Benchmarks
Sandra Dhrystone
In the Sandra CPU Dhrystone test, we see a result of 707.28GFLOPS compared to 730.12GFLOPS while using MSI’s default values. More specifically, with the power limits for the CPU uncapped, we get a considerable boost in performance. Interestingly, despite being a DDR4-based solution on an older chipset, the GIGABYTE Z690 GAMING X is slightly faster than the Z790-P PRO WiFi. Though not by a significant margin.
Sandra Whetstone
This is a strange result. Compared to the older test systems, the MSI Z790-P PRO WiFi is considerably faster. There may have been some issues with the power limits in the older tests, or some other software issue at work here. I cannot say. In any event, the Intel default power limits seem to help ever so slightly compared to the MSI default values here.
V-Ray
In this test, we can see that memory clocks and memory bandwidth are essentially meaningless with both DDR4 and DDR5 systems coming in very close to each other. These results are only a few hundred VSamples apart though the GIGABYTE Z690 GAMING X takes the lead here. Again, the difference is virtually minuscule. MSI’s defaults do provide a slight improvement over the Intel settings but again, it’s hardly a significant improvement.
Cinebench R23 – Single Thread
Unsurprisingly, the results are all within 28 points of each other. The older Z790 APEX has the most divergent result with the GIGABYTE and MSI boards being only two points apart.
Cinebench R23 – Multithread
In this test, we see some of the largest differences we’ve encountered across the benchmarks. Interestingly, the MSI Z790-P PRO WiFi does a bit worse here. Of further note is that there is around an 800-point difference between Intel’s and MSI’s CPU power limits. The Z690 boards both do quite a bit better with the DDR4 board achieving the highest result of 28,483.
Discussion (7 replies)
Join Discussion →Intel's i225v & i226v have proven to be junk that should be avoided. Intel is probably giving them away. Any manufacturer using them should be called out.
Yea I wouldn't get another pro series from MSI. I had the x570 pro-a. Was always solid but I always worried about the caps.
Just curious (as I haven't been looking for a little while now), but what Networking Controller would you trust if the i225v and i226v's are junk?
Thanks @Dan_D for the awesome review.
I took a chance on not one but two Pro Series motherboards for a couple of my rigs and so far they've done well. Quite frankly I was on a tight budget in upgrading two rigs right after each other so I was looking for the cheapest motherboard I could find with the features I was after. I don't know if they've got the Intel NIC chipset or not but one is plugged in while the other is using Wifi and both have done well with transfer speeds but I'm not constantly having to push either except for game downloads.
I have been a little worried about power but they seem to be doing alright with the 5800X3D. According to MS AB, it mostly averages around 50-60W and occasionally jumps to ~85W during heavy loads but so far, so good.
I've had an on-again off-again experience with them. I've found that if they're acting up, the interface can be popped and they come back to life.
I feel that it's a driver / firmware issue; it's certainly not expected for Intel to fumble NICs, as they're sort of the consumer / prosumer / entry enterprise option of choice. Their WiFi modules are still stellar, from what I've seen hands on.
From what I can tell, the i225v / i226v work pretty well under Linux too.
As a rule, AM4 boards were all questionable. Some X370 boards were rock solid, some X570 boards weren't. Brand and tier irrespective.
With LGA1700 and AM5, both Intel and AMD asserted significant control as to the 'minimums' acceptable for boards sporting their halo chipset, I've observed. Unless you are truly scraping the bottom of the barrel, any Z or X board for the new sockets is good to go from a base functionality perspective.
US$200 and US$1200 boards will perform exactly the same for consumer usecases. You'd need to push into extreme OC of the CPU (i.e., sub-ambient using LN2 or water chilling), or trying to set memory overclock records with DDR5, in order to need a 'better' board.
Where boards differentiate mostly is in terms of features, with stuff like 10Gbit Ethernet, TB4 / USB4, post code readers, power and reset buttons, more controllers for fans and water pumps and temperature probes, etc. If you don't need any of that stuff, a 'Pro' board like this one is all you could ever need. Aesthetics aside, of course.
Mine are B550's, but so far they're doing well. If I remember correctly they came out after the 570's and perhaps some improvements were made despite being the lower tier. Seriously, plug and play with the 5800X3D. Didn't even have to update the firmware on the first power-ups for either and XMP was ready to go, just had to click on it in the BIOS. I paid $120 for each and I'm smiling over it.
The B550 came later, and there was also an X570S that provided a lower-power update (and hopefully other fixes) to X570.
The bigger problem was just the inconsistency of the boards. Some were great, others not so much; we don't see that with AM5, thankfully.