I would have liked to see the performance with one of the faster M.2 storage devices, and different configurations across the PCIe Gen4 and Gen3 connectors. The Crucial MX300 appears to be a SATA drive, which leaves a ton of performance on the table.
That’s AMD. The pins are on the CPU so the CPU is more expensive to match. Additionally Rocket Lake draws more instantaneous current so the boards need more VRMs. The AMD board’s second slot is PCIe-4, but it’s missing the third M2 slot as well as front USB-C
The x570-Pro has the front and back USB-C ports. ( I have one sitting two feet from me )
It also has 2x more SATA lines, BIOS flashback, PCIe 4 slots, multiple graphics card slots (the reviewed board indicates it only has one), and both m2 slots are PCIe 4.
The additional m2 slot on the z590 is an advantage, but cheap adaptors exist for converting PCIe 4.0 slots to m.2.
Yea, the different socket does cost more then the AMD equivalent, but ironically the CPU the board was reviewed with, the i9-11900K, costs a $150 more then its AMD equivalent 5800x.
For price comparisons I'd never match AMD's mid-range to Intel's top-end. The mobo+CPU comparison is far closer between 5800X/Z570 and 11700KF/Z590. The nice thing is street prices have been adjusting to relative performance & availability. Intel is obviously sweating on 14nm as they don't have any 12- or 16-core K competitor, plus they're cutting Rocket Lake below MSRP as it merely throws punches vs. a 5800x and is a bit behind in gaming and very much in power efficiency.
The PCI-e 4 lanes on x570 aren't always an advantage here, btw. See, Ryzen 3000 & 5000 only have 24 PCIe-4 lanes coming out of the SOC. In the TUF series, 16 are used for the first graphics slot and 4 for the first M2 slot, leaving 4 for the chipset to spread out between the second x16 graphics slot, second M2, and many of those USB links and Wifi. On Rocket Lake, 20 PCIe-4 lanes are used for the same graphics and M2 slots, but then 8 PCIe-3 lanes go to the chipset. The second x16 slot on both TUF boards is electrically just x4, but on the Intel version the halved bandwidth is accompanied by much less resource contention. This is primarily evident if you're using both a second M2 and multiple PCI-e cards on both boards - the simultaneous bandwidth off the chipsets is identical.
"Although the aforementioned competitor's models include better onboard audio solutions, the ASUS and its lower price puts it in a solid position for users looking for a sub $300 model to build a Rocket Lake based system."
But how many use the onboard audio anyway? Even the GPU has an onboard solution.
The vast majority of desktop computers use onboard sound from the motherboard. I'd guess that the market for cheap (e.g., sub-$150) DAC's/cards is just for people who buy a motherboard with a subpar Realtek audio implementation that lets them hear all their computer noise crystal clear.
This isn't the early 00s DACs are easy these days as is evident by how many people use onboard audio (even with decent headphones or speakers) which is nearly everyone.
Intel's 845G chipset for the Pentium III/850 (I bought it around Christmas of the year 2000) has usable onboard sound for gaming. Have not bought a sound card since 1999 or so...
i still use soundcards, mosty because onboard sound, doesnt have dd live or dts connect, and if it does, it isnt as good as the sb z or the sb ae-5 plus i now have. the last on board sound i used, was with the n force 2, and briefly with the a64 i had.
I think the vast majority use the sound over the HDMI/DP out on the video card (then from the monitor/line out), at least in most setups i've seen.
Then, if you want higher quality sound for your cans, people buy outboard DACs/headphone amps like the FiiOs, which are far superior to any motherboard solution anyways.
‘In our overclock testing, the board’s inability to hit 5.2 GHz all-core stable with our Core i9-11900K processor was somewhat disappointing. Even with a hefty 1.45 V on the CPU VCore, it just didn’t want to play ball’
Overclocking Rocket Lake?
I hope you had one of those Intel freezer units the company used to demo some time ago.
Overclocking is dead. It has zero relevance, zero practicality. Modern turbo has eliminated the point.
Moreover, Rocket Lake’s critical flaw is its 14nm power hog process. Overclocking magnifies that.
Finally, it’s a mistake to entice people to pump reckless amounts of voltage into expensive hardware. It’s hilarious, too, given this site’s defense of its use of JEDEC RAM speeds to hobble Zen 1 and 2 in reviews.
Most people, you claimed, don’t open BIOS to switch on XMP. But, apparently trying to overclock Rocket Lake (with or without reckless levels of voltage) is so much more relevant.
The amount of effort, expertise, and time involved in overclocking to obtain stability, rather than useless Cinebench scores, is vastly vastly more than what is needed to switch on a single BIOS setting (XMP).
That is one of the most ignorant things I've read here in my 20 years of being on AT. You do realize that turbo boost is rated around CORES USED right? So for example that hot 5.3 "turbo" boost on this i9 is for TWO cores not ALL EIGHT. And there are countless examples of why overclocking for ALL CORES is still relevant today. Stop spreading FUD because you don't know how to successfully overclock.
So you don't refute that your "point" is without merit (or benchmarks, or any other back up proof). Keep talking and showing your ignorance. The facts and benchmarks on overclocking on ALL cores for productivity alone prove you wrong.
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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
Back to Article
Arcadianu9 - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
I would have liked to see the performance with one of the faster M.2 storage devices, and different configurations across the PCIe Gen4 and Gen3 connectors. The Crucial MX300 appears to be a SATA drive, which leaves a ton of performance on the table.Leeea - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
What is weird about this is the ASUS TUF Gaming X570-PRO (WiFi 6) is both cheaper at $220 and is superior.That $40 difference also goes a long way to cover the difference in cost between
Wrs - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
That’s AMD. The pins are on the CPU so the CPU is more expensive to match. Additionally Rocket Lake draws more instantaneous current so the boards need more VRMs. The AMD board’s second slot is PCIe-4, but it’s missing the third M2 slot as well as front USB-CLeeea - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
The x570-Pro has the front and back USB-C ports. ( I have one sitting two feet from me )It also has 2x more SATA lines, BIOS flashback, PCIe 4 slots, multiple graphics card slots (the reviewed board indicates it only has one), and both m2 slots are PCIe 4.
The additional m2 slot on the z590 is an advantage, but cheap adaptors exist for converting PCIe 4.0 slots to m.2.
Yea, the different socket does cost more then the AMD equivalent, but ironically the CPU the board was reviewed with, the i9-11900K, costs a $150 more then its AMD equivalent 5800x.
Wrs - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
Whoops, sorry about the USB-C front.For price comparisons I'd never match AMD's mid-range to Intel's top-end. The mobo+CPU comparison is far closer between 5800X/Z570 and 11700KF/Z590. The nice thing is street prices have been adjusting to relative performance & availability. Intel is obviously sweating on 14nm as they don't have any 12- or 16-core K competitor, plus they're cutting Rocket Lake below MSRP as it merely throws punches vs. a 5800x and is a bit behind in gaming and very much in power efficiency.
The PCI-e 4 lanes on x570 aren't always an advantage here, btw. See, Ryzen 3000 & 5000 only have 24 PCIe-4 lanes coming out of the SOC. In the TUF series, 16 are used for the first graphics slot and 4 for the first M2 slot, leaving 4 for the chipset to spread out between the second x16 graphics slot, second M2, and many of those USB links and Wifi. On Rocket Lake, 20 PCIe-4 lanes are used for the same graphics and M2 slots, but then 8 PCIe-3 lanes go to the chipset. The second x16 slot on both TUF boards is electrically just x4, but on the Intel version the halved bandwidth is accompanied by much less resource contention. This is primarily evident if you're using both a second M2 and multiple PCI-e cards on both boards - the simultaneous bandwidth off the chipsets is identical.
Leeea - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
If I could upvote your post I would. :)supdawgwtfd - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
8x gen3 lanes have the same bandwidth as 4x gen 4 lanes.Based on your comments the choosers would have the same bandwidth to the CPU?
What point we're you tryjg to make?
Threska - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
"Although the aforementioned competitor's models include better onboard audio solutions, the ASUS and its lower price puts it in a solid position for users looking for a sub $300 model to build a Rocket Lake based system."But how many use the onboard audio anyway? Even the GPU has an onboard solution.
neothe0ne - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
The vast majority of desktop computers use onboard sound from the motherboard. I'd guess that the market for cheap (e.g., sub-$150) DAC's/cards is just for people who buy a motherboard with a subpar Realtek audio implementation that lets them hear all their computer noise crystal clear.Operandi - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
This isn't the early 00s DACs are easy these days as is evident by how many people use onboard audio (even with decent headphones or speakers) which is nearly everyone.Holliday75 - Tuesday, August 10, 2021 - link
I have not used a soundcard in almost 15 years. Have not seen the point. If I want audiophile sound I'll go listen to my $3200 tower speakers.MDD1963 - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
Intel's 845G chipset for the Pentium III/850 (I bought it around Christmas of the year 2000) has usable onboard sound for gaming. Have not bought a sound card since 1999 or so...Qasar - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
i still use soundcards, mosty because onboard sound, doesnt have dd live or dts connect, and if it does, it isnt as good as the sb z or the sb ae-5 plus i now have. the last on board sound i used, was with the n force 2, and briefly with the a64 i had.blppt - Thursday, August 12, 2021 - link
I think the vast majority use the sound over the HDMI/DP out on the video card (then from the monitor/line out), at least in most setups i've seen.Then, if you want higher quality sound for your cans, people buy outboard DACs/headphone amps like the FiiOs, which are far superior to any motherboard solution anyways.
Leeea - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
I doEveryone I know does.
Oxford Guy - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
‘In our overclock testing, the board’s inability to hit 5.2 GHz all-core stable with our Core i9-11900K processor was somewhat disappointing. Even with a hefty 1.45 V on the CPU VCore, it just didn’t want to play ball’Overclocking Rocket Lake?
I hope you had one of those Intel freezer units the company used to demo some time ago.
Overclocking is dead. It has zero relevance, zero practicality. Modern turbo has eliminated the point.
Moreover, Rocket Lake’s critical flaw is its 14nm power hog process. Overclocking magnifies that.
Finally, it’s a mistake to entice people to pump reckless amounts of voltage into expensive hardware. It’s hilarious, too, given this site’s defense of its use of JEDEC RAM speeds to hobble Zen 1 and 2 in reviews.
Most people, you claimed, don’t open BIOS to switch on XMP. But, apparently trying to overclock Rocket Lake (with or without reckless levels of voltage) is so much more relevant.
The amount of effort, expertise, and time involved in overclocking to obtain stability, rather than useless Cinebench scores, is vastly vastly more than what is needed to switch on a single BIOS setting (XMP).
Nfarce - Monday, August 16, 2021 - link
That is one of the most ignorant things I've read here in my 20 years of being on AT. You do realize that turbo boost is rated around CORES USED right? So for example that hot 5.3 "turbo" boost on this i9 is for TWO cores not ALL EIGHT. And there are countless examples of why overclocking for ALL CORES is still relevant today. Stop spreading FUD because you don't know how to successfully overclock.Oxford Guy - Thursday, August 19, 2021 - link
The laws of physics disagree with your rant.As for the ad hom at the end, I’m quite sure that’s the reason — not that overclocking is dead.
Nfarce - Friday, August 27, 2021 - link
So you don't refute that your "point" is without merit (or benchmarks, or any other back up proof). Keep talking and showing your ignorance. The facts and benchmarks on overclocking on ALL cores for productivity alone prove you wrong.Oxford Guy - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
So... Did ‘14 nm’ appear anywhere on the first page or did 1.45 volts appear instead?The relevance... the priorities...
COtech - Thursday, August 12, 2021 - link
Would this board do better overclocking a 11600K ?Oxford Guy - Sunday, August 15, 2021 - link
14nm is overclocked.Aliguts - Saturday, August 14, 2021 - link
Do these Muscle and Strength Exerciseshttps://aligfits.com/muscle-and-strength/