Test Setup

Test System Setup

Peformance 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.

BIOS & Hardware Settings

We have left most motherboard values on their default settings for stock testing. We enable XMP and use a memory speed of DDR4 3200MHz which is a speed achievable on every system configuration we’ve tested. Additionally, this is a very common speed for memory sold today. Higher memory speeds are noted where applicable. For overclocked results, the settings changed vary and we will cover that in the overclocking section.

Operating System Notes

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 version is 20H2. 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 them 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 above.

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.

Stock vs. Overclocked – Definitions

Finally, 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. Unfortunately, this does allow for things like ASUS’ multicore enhancement to “cheat” in the benchmarks but we feel it’s important to showcase the typical out of box experience users will face and what they can expect from that.

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.

Editor’s Note:

Lastly, unfortunately, identical GPUs were not used due to issues with the water cooling system on the RTX 2080 Ti. It was replaced by an RTX 3090, meaning all 4K results will be omitted for this review.

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

6 Comments

  1. You’re missing (or mislabeled) the 3900x “Max” and “Min” on the first Ghost Recon Breakpoint chart.

    Also, though I hate to be a turd, but those FPS charts don’t work at all for me. I’d much rather see one line going across with the min, avg and max color coded on it. It makes things too unnecessarily busy when there’s a separate line for each. Again, just my opinion.

  2. [QUOTE=”Grimham, post: 44543, member: 169″]
    You’re missing (or mislabeled) the 3900x “Max” and “Min” on the first Ghost Recon Breakpoint chart.

    Also, though I hate to be a turd, but those FPS charts don’t work at all for me. I’d much rather see one line going across with the min, avg and max color coded on it. It makes things too unnecessarily busy when there’s a separate line for each. Again, just my opinion.
    [/QUOTE]
    Most likely mislabeled. The graph format will also be changing in the future for these.

  3. Thanks [USER=6]@Dan_D[/USER] , awesome article!

    I’m loving these comparison articles. For those of us with the older chips it’s nice to see what the real gains could be. I’m still going to hold onto my 3700x for a bit but that other article you did on it vs the [URL=’https://www.thefpsreview.com/2021/10/06/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-vs-ryzen-7-3700x-performance-review/’]5800x[/URL] was a bit of an eye opener.

  4. [QUOTE=”Peter_Brosdahl, post: 44610, member: 87″]
    Thanks [USER=6]@Dan_D[/USER] , awesome article!

    I’m loving these comparison articles. For those of us with the older chips it’s nice to see what the real gains could be. I’m still going to hold onto my 3700x for a bit but that other article you did on it vs the [URL=’https://www.thefpsreview.com/2021/10/06/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-vs-ryzen-7-3700x-performance-review/’]5800x[/URL] was a bit of an eye opener.
    [/QUOTE]
    Yeah, the Ryzen 5000 series offers quite a bit over the 3000 series performance wise. Although, whether or not that’s enough to justify the price of an upgrade is debatable.

  5. Since this is a “now that Zen3 has been out for a while” type of article, was there any significant difference between performance upon initial release versus now when things have matured a bit?

  6. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 44618, member: 96″]
    Since this is a “now that Zen3 has been out for a while” type of article, was there any significant difference between performance upon initial release versus now when things have matured a bit?
    [/QUOTE]
    Unfortunately, that’s a question I can’t really answer. We didn’t have the 5900X until somewhat recently. The availability was so bad that we didn’t get sampled by AMD when these were released and we had to buy this CPU retail. And again, retail availability was horrible so it took us a really long time to get one.

    The answer should be “yes.” By how much? I couldn’t say unfortunately.

Leave a comment