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 ASUS AMD RX 570 GPU configuration with a wall meter connected to the Corsair AX1200i power supply. This power supply is Platinum rated, and as I am on a 230 V supply, leads to ~75% efficiency > 50W, and 90%+ efficiency at 250W, 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/RX 570)

Power OS Idle (w/RX 570)

Power OCCT (w/RX 570)

The energy consumption figures of the ASRock X399 Professional Gaming are unsurprising, considering we already knew that the motherboard is using a processor boost/turbo mode by default. Energy consumption varies between 68 Watts while the system is idling and up to 254 Watts when the processor is fully loaded. The huge energy consumption difference is being caused by the overdriving of the already power-hungry Ryzen Threadripper 1950X processor. The power figures are close to those of most AMD X399 motherboards that we have tested to this date.

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 starts loading. (We discount Windows loading as it is highly variable given Windows specific features.) 

Non UEFI POST Time

The default boot time figures of the ASRock X399 Professional Gaming may appear to be the worst out of the motherboards that we have already tested but, from a practical point of view, the difference between the motherboards is unimportant. Enabling the Fast Boot option shortens the boot time down to 10.5 seconds, reducing the boot time by 4.1 seconds at the expense of initializing most of the motherboard's subsystems and connected devices during boot.

USB Backup

For this benchmark, we transfer a set size of files from the SSD to the USB drive using DiskBench, which monitors the time taken to transfer. The files transferred are a 1.52 GB set of 2867 files across 320 folders – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second HD videos. In an update to pre-Z87 testing, we also run MaxCPU to load up one of the threads during the test which improves general performance up to 15% by causing all the internal pathways to run at full speed.

Due to the introduction of USB 3.1, as of June 2015 we are adjusting our test to use a dual mSATA USB 3.1 Type-C device which should be capable of saturating both USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 connections. We still use the same data set as before, but now use the new device. Results are shown as seconds taken to complete the data transfer.

At this point we should also note that manufacturers nowadays advertise their motherboards as having "USB 3.1 Gen 1" and "USB 3.1 Gen 2" ports. The USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports are limited to 5 Gbps, which means that they are USB 3.0 ports. USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports are rated for up to 10 Gbps.

USB Copy Test, 2867 Files (1.52GB)

The ASRock X399 Professional Gaming shares the exact same USB performance as with all of the AMD X399 motherboards that we have tested to this date. All four motherboards are using the same chipsets for their USB 3.1 Gen 1 and USB 3.1 Gen 2 controllers and, naturally, there are no performance differences here.

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

As with all of the AMD X399 motherboards that we have tested to this date, the DPC latency of the ASRock X399 Professional Gaming is relatively high, yet not too high. Our highest recorded DPC latency was 310 μs, a figure that is not high enough to cause any performance concerns.

Test Bed and Setup CPU Performance, Short Form
Comments Locked

43 Comments

View All Comments

  • 29a - Thursday, July 5, 2018 - link

    The logical assumption for the Killer NIC love affair would be money.
  • PeachNCream - Friday, July 6, 2018 - link

    I'm not sure its about money. Anandtech has historically acted to avoid financial conflicts of interest and there's Purch oversight these days as well. It seems more of an interpersonal or friendship thing.

    It's in the comments of this article where AT's people met Rivet's people that seems like the starting point: https://www.anandtech.com/show/10679/rivet-network...

    From there, it's pretty much been site-wide drum beating in every single review where a Killer NIC ends up in a product without data that backs it up, but we're badgered into thinking that because we're gamers we should have an ethernet boner over some OEM shoveling one of Rivet's rebranded NICs and pointless AOL floppy diskette style bloatware on us. I'm guessing it's just that friendships were formed and people kicked off a bromance during the office tour that's since influenced the tone at Anandtech. The part that really irks me is that we've been told before that we wouldn't understand how a Killer NIC works because the matter is too complex to explain...that's been in comments from editors too in the past when we've tried to extract some reason for the bias. I know it's possible to explain this to technically-savvy AT readers because there are articles that have tackled more complicated for that same audience. Comments from editors like those are a cop-out for never finding a way to actually show there's a measurable real world benefit that justifies why Rivet Networks even exists today beyond it providing the industry with a supposed premium ethernet and wireless brand since there's an fairly pointless up-market version of every other component. It's just a shame this happened because lots of us otherwise still believe that Anandtech is an otherwise good site with useful, in-depth articles. I just wish they'd either publish proof or turn the dial back a few notches on Killer NIC commentary.
  • PeachNCream - Thursday, July 5, 2018 - link

    "The design of the X399 Professional Gaming is not in any way extravagant, as one would expect from a top-tier motherboard that is almost exclusively targeting gamers. On the contrary, the aesthetic design is subtle, yet elegant, focused on simple geometric shapes."

    I think it leans a lot closer to the obnoxious end of the spectrum than you do. Maybe when compared to a RGB-and-dragon/deformed bird-festooned gaming board that MSI or Gigabyte vomited up at a recent computer show it might look toned-down, but for an adult buyer, it this thing still has the stink of gamer man-child. It's only a notch or two away from the top of the volume dial thanks to someone at ASRock sticking "professional" on the box next to a has-been old guy's screen name in the hopes of catching a few workstation buyers.
  • Arbie - Thursday, July 5, 2018 - link

    This IS understated compared to practically any other enthusiast board. In fact only the extra-pointy heatsink cover could even be called flash. "The stink of gamer man-child"?? You must go insane over the truly glitzy stuff.
  • PeachNCream - Friday, July 6, 2018 - link

    Since you missed it, here's where that was already noted: " Maybe when compared to a RGB-and-dragon/deformed bird-festooned gaming board that MSI or Gigabyte vomited up at a recent computer show it might look toned-down..."
  • vailr - Thursday, July 5, 2018 - link

    What's the status of Thunderbolt appearing on AMD motherboards?
    Since Intel released the Thunderbolt patents to anyone interested in using it, one would have thought it would be appearing on AMD motherboards by now. Maybe even on an AMD-based "modular Mac Pro 2019", according to some rumors on certain Mac-related web sites.
  • GreenReaper - Sunday, July 8, 2018 - link

    I'm not sure if "released" means "licensed along with a covenant not to sue". Sometimes "free" isn't exactly free.
  • kgardas - Thursday, July 5, 2018 - link

    And does it support ECC UDIMMS or not? That is the question. W/o ECC it's really just yet another gaming board. With ECC supports one may see if it's possible to get rid of those silly LEDs and then give it a run...
  • Fujikoma - Friday, July 6, 2018 - link

    What is meant by 'comprehensive manual'? My ASRock mobo had an atrocious manual (minimalist at best). No downloadable/printable 'comprehensive manual'. There were even QR-codes that linked to nothing, meaning they still haven't written up what those options are and what they do per each firmware revision. I've ended up relying on support board postings to find out all the various nooks and crannies of the BIOS.
  • Strunf - Friday, July 6, 2018 - link

    "Gamers would most likely welcome the replacement of all three NICs with just one with proven gaming performance."
    Unlikely... a single NIC would make this board look cheap and not professional at all, it's professional gaming motherboard after all. 2 NICs are a minimum on this kind of price tag.
    I would be interested to know where your "proven gaming performance" comes from cause from what I see there's virtually no difference in gaming performance between any NIC and one only comes ahead in very specific cases scenarios like Internet bandwidth limited and torrenting/streaming while playing.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now