Performance Testing & Methodology

For general performance testing, we use the same basic test setup for both CPU and motherboard evaluation making the results comparable. Each test is run multiple times to ensure accuracy. The middle result is used in each case. The following system configurations were used for all benchmarks and general testing.

Test Systems

Due to potential scheduler improvements with Windows 10 that have happened over time as well as other tweaks we are using the latest build available at the time of this writing. For reference, the current Windows 10 build is 1909. We are using Windows 10 Professional for reference. All the latest patches have been applied and the driver versions are noted in the specifications. These are not necessarily the newest as we want the game performance to be more consistent across a broader sample of system configurations. We will update these periodically and retest as needed.

All systems were freshly formatted, and all the latest drivers and OS patches were used. All the systems were updated to their latest BIOS revisions. Finally, for the Intel system, I did install the CPU microcode updates relevant to that CPU. It’s important to note that build 1909 does contain improved mitigations for several security flaws on Intel processors. However, I did not go out of my way to download any additional or optional mitigation patches. Hyperthreading (SMT for AMD) also remained enabled for all testing.

We are using the performance power plan on all our test configurations. Essentially, we created a “best case” scenario for each system outside of the hardware configurations. For the hardware, it was impossible to use the same memory modules on all the test systems due to the nature of memory compatibility on different motherboards. That said, we were able to use common frequencies and keep the timings relatively close for the most part. The memory timings and the speeds we used are referenced in the specification tables below.

One thing to keep in mind is that performance is largely determined by CPU and memory configuration, or that of the graphics card rather than the motherboard itself. The benchmarks here ensure that the motherboard was able to hold up to the testing and that there were no problems with firmware, thermals or power delivery, which caused performance to drop off. It’s also worth noting that overclocked results are provided to not only showcase what the motherboard can do when pushed but that it was able to sustain the necessary power delivery to make it through the torture testing another time with greater demand placed on it than that of stock operation.

Finally, all systems were run at stock and overclocked values. For clarification: “Stock” settings are their automatic or default values in BIOS which allows the CPU’s tested to operate using their default base and boost clocks. Overclocked values provided are all core overclocks unless otherwise noted. These clock speeds are the maximum 24/7 stable overclock we could achieve for each configuration. AVX offsets are not used unless stated. Results, where clock speeds are not explicitly shown, are “stock” values. These are checked to ensure that boost clock behavior is normal and that temperatures are in the correct ranges to avoid throttling and performance anomalies as much as possible.

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

Join the Conversation

10 Comments

  1. Very nice review. I’ve been tinkering with the idea of building an AMD system and was looking into this board. I doubt I’ll do it, but if I did I would no doubt heavily consider this board. This review only backs my thinking up.

  2. It was a surprisingly good motherboard. Low end boards are a bit of a double-edged sword for me. They are relatively easy to test as they have less integrated hardware, but at the same time they are often quirkier, not as well made, etc. GIGABYTE really did a good job cutting the fluff without making it horribly cheap like some other brands usually do.

    That’s not to say the VRM is excessively beefy, but it’s good enough and can more than handle higher end CPU’s like the 3900X and 3950X if need be.

  3. Nice review Dan.

    I don’t like the x570 boards having the tiny cooling fan on the chipset. Those things always fail or become noisy over time. I would prefer a proper beefy heatsink if needed.

    GB is not my favorite brand but they are in my top 3. Their bios implementations have always been wacky and different from everyone else’s.

  4. [QUOTE=”Burticus, post: 11582, member: 297″]
    Nice review Dan.

    I don’t like the x570 boards having the tiny cooling fan on the chipset. Those things always fail or become noisy over time. I would prefer a proper beefy heatsink if needed.

    GB is not my favorite brand but they are in my top 3. Their bios implementations have always been wacky and different from everyone else’s.
    [/QUOTE]

    I would agree that the tiny fans tend to fail/get noisy over time, but then again, I’ve had an MSI X570-A Pro sitting next to me for the past 6 months as a test bench and the fan very very very rarely runs to the point it’s fairly moot to have it. The only time it has run is when I had a video card in it that was exhausting its heat down onto the heatsink – other than that, it’s been off the whole time. Thermal images show it to be about 110-120 degrees F when under load.

  5. Very nice review, looks like a good motherboard for a Ryzen 3600 build keeping the costs down while allowing for later upgrades to much higher end CPUs.

    The Spec chart looks wrong, it has 3x PCIe 3.0 16x slots as listed, not sure of the rest either, Quad CrossFire support?

  6. [QUOTE=”David_Schroth, post: 11591, member: 1″]
    I would agree that the tiny fans tend to fail/get noisy over time, but then again, I’ve had an MSI X570-A Pro sitting next to me for the past 6 months as a test bench and the fan very very very rarely runs to the point it’s fairly moot to have it. The only time it has run is when I had a video card in it that was exhausting its heat down onto the heatsink – other than that, it’s been off the whole time. Thermal images show it to be about 110-120 degrees F when under load.
    [/QUOTE]

    That’s been my experience as well. If it does run I can’t hear it.

  7. I have had good luck with the B450 boards so far. I wouldn’t mind checking this board out for a new Linux box. As for the chipset fan, I still have a Swiftech block that can replace the fan.

    Not that it’d bug me much to leave the fan.

    Aww, Realtek lan, meh

  8. [QUOTE=”Burticus, post: 11582, member: 297″]
    Nice review Dan.

    I don’t like the x570 boards having the tiny cooling fan on the chipset. Those things always fail or become noisy over time. I would prefer a proper beefy heatsink if needed.

    GB is not my favorite brand but they are in my top 3. Their bios implementations have always been wacky and different from everyone else’s.
    [/QUOTE]

    The chipset coolers would have to actually run for that to happen. As I said in the review, you hear it when you first power the system on and that’s about it. I’ve been running the MSI MEG X570 GODLIKE since before X570 came out for CPU reviews and general testing. I never heard its fan beyond initial startup. I dusted the thing off after so many months and now its in my personal PC not making any noise either.

    All the other X570 motherboards I’ve tested have the active chipset cooling and they all work the same way. I wouldn’t worry about them. This isn’t the days of the old chipset coolers that ended up clapped out or seized by dust or bad bearings in short order. The X570 chipset itself can reach temperatures of 50c and the chipset fans still won’t turn on.

    The problem with going to a beefier heat sink is surface area. You can’t make them thicker or they’ll prevent expansion card installation. Spreading them out like the old days doesn’t work as well anymore as you have to leave room for M.2 slots. It’s one of the many issues that result from M.2 being an absolutely retarded form factor for desktops. Of course, you can spread it out some and then use heat pipes to help cool them. You can even connect the heat pipe to the MOSFET coolers if you wanted to. But all of those things are costlier than adding a simple chipset fan and writing some firmware to make sure it only turns on when its absolutely necessary.

    As for GIGABYTE, I like their build quality and most of their more modern designs. They tend to overbuild most of their motherboards which is better than the alternative. Even though the X570 Gaming X is pretty cheap, its still well made. GIGABYTE cut costs precisely where I think they should have. When some other companies cut costs, they do it at the VRM’s and that’s not a good approach.

    As for the GIGABYTE UEFI, it’s different, but so is everyone else’s. Everyone does their own thing for better or for worse. This is one area where I think ASUS is the undisputed king. Everyone else is on a sliding scale of worse than ASUS on UEFI implementation. That said, MSI and GIGABYTE’s stuff works pretty well even if it is different. I guess, I have gotten used to them all by reviewing so many of them. I can see where they could all improve, but it gets the job done and you generally don’t spend a lot of time in the UEFI past your initial tuning phase of a system build.

    If I could change anything about GIGABYTE’s UEFI, it would be the horrendous red/orange colors. I hate them.

  9. [QUOTE=”noko, post: 11636, member: 69″]
    Very nice review, looks like a good motherboard for a Ryzen 3600 build keeping the costs down while allowing for later upgrades to much higher end CPUs.

    The Spec chart looks wrong, it has 3x PCIe 3.0 16x slots as listed, not sure of the rest either, Quad CrossFire support?
    [/QUOTE]

    Thought I fixed that chart. (EDIT: I’ve fixed it now.)

    However, the GIGABYTE X570 Gaming X does indeed support both 2-Way and Quad-Crossfire technologies. Quad-Crossfire is the use of two dual-GPU graphics cards. Since there aren’t any newer cards that feature dual GPU’s, it’s a legacy feature at this point but it is on the spec sheet.

    [QUOTE=”Dogsofjune, post: 11722, member: 168″]
    I have had good luck with the B450 boards so far. I wouldn’t mind checking this board out for a new Linux box. As for the chipset fan, I still have a Swiftech block that can replace the fan.

    Not that it’d bug me much to leave the fan.

    Aww, Realtek lan, meh
    [/QUOTE]

    I currently work in IT and I’ve been doing so for more than two decades now. Believe me when I say, I’m not a fan of Realtek LAN. That said, it tested very well here and to be honest, it’s not surprising given the price point.

  10. No, you are right, it’s expected for the price, I am always of Realtek and Linux. I am still considering the board. I can always get an Intel network card if there are issues

Leave a comment