017/5/9656d308-25...

    It's no different than MSI doing a similar red/black dragon scheme that they've done with their video cards to their motherboards.
  • bug77 - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link

    I find this type of comment pretty useless.

    No one design choice will ever appeal to everyone. And a chameleonic or customizable look hasn't been done yet, so that comment really brings nothing to the discussion.
    It's ok to point out fugly board, so the manufacturer knows not to do that again, but that's far from the case here.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now