The EVGA X299 Micro Motherboard is mid-range microATX offering aiming to please a wide range of users but isn't marketed towards any one function in particular. It supports 2-way SLI, includes a U.2 port, an M.2 slot, and has Wi-Fi connectivity via an included card. It sits as the second smallest commercial X299 motherboard, behind the X299E-ITX. For the X299 platform, as they did with X99, EVGA has the fewest motherboard SKUs compared to the other major board partners, a total of three. These range from the flagship X299 Dark, the mid-range full-sized X299 FTW K, and the X299 Micro which we are looking at today.

EVGA X299 Micro Overview

For high-end desktop platforms, any movement to reduce the motherboard size usually comes at the expense of features. Sometimes a feature compromise makes sense, if a smaller product is aiming for a specific crowd, however it takes a good motherboard design to make the most of the key features of the platform in such a small size. EVGA, for the X299 Micro, attempts to make the best of both worlds: the board supports a full set of quad-channel memory, although only one module per channel, and rather than doing two network ports, changes one for a wireless card. The PCIe lane layout is optimized for a dual-GPU setup, and EVGA puts the other lanes to use with two different PCIe storage implementations.

The X299 Micro has three full-length PCIe slots, supporting up to 2-way graphics. The physical slot configuration allows for a dual slot GPU to fit in the primary GPU slot (top) and the secondary just below it. Technically EVGA's manual suggests support for SLI plus an additional PhysX graphics card, should single-slot GPUs be in play, with the third slot being a PCIe 3.0 x4 from the chipset. For storage, between the PCIe slots is an M.2 slot, supporting both PCIe and SATA modules up to 80mm. In addition to the M.2, the X299 Micro also has a U.2 port below the six SATA ports. with all SATA, M.2, and U.2 lanes fed from the chipset. 

The Micro has information voltage LEDs which note if there is an abnormal voltage detected. There are two additional LEDs in the same area that will light up depending on which processor is installed. It also includes power and reset buttons as well as a debug LED for POST codes (and temperatures once it goes through POST). EVGA mentions a 12-phase power delivery, and has a heatsink which looks like it can handle the load. 

USB connectivity on the Micro offers users two USB 3.1 (10 Gbps) ports, one Type-A, and one Type-C, managed by the ASMedia 2142 controller (most boards in this class use the newer and more efficient ASMedia 3142 controller), but does not include front panel 10 Gbps support. The chipset handles eight USB 3.0 ports (six on the back panel, one internal header) along with four USB 3.0 internal headers. 

The network side of the house is handled by a single Intel I219-V Gigabit LAN controller. Wi-Fi capabilities are handled by an add-in-card, an Intel 8260 card which is 2T/2R, supports speeds up to 867 Mbps and includes Bluetooth 4.2. The kicker here is users will have to install the diminutive card themselves. as it does not come pre-installed.

Performance on the EVGA X299 Micro was solid overall outside of any tests using AVX instructions, with the motherboard usually around the middle of the pack. One of the better results in our power testing, however there is an issue here. In this AVX test, both EVGA boards so far have the clock speed dropping to 3.3 GHz, which is the base clock for the i9-7900X. After running this with Intel XTU monitoring in the background, it showed there is current limit throttling causing the CPU to drop to 3.3 GHz. X299 boards from other vendors do not have this issue. 

In our manual overclocking tests using our first CPU, the system was comfortable at 4.5 GHz, like the others we have tested so far.

The current price on the X299 Micro is $290 on Amazon US. MSI has two MicroATX boards in their product stack; the X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC ($301) and the X299M-A Pro ($222). ASRock has a Mini-ITX board, the X299E-ITX/AC ($400), while GIGABYTE and Asus do not currently have anything smaller than ATX in their lineups. 

EVGA's X299 Strategy

EVGA's X299 Strategy relies on only a couple of boards, three, to complete their lineup as compared to others with close to, or more than, 10 boards filling out many of the nooks and crannies of the market. The least expensive board is the X299 Micro, reviewing here, which as its name implies is a MicroATX size motherboard. Next up the stack is the FTW-K. This E-ATX sized board will compete with other X299 mid-range offerings through its feature set and price. Finally, the flagship of the EVGA X299 stack is the X299 Dark which will match up with other board partner's flagship offerings. 

EVGA's X299 Motherboard Lineup (11/28)
	AnandTech Review	Amazon	Newegg
X299 Dark	upcoming	-	-
X299 FTW K	1/9/2018	-	$330
X299 Micro	this review	$290	$290

Information on Intel's X299 and our other Reviews

With Intel's release of the Basin Falls platform, encompassing the new X299 chipset and LGA2066 socket, a new generation of CPUs called Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X were also released. The Skylake-X CPUs range from the 7800X, a hex-core part, all the way up to an 18-core 7980XE multitasking behemoth. Between the bookend CPUs are five others increasing in core count, as in the table below. The latter HCC models are set to be launched over 2H of 2017. 

Skylake-X Processors
	7800X	7820X	7900X		7920X	7940X	7960X	7980XE
Silicon	LCC				HCC
Cores / Threads	6/12	8/16	10/20		12/24	14/28	16/32	18/36
Base Clock / GHz	3.5	3.6	3.3		2.9	3.1	2.8	2.6
Turbo Clock / GHz	4.0	4.3	4.3		4.3	4.3	4.3	4.2
Turbo Max Clock	N/A	4.5	4.5		4.4	4.4	4.4	4.4
L3	1.375 MB/core				1.375 MB/core
PCIe Lanes	28		44		44
Memory Channels	4				4
Memory Freq DDR4	2400	2666			2666
TDP	140W				140W	165W
Price	$389	$599	$999		$1199	$1399	$1699	$1999

Board partners have launched dozens of motherboards on this platform already, several of which we will have an opportunity to look over in the coming weeks and months. This specific review will cover the EVGA X299 Micro. 

Other AnandTech Reviews for Intel’s Basin Falls CPUs and X299

As we are in the process of testing more and more motherboards, some of the benchmark results in this review will contain numbers from motherboards we have not published a full review yet. Here's our current list of motherboards on the go, as well as some of our CPU reviews:

• The Intel Skylake-X Review: Core i9-7980XE and Core i9-7960X Tested
• The Intel Skylake-X Review: Core i9-7900X, i7-7820X and i7-7800X Tested
• The Intel Kaby Lake-X Review: Core i7-7740X and i5-7640X Tested
• Intel Announces Basin Falls: The New High-End Desktop Platform and X299 Chipset
   
• ($400) The ASRock X299E-ITX/ac Review [link] 
• ($400) The GIGABYTE X299 Gaming 7 Pro Review [link]
• ($390) The ASRock X299 Professional Gaming i9 Review [link] 
• ($370) The ASUS Strix X299-XE Gaming Review [link] 
• ($350) The MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon Review [link] 
• ($340) The ASUS X299 TUF Mark 1 Review [link] 
• ($330) The EVGA X299 FTW-K Review [link]
• ($290) The EVGA X299 Micro Review (this review)
• ($290) The ASRock X299 Taichi Review [link]
• ($280) The MSI X299 Tomahawk Arctic Review [link]
• ($260) The MSI X299 SLI Plus Review [link]
   
• ($500) The GIGABYTE X299 Gaming 9 Review (planned) 
• ($490) The ASUS Prime X299-Deluxe Review (testing)
• ($286) The MSI X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC Review (testing)
• ($199) The ASRock X299 Extreme4 Review (testing)
• ($?) The EVGA X299 Dark (planned)

To read specifically about the X299 chip/platform and the specifications therein, our deep dive into what it is can be found at this link.

X299 Motherboard Review Notice

If you’ve been following the minutiae of the saga of X299 motherboards, you might have heard some issues regarding power delivery, overclocking, and the ability to cool these processors down given the power consumption. In a nutshell, it comes down to this:

• Skylake-X consumes a lot of power at peak (150W+),
• The thermal interface inside the CPU doesn’t do much requiring a powerful CPU cooler,
• Some motherboard vendors apply Multi-Core Turbo which raises the power consumption and voltage, exacerbating the issue
• The VRMs have to deal with more power, and due to losses, raise in temperature
• Some motherboards do not have sufficient VRM cooling without an active cooler
• This causes the CPU to declock or hit thermal power states as to not degrade components
• This causes a performance drop, and overclocked systems are affected even more than usual

There has been some excellent work done by Igor Wallossek over at Tom’s Hardware, with thermal probes, thermal cameras, and performance analysis. The bottom line is that motherboard vendors need to be careful when it comes to default settings (if MCT is enabled by default) and provide sufficient VRM cooling in all scenarios – either larger and heavier heatsinks or moving back to active cooling.

This means there are going to be some X299 boards that perform normally, and some that underperform based on BIOS versions or design decisions. We are in the process of quantifying exactly how to represent this outside of basic benchmarking, so stay tuned. In the meantime, take a look at the next motherboard for review. 

Visual Inspection

The EVGA X299 Micro uses an all black 8-layer PCB, and goes without any design aesthetic stenciled on it. All the slots and all the ports, including the four memory slots, the three non-reinforced PCIe slots, the SATA ports, the chipset heatsink, and even the EPS/ATX 12V connectors are black, matching the color style of the board. The shroud for the back panel IO does not come pre-attached to the board, and requires the user to attach it - this is likely to save on additional manufacturing cost, but allows the user to also install the Wi-Fi module that is included but not automatically installed (EVGA might sell the board to an OEM without the Wi-Fi?).

Both the rear panel shroud and the VRM heatsink share the same design with a plastic, almost cobblestone-like, pattern weaving its way around the shroud and heatsink. Unlike the FTW K, the shroud does not have RGB LEDs, nor does the power delivery heatsink. This is despite the specifications page on EVGA's website, which states it has them. For any user wishing to have RGB LED lighting, a strip will have to use the onboard header located in the top right corner next to the PWR_FAN. There is nothing that sticks out on the board in a positive or negative way for its looks. The Micro should be able to fit in well with most themes with the agnostic black color scheme. 

 

The EVGA X299 Micro has a total of six fan headers: the two CPU headers are located at the top right corner splitting the top of the right set of DRAM slots, and these are PWM controlled only. The remaining four headers are able to support both PWM and DC control. All headers can output a maximum of 1A (12W). This should be plenty for most, however many boards have at least a header or two which can distribute more power (for use with pumps or daisy chaining multiple fans on a header). 

EVGA advertises the the power delivery section on the board as 12-phases. The Vcore/VCCIN and VSA uses IR35201 and IR3556 MOSFETs, while the VCCIO uses IR 35204 and IR3556 MOSFETs. The bits for the CPU are rated to 50A and can supply up to 400W to the Vcore/VCCIN (8-phases for the CPU). Phase doubling duties are handled by the IR 3599 and is found on the back of the motherboard/VRM. This solution will hold up just fine to the rigors of high TDP CPUs with little fanfare. Sending power to the VRMs is a single 8-pin EPS 12V connector located just above the PWM area.  

Being a microATX size board means some sacrifices will have to be made as there just isn't the same amount of real estate to go around. In this case, among other changes, EVGA chose to use four DRAM slots instead of the eight we normally see on this platform. To that end, memory capacity sits at 64GB on the Micro and it supports speeds up to DDR4-3600 using quad channel Skylake-X CPUs. If a Kaby Lake-X CPU is installed, supported speeds are higher at DDR-4133 but only two of the slots are active. 

Focusing on the right side of the board, moving from bottom to top, we get the SATA and U.2 ports first, followed by the 24-pin ATX connector. Next, we can see the AUX_FAN header, the removable BIOS chip which sits next to the debug LED, power/reset buttons, as well as the voltage LEDs. 

Earlier we mentioned some sacrifices need to be made because of less real estate available, and here among the SATA ports is another area where that happened. The X299 chipset is able to provide up to eight SATA ports, but here, due in part to space and part to the U.2 connector, we have a total of six. 

The bottom part of the board has the rest of the headers. On the left is the Front Panel HD Audio connector. Towards the middle of the board is the beep code speaker, a system fan header, and two USB 2.0 headers. To the right of it is a front panel USB 3.0 and chassis fan headers, and finally the front panel headers. 

The PCIe part of the board consists of three full-length PCIe slots. The first two slots are attached to the CPU for x16/x16 operation (with 44-lane CPUs), while the bottom slot is from the chipset and runs at x4 speeds. Both the M.2 and U.2 slots are also connected via the chipset. 

Below is a simplified list of how the PCIe slots will work with each family of CPUs (talking PCIe lanes) when multiple cards are used (the "@" symbol is used to show slot preference for the configuration): 

EVGA X299 Micro CPU PCIe Layout
	44-Lane 1/2-Way	28-Lane 1/2-Way	16-Lane 1-Way	16-Lane 2-Way
PCIe 1	@x16	x16	@x8	x8
PCIe 2	x16	x8	x8	x8
SLI / Crossfire	Yes	Yes	-	Yes

What users might find interesting is the PCIe layout when a 16-lane CPU is in play. Because of the need to support all three sets of CPUs, EVGA has had to offer an x8/x8 configuraiton only with Kaby Lake-X, rather than x16/x0. 

The back panel IO consists of:

• CMOS reset button
• 6 x USB 3.1 (5 Gbps) ports
• Intel I219-V LAN
• Intel 8260NGW Wi-Fi Adapater 
• 2 x USB 3.1 (10 Gbps) ports Type-A and Type-C
• 5 plug audio stack & SPDIF

In the Box

The EVGA Micro doesn't come with much, but does have what is needed to get started. Not pictured is the back panel shroud which does not come attached already, but is included. Also not attached, but pictured below, the Intel 8260NGW Wi-Fi module. This, curiously, also does not come attached to the board. If you want Wi-Fi capabilities, users will have to install the module yourself. 

We get the following:

• Driver Disk
• Specs and Installation Guide
• Rear IO Plate
• 2 x SATA 6 Gbps Cables
• Intel S8260NGW Wireless Module
• 2 x Thermal Pads for M.2 devices
• EVGA sticker

BIOS

When entering the BIOS for the EVGA Micro, users are greeted by a split-screen with high-level information up top such as which DRAM slots are populated, the total amount and speed of memory, as displaying which PCIe slot(s) are in use, their mode, and bandwidth. Other information in the top 1/3 of the screen are bits about the CPU, the number of active cores, if Hyperthreading enabled, and voltages for the CPU, memory voltage, and VRM/CPU temperatures. 

The bottom 2/3 is where we will be able to view and edit functions on the motherboard. One thing some astute readers may notice is a lack of an "EZ BIOS" screen. With EVGA boards, users jump right into the 'advanced' version of the BIOS and into the Overclocking tab. Across the top of this portion are five sections, Overclock, Memory, Advanced, Boot, and Save & Exit.

The Overclock section presents users with a multitude of options associated with overclocking. Items such as the CPU Multiplier Control, BCLK Frequency settings, and voltage domains, are located under this tab. The Micro has the options needed to overclock the CPU, however, it is missing custom LLC functionality to modify vDroop response, as well as any multi-core enhancement which many other boards have. After talking with EVGA they stated they are following the Intel specifications as far as boost on multiple threads.

The Micro, like the EVGA FTW K, reviewed earlier, is also missing power limit adjustments. This would be a concern if we ran into throttling during overclocking, but, we reached our 4.5 GHz clocks without issue. Also like the FTW K, when switching to manual mode, either Per Core or Ratio Limit, it automatically sets a negative AVX and AVX2 offset of 3. Whereas other boards allow the user to set this manually, this is pre-applied and cannot be swtiched off. The result of this setting if it isn't manually adjusted is slower performance on AVX based tasks. 

All memory options are found within the Memory Tab. This is the location where we are able to set XMP profiles as well as manually adjust the speed and timings. In the Memory Information section, it lists the XMP profiles available from the installed sticks which makes it easier to set the profile the user wants. 

The official listed supported memory speeds on the Micro are the lowest for an X299 board we have seen, matching its big brother in this distinction. Also, like the FTW K, it does provide memory ratios to DDR4-4400, but we are only able to test up to DDR4-3600 with the set of sticks we have. Both sets of DRAM we have worked without a hitch using the XMP profile of DDR4-2666 or DDR4-3200. 

The next tab is labeled Advanced. Tis section is where low-level system adjustment can be made such as CPU manipulation, CPU storage, PCIe for bandwidth adjustments, PCH, SATA (enable and disable ports), as well as USB configurations can all be edited here. The Power Management section is a bit of a tease and has adjustments for enabling/disabling LEDs, ERP mode for EU energy savings, and sleep states. No options to adjust the power limits or adjust the Load Line Calibration can be found. The Onboard Device Configuration section users can enable.disable the LAN, Audio, USB 3.1 Controller, as well as M.2 and U.2 ports. 

The H/W monitor configuration section is where system temperatures such as power delivery, motherboard, and the CPU temperature can be found. It also displays voltages from the power supply including the +12V, +5V, and 3VSB. Here we are also able to adjust fan speeds, however, it will have to be through pre-supplied auto options (Smart and Max), or through basic power percent values for fine control. This is an aggrivatingly bad way to represent fan control, as fan response is far from linear with respect to power. The two CPU fan headers are PWM control only while the remaining chassis/system fans are able to use both PWM and DC control. 

 

 

Boot Order, Numlock State, and Fast Boot are some of the options found on the Boot tab. There are options for a Windows 7 installation, boot mode select, as well as a list of boot options to change. 

Last is the Save & Exit tab where we are able to restore defaults or load the last saved settings. Also in this section is where users are able to save BIOS profiles internally or to a USB stick as well as updating the BIOS. Boot override is also present, which is a positive.

Overall, the EVGA Micro BIOS worked fine outside of some issues with a cold boot. It would POST, then give five long beeps and throw a d6 debug code. Occasionally it would work through it and boot to an OS, while other times it would hang there repeatedly. When I first received the board, I was unable to boot and it was difficult to get into the BIOS as fast boot is enabled by default which did not leave a lot of time to reach the BIOS. Once I was able to get into it, I upgraded the BIOS to 1.08 (latest on their website at the time). This allowed me to get in and boot without issue, however, it still sends five long beeps as if there was a problem and then it boots. Our initial thought it has something to do with memory training. We have reached out to EVGA who is looking into it. 

Software

The included driver disc contains all the basic drivers. This includes the Chipset, ME, LAN, Audio drivers, amd also EVGA's sold software package, the E-Leet utility. I used the disc to install the motherboard drivers without issue. One item I would like to see added to help the average user is an automatic update program. Because the Micro doesn't have one, users will have to go to the EVGA website and manually look for updated drivers. Enthusiasts may prefer this method, particularly in this day and age of automatic updates, but for most it would welcome such an addition, which other motherboard manufacturers have been using to their advantage. 

The E-Leet Tuning Utility X is a windows based application used for monitoring the system, overclocking, and if the board supports it, changing LED effects. The first three tabs, CPU, Mainboard, and Memory, are informational only covering details about each part. They look a lot like the same tabs in CPU-Z, in fact. 

Below are images of the overclocking and voltage sections. These tabs are where adjustments for overclocking such as CPU Multiplier, Ring, BCLK, and voltage adjustments will be managed. The BIOS settings for the CPU multiplier determines which cores are able to be adjusted. A Per Core ratio will lead all to be individually configured, while the Ratio Limit is a 'one slider controls all' situation. 

The E-Leet Utility worked without issue on the Micro. The issues I had on the FTW K, freezing when DRAM was set manually from the BIOS, were not present.

The EVGA Micro uses the ALC1150 codec for audio processing which is the high-end codec from the previous generation, which has since been superceded. The Micro, like the FTW K, uses the Realtek HD Audio Manager for audio tweaking and does not offer additional software on top of it. 

Board Features

The EVGA Micro is designed to be a jack of all trades and is clearly intended for smaller form factor computing. EVGA doesn't have a dozen boards for each market segment so each board will have to make use for any type of user which should not be an issue to most users. The Micro gives users six SATA ports, one U.2 port, a single Intel NIC, integrated Wi-Fi, and 2-way multi-GPU abilities. 

EVGA X299 Micro
Warranty Period	3 Years
Product Page	Link
Price	$289.99 Amazon US
Size	MicroATX
CPU Interface	LGA2066
Chipset	Intel X299
Memory Slots (DDR4)	Four DDR4 Supporting 64GB Quad Channel - Up to DDR4 4000  DDR4 4133 (dual channel Kaby Lake-X)
Network Connectivity	1 x Intel I219V GbE
Onboard Audio	Realtek ALC 1150
PCIe Slots for Graphics (from CPU)	2 x PCIe 3.0 - 44 Lane CPU: x16/x16 - 28 Lane CPU: x16/x8  - 16 Lane CPU: x8/x8
PCIe Slots for Other (from PCH)	1 x PCIe 3.0 x4
Onboard SATA	6 x RAID 0/1/5/10
Onboard SATA Express	None
Onboard M.2	1 x PCIe 3.0 x4 and SATA mode
Onboard U.2	1 x PCIe 3.0 x4 (chipset)
USB 3.1	ASMedia ASM2142  1 x Type-A 1 x Type-C
USB 3.0	Chipset 6 x Back Panel 2 x Onboard Headers
USB 2.0	Chipset 2 x Onboard Headers
Power Connectors	1 x 24-pin ATX 1 x 8-pin CPU
Fan Headers	2 x 4-pin CPU (PWM) 4 x 4-pin Chassis (PWM and DC) * All headers max 1A/12W
IO Panel	1 x LAN (RJ45) ports 2 x USB 3.1 10 Gbps, Type-A and Type-C 6 x USB 3.0 1 x SPDIF out 5 x Audio Jacks 1 x M.2 E Key Vertical Header 1 x BIOS/CMOS Reset

From the controller set, EVGA is a little behind the times compared to the competition in a couple of areas. The USB 3.1 controller being used here, the ASM2142, has since been upgraded on many boards to the ASM3142, which is a lower power version. Similarly, the audio codec here is the Realtek ALC1150, which is the previous high-end model: most motherboards now go straight to the ALC1220, which offers additional features. EVGA also only has 12 W fan headers, which may be insufficient for some high-powered cooling setups.

Test Bed

As per our testing policy, we take a high-end CPU suitable for the motherboard that was released during the socket’s initial launch and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the processor maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC sub timings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend our testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.

Readers of our motherboard review section will have noted the trend in modern motherboards to implement a form of MultiCore Enhancement / Acceleration / Turbo (read our report here) on their motherboards. This does several things, including better benchmark results at stock settings (not entirely needed if overclocking is an end-user goal) at the expense of heat and temperature. It also gives, in essence, an automatic overclock which may be against what the user wants. Our testing methodology is ‘out-of-the-box’, with the latest public BIOS installed and XMP enabled, and thus subject to the whims of this feature. It is ultimately up to the motherboard manufacturer to take this risk – and manufacturers taking risks in the setup is something they do on every product (think C-state settings, USB priority, DPC Latency/monitoring priority, overriding memory sub-timings at JEDEC). Processor speed change is part of that risk, and ultimately if no overclocking is planned, some motherboards will affect how fast that shiny new processor goes and can be an important factor in the system build.

Test Setup
Processor	Intel i9 7900X (10C/20T, 3.3G, 140W)
Motherboard	EVGA X299 Micro (BIOS version 1.08)
Cooling	Corsair H115i
Power Supply	Corsair HX750
Memory	Corsair Vengeance LPX 4x8GB DDR4 2666 CL16 Corsair Vengeance LPX 4x4GB DDR4 3200 CL16
Memory Settings	DDR4 2666 CL16-18-18-35 2T (testing)
Video Cards	ASUS Strix GTX 980
Hard Drive	Crucial MX300 1TB
Optical Drive	TSST TS-H653G
Case	Open Test Bed
Operating System	Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

 

Many thanks to...

We must thank the following companies for kindly providing hardware for our multiple test beds. Some of this hardware is not in this testbed specifically but is used in other testing.

Thank you to ASUS for providing us with GTX 980 Strix GPUs. At the time of release, the STRIX brand from ASUS was aimed at silent running, or to use the marketing term: '0dB Silent Gaming'. This enables the card to disable the fans when the GPU is dealing with low loads well within temperature specifications. These cards equip the GTX 980 silicon with ASUS' Direct CU II cooler and 10-phase digital VRMs, aimed at high-efficiency conversion. Along with the card, ASUS bundles GPU Tweak software for overclocking and streaming assistance.

The GTX 980 uses NVIDIA's GM204 silicon die, built upon their Maxwell architecture. This die is 5.2 billion transistors for a die size of 298 mm², built on TMSC's 28nm process. A GTX 980 uses the full GM204 core, with 2048 CUDA Cores and 64 ROPs with a 256-bit memory bus to GDDR5. The official power rating for the GTX 980 is 165W.

The ASUS GTX 980 Strix 4GB (or the full name of STRIX-GTX980-DC2OC-4GD5) runs a reasonable overclock over a reference GTX 980 card, with frequencies in the range of 1178-1279 MHz. The memory runs at stock, in this case, 7010 MHz. Video outputs include three DisplayPort connectors, one HDMI 2.0 connector, and a DVI-I.

Further Reading: AnandTech's NVIDIA GTX 980 Review

 

Thank you to Crucial for providing us with MX300 SSDs. Crucial stepped up to the plate as our benchmark list grows larger with newer benchmarks and titles, and the 1TB MX300 units are strong performers. Based on Marvell's 88SS1074 controller and using Micron's 384Gbit 32-layer 3D TLC NAND, these are 7mm high, 2.5-inch drives rated for 92K random read IOPS and 530/510 MB/s sequential read and write speeds.

The 1TB models we are using here support TCG Opal 2.0 and IEEE-1667 (eDrive) encryption and have a 360TB rated endurance with a three-year warranty.

Further Reading: AnandTech's Crucial MX300 (750 GB) Review

 

Thank you to Corsair for providing us with Vengeance LPX DDR4 Memory, HX750 Power Supply, and H115i CPU Cooler. 

Corsair kindly sent a 4x8GB DDR4 2666 set of their Vengeance LPX low profile, high-performance memory for our stock testing. The heatsink is made of pure aluminum to help remove heat from the sticks and has an eight-layer PCB. The heatsink is a low profile design to help fit in spaces where there may not be room for a tall heat spreader; think a SFF case or using a large heatsink. Timings on this specific set come in at 16-18-18-35. The Vengeance LPX line supports XMP 2.0 profiles for easily setting the speed and timings. It also comes with a limited lifetime warranty. 

Powering the test system is Corsair's HX750 Power Supply. This HX750 is a dual mode unit able to switch from a single 12V rail (62.5A/750W) to a five rail CPU (40A max ea.) and is also fully modular. It has a typical selection of connectors, including dual EPS 4+4 pin four PCIe connectors and a whopping 16 SATA power leads, as well as four 4-pin Molex connectors.

The 135mm fluid dynamic bearing fan remains off until it is 40% loaded offering complete silence in light workloads. The HX750 comes with a ten-year warranty. 

In order to cool these high-TDP HEDT CPUs, Corsair sent over its latest and largest AIO in the H115i. This closed-loop system uses a 280mm radiator with 2x140mm SP140L PWM controlled fans. The pump/block combination mounts to all modern CPU sockets. Users are also able to integrate this cooler into the Corsair link software via USB for more control and options. 

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. 

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.

In our Long Idle testing, the EVGA X299 Micro used the 63W at the wall which is a margin of error difference next to the least power hungry board in the FTW K. OS Idle numbers were middle of the also tied for second using 68W. The load test, using a Prime 95 Blend load, yielded a 179W reading which was the least in the group by a few watts. The reason we see this result is due to the BIOS, by default, setting the AVX offset to -3 thus using less voltage and clock speed than the other boards who do not set this offset at stock.

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.

POST times for the Micro managed to be up there with the best of them at 25.1 seconds by default and 23.8 seconds when stripped. By default, the Micro has Fast Boot enabled which helps the times a bit, but this has a downside to it, by having a shorter time 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. 

DPC Latency is in the expected range, below 300 on the X299 platform. The Micro's result was towards the higher end of our group but within the expected range. 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.

CPU Performance, Short Form

For our motherboard reviews, we use our short form testing method. These tests usually focus on if a motherboard is using MultiCore Turbo (the feature used to have maximum turbo on at all times, giving a frequency advantage), or if there are slight gains to be had from tweaking the firmware. We leave the BIOS settings at default and memory at JEDEC timings for these tests, respective to the maximum supported DRAM frequency of the processor. This makes it very easy to see which motherboards have MCT enabled by default.

Rendering - Blender 2.78: link

For a render that has been around for what seems like ages, Blender is still a highly popular tool. We managed to wrap up a standard workload into the February 5 nightly build of Blender and measure the time it takes to render the first frame of the scene. Being one of the bigger open source tools out there, it means both AMD and Intel work actively to help improve the codebase, for better or for worse on their own/each other's microarchitecture.

Our Blender testing has the EVGA FTW Micro landing in the middle of the pack completing the benchmark in 204 seconds. 

Rendering – POV-Ray 3.7: link

The Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer, or POV-Ray, is a freeware package for as the name suggests, ray tracing. It is a pure renderer, rather than modeling software, but the latest beta version contains a handy benchmark for stressing all processing threads on a platform. We have been using this test in motherboard reviews to test memory stability at various CPU speeds to good effect – if it passes the test, the IMC in the CPU is stable for a given CPU speed. As a CPU test, it runs for approximately 2-3 minutes on high-end platforms.

Our POV-Ray results have the Micro second to last, in front of its big brother in the FTW K. The difference here we found during our sanity checks was to see the CPU running at its base clock of 3.3 GHz throughout this testing. Typically, depending on the board, the 7900X CPU should run from 3.6-3.7 GHz, and the Micro is throttling back to the base clocks. According to Intel's XTU utility, this is due to current limit throttling. This curious phenomenon, which happens at stock speeds, goes away when overclocked, as indicated by the higher result.

Compression – WinRAR 5.4: link

Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30-second 720p videos.

WinRAR results have the Micro as the second slowest of the bunch posting a time of 37.9 seconds, again behind the FTW K.   

Synthetic – 7-Zip 9.2: link

As an open source compression tool, 7-Zip is a popular tool for making sets of files easier to handle and transfer. The software offers up its own benchmark, to which we report the result.

For our 7-Zip results the Micro scores 58995 which is middle of the pack, and less than 1% away from the second spot. No anomalies here.  

Point Calculations – 3D Movement Algorithm Test: link

3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz, and IPC win in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. For a brief explanation of the platform agnostic coding behind this benchmark, see my forum post here.

The 3DPM results were also positive coming in 4th place and in the middle of the pack. 

Neuron Simulation - DigiCortex v1.20: link

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. Results are taken during the steady state period in a 32k neuron simulation and represented as a function of the ability to simulate in real time (1.000x equals real-time).

In the DigiCortex testing, the FTW K managed 1.15 score which is more towards the middle of our results. There are seven boards within 0.02x fractions of real-time simulation of each other in this grouping. 

Gaming Performance

Ashes of the Singularity is a Real Time Strategy game developed by Oxide Games and Stardock Entertainment. The original AoTS was released back in March of 2016 while the standalone expansion pack, Escalation, was released in November of 2016 adding more structures, maps, and units. We use this specific benchmark as it relies on both a good GPU as well as on the CPU in order to get the most frames per second. This balance is able to better display any system differences in gaming as opposed to a more GPU heavy title where the CPU and system don't matter quite as much. We use the default "Crazy" in-game settings using the DX11 rendering path in both 1080p and 4K UHD resolutions. The benchmark is run four times and the results averaged then plugged into the graph. 

Our AOTSe testing continues to be a tight-knit dataset with almost 2 frames per second separating things in the more CPU heavy 1080p and less than 1 frame per second in 4K.  The Micro's performance was right on par with the rest of the data sets able to pull 43.1 frames per second in 1080p and 35.3 in 4K UHD. 

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Rise of the Tomb Raider is a third-person action-adventure game that features similar gameplay found in 2013's Tomb Raider. Players control Lara Croft through various environments, battling enemies, and completing puzzle platforming sections, while using improvised weapons and gadgets in order to progress through the story.

One of the unique aspects of this benchmark is that it’s actually the average of 3 sub-benchmarks that fly through different environments, which keeps the benchmark from being too weighted towards a GPU’s performance characteristics under any one scene.

The ROTR results are also showing very close results with the few datasets we have. In this case, the Micro reached 93.2 FPS in 1080p while the 4K UHD testing yielded 40 FPS. 

Overclocking

Experience with the EVGA X299 Micro

Overclocking with the EVGA X299 Micro went well. The board does not come with any automatic overclocking presets, however, when left on auto, it will adjust the CPU voltage in line with the clock speed. This tends to overvolt things a bit, and that was the case here, but is a tactic used by motherboard manufacturers to ensure that most CPUs can be overclocked.

Leaving the voltage on auto and setting 4.5 GHz yielded almost 1.3V, which is too much voltage on our chip for the clock speed, and unsurpisingly failed our testing. Although the BIOS was missing some features, like LLC to adjust vDroop, and power limit adjustments, we really didn't find ourselves needing those adjustments for ambient overclocking. In the end, we landed right around where the other boards did with 1.23V @ 4.5 GHz. 

The major overclocking options are under one section, and in this case, one page worth so there is no jumping around required for an average ambient overclock. Options like the CPU multiplier, BCLK, and Voltages for multiple domains are all found in the same section. Only the DRAM voltage was in a different section but logically placed in the Memory section, right at the top. 

As far as DRAM goes, the board had no issues with either of our DDR4-2666 or the DDR4-3200 kits. It was 'set XMP and go', just how we like it. We were able to overclock the sticks and achieve DDR4-3600 speeds with equivalent timings. Windows overclocking through E-Leet worked fine, even when setting the DRAM speed manually. This is compared to the FTW K in the last review, where it froze with any manual memory speed settings enabled - this does not happen here.  

Many commenters of previous X299 boards wanted more in-depth testing of the VRM. Some boards do not read and display VRM temperatures. However, the Micro does. Because of that, I was able to run the system and get more objective readings as opposed to the warm/hot to the touch and throttling barometers we use. To make a long story short, we did not run into any thermal issues on the VRM on this board in stock or overclocked form. The maximum VRM temperature E-Leet read was 59C during a longer duration stress test of OCCT (about an hour).  

Overclocking Methodology

Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows. We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with POV-Ray and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads. These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.

For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from the previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed. The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (90ºC+). Our test bed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.

Overclocking Results

The EVGA Micro topped out at 4.5 GHz at 1.23V along with the other boards tested as expected. The voltage to reach the clock speeds were all within a small variance so nothing out of the ordinary there. But again, we read from software, so there is a built-in leeway already. With no LLC setting in sight, we did not have any vDroop control, but voltages stayed stable as we have seen with all boards reviewed so far. At the top overclock of 4.5 GHz and 1.23V, the system pulled 299W from the wall. 

The board does not have any power limit adjustments but that did not cause an issue during overclocking. Ironically, we saw current limit and throttling while running POV-Ray and P95 at stock (board optimized defaults). It seems when you switch from auto to manual, those limits appear to be raised or eliminated as we cannot get XTU to trip the current limit and throttle in that state.

 

The EVGA X299 Micro is priced at $290 from Amazon US. Being microATX in size, there are only a few competitors in the space, such as the the X299M Gaming Pro Carbon AC and X299M-A Pro from MSI. For users that want to get even smaller, the mini-ITX ASRock X299E-ITX/ac also exists, which we reviewed.

Conclusions

The Micro stands up well compared to the other smaller-than-ATX X299 motherboards, particularly when there is a need for U.2 support as the EVGA X299 Micro is the only one to have a U.2 port. There is a downside to this, as the other boards have dual M.2 slots instead. Those features aside, the difference between the smaller X299 boards comes down to integrated RGB LEDs, which the Gaming Pro Carbon has, or included wireless capabilities which only the X299M-A Pro lacks. It will be a feature trade off depending on user requirements, and we are waiting for the others to come into our hands for testing. 

That said, the EVGA X299 Micro has most of what we would need on a PC. Most users will be sufficient with 'only' six SATA ports, or a single M.2 port, or 64 GB of DRAM: it could easily be argued that if a user needs more than this, then other ATX are available. As the EVGA X299 is a smaller board, there are natural tradeoffs

The EVGA X299 uses a reasonably robust 12-phase power delivery, with Infineon power stages, that handled stock settings and our overclocked options without issue. The power delivery heatsink, an important part of that ecosystem, worked well keeping temperatures in check during our overclocking adventures.

Overall, I am pleased with how the Micro turned out, but improvements can be made. The curious issue I had with the beep codes and getting the system to boot was a somewhat frustrating experience. We are not sure what was going on (speculating a memory training issue), but EVGA is aware of the problem we ran into and is looking into it. The stock performance in AVX tests was lower than the other boards which is something users should be aware of, but EVGA relayed to us that this is the Intel specification and other boards technically go outside of Intel spec, and thus are getting better results in those tests. Outside of that, I would have liked to see EVGA put the back panel shroud and Wi-Fi card on the board automatically. Despite a user being in the process of building a full PC, it did feel odd to also have to finish putting together the motherboard, regardless if it only takes a couple of minutes to do it. 

In the end, EVGA has given users a solid choice for a small form factor motherboard. While not without its quirks, the Micro has enough features an options to satisfy a large cross section of users from the gamer and enthusiast crowd, and even to the professional users given its high horsepower and fast storage options. Its pricepoint places it in position between the other MicroATX (and ITX) offerings, so it really will come down to each user and what they need, want, and can do without. The other side of it is EVGA's warranty strategy, which bypasses retailers and goes straight to them directly.

• The Intel Skylake-X Review: Core i9-7980XE and Core i9-7960X Tested
• The Intel Skylake-X Review: Core i9-7900X, i7-7820X and i7-7800X Tested
• The Intel Kaby Lake-X Review: Core i7-7740X and i5-7640X Tested
• Intel Announces Basin Falls: The New High-End Desktop Platform and X299 Chipset
   
• ($400) The ASRock X299E-ITX/ac Review [link] 
• ($400) The GIGABYTE X299 Gaming 7 Pro Review [link]
• ($390) The ASRock X299 Professional Gaming i9 Review [link] 
• ($370) The ASUS Strix X299-XE Gaming Review [link] 
• ($350) The MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon Review [link] 
• ($340) The ASUS X299 TUF Mark 1 Review [link] 
• ($330) The EVGA X299 FTW-K Review [link]
• ($290) The EVGA X299 Micro Review (this review)
• ($290) The ASRock X299 Taichi Review [link]
• ($280) The MSI X299 Tomahawk Arctic Review [link]
• ($260) The MSI X299 SLI Plus Review [link]