# VRM on the new AM4 motherboards



## chimico9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> All getting Hyped for the new Ryzen competition!?
> 
> So I was thinking of pre-ordering but the lack of decent VRM sections of most release motherboards seems to be straight up awful if you wanna overclock any unless you want to spend 200$++


Yeah, dude, well said! They should give for free premium motherboards at day-one...


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> All getting Hyped for the new Ryzen competition!?
> 
> So I was thinking of pre-ordering but the lack of decent VRM sections of most release motherboards seems to be straight up awful if you wanna overclock any unless you want to spend 200$++
> 
> I'm a cheapskate enthusiast and want to spend as little as possible for great things. Comparing all the boards available I'm disappointed for what kind of power delivery we will be getting with most boards.
> 
> Basically all boards arrive with max 4phase design unless you go up to premium deluxe bling designs that all add cost to the absurd when you only want that last part about VRM better the rest you care not much at all about.
> 
> With the leak of the new AMD Ryzen 7 1700 65TDP chip hitting max around 3.8Ghz on the cheaper boards mentioned(most 4-phase and cooking). And topping 4.05Ghz on the premium deluxe boards with the better VRM such as Asus VI hero or Asrock Taichi. I'm torn..
> 
> I really don't want to spend as much on the motherboard as the cpu in the end. (the cheap Ryzen 7 1700)
> 
> Does anyone know which power designs the various boards have yet?
> 
> I'm guessing the cheaper MSI boards have those awful 4-array Nikos per phase. (read bad things about those) Unless you like smoked computers.
> The Titanium being the most expensive release board with only 6-phase what it seems like doesn't attract.(though I guess they are the premium set of VRM chips(not any NIKOS there)
> 
> The Gigabyte mention low(RSD)on and they appear to be their usual design I guess. Vishay?
> They seem to be 1 high, 2 low-side design per phase.
> Problem here is they have the same design all they way up until their premium boards such as "Gigabyte X370 GA-AX370-Gaming 5".
> All lower tier boards have only 4-phase and only at "gaming 5" do we get a what looks like (8+2/6+4)-phase design for cpu power.
> And you can get 2 *TWO*! of the 4-phase boards for the same price as that Gaming 5... Really?
> 
> That lowRDSon 4 phase design I've seen been rated to ~140Watt Max with extra cooling unsinked on much older motherboards. Is it still similar?
> My old Am2+ board with this 4 phase design cooks on 1.4volts and needs extra fan or extra heatsinks with a old Phenom 1 at 3Ghz..(what the wattage may now be for that old clunker I still use)
> 
> They really are tiering out OC only to the expensive boards aren't they?
> 
> So what are you supposed to do? It seems like you need an extra 100$ for the better VRM which means you could actually just buy the 1700X instead and keep the cheap board and have same kind of results but now guaranteed with NO OC?


Well, your speculation on VRM manufacturers is just that...speculation. We really have no idea what parts will go into these boards, and if a 6 phase B350 can spit out 150W safely, you'll see plenty of good OC's. My FX-8350 eats 180W ~1.5V full load, so there's no real NEED for 300W outputs on Ryzen.

I recommend going 6-phase like you want (Gigabyte or something) and immediately swapping out the TIM for some Sarcon or something if you're really worried about thermal load.

Edit: We're not dealing with Bulldozer/Piledriver here. We may find that the Ryzen chips do just fine on heatsinked 6 phase boards.


----------



## nukem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> Well, your speculation on VRM manufacturers is just that...speculation. We really have no idea what parts will go into these boards, and if a 6 phase B350 can spit out 150W safely, you'll see plenty of good OC's. My FX-8350 eats 180W ~1.5V full load, so there's no real NEED for 300W outputs on Ryzen.
> 
> I recommend going 6-phase like you want (Gigabyte or something) and immediately swapping out the TIM for some Sarcon or something if you're really worried about thermal load.
> 
> Edit: We're not dealing with Bulldozer/Piledriver here. We may find that the Ryzen chips do just fine on heatsinked 6 phase boards.


100% agree. Coming from 125~220 watt flagship AMD CPUs I think everyone is a little over concerned with power delivery. 65~95 watt CPUs should be a lot easier on VRMs. Can't say for sure how all this will pan out for overclocking. Can't wait to start seeing results though.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> Well, your speculation on VRM manufacturers is just that...speculation. We really have no idea what parts will go into these boards, and if a 6 phase B350 can spit out 150W safely, you'll see plenty of good OC's. My FX-8350 eats 180W ~1.5V full load, so there's no real NEED for 300W outputs on Ryzen.
> 
> I recommend going 6-phase like you want (Gigabyte or something) and immediately swapping out the TIM for some Sarcon or something if you're really worried about thermal load.
> 
> Edit: We're not dealing with Bulldozer/Piledriver here. We may find that the Ryzen chips do just fine on heatsinked 6 phase boards.


I guess it's not Bulldozer super volcano we are dealing with here but we have no numbers at all for wattage on the Ryzen processors. That makes me a bit worried.

I have a alphacool watercooling kit to transfer so I can cool the cpu no problems with a new bracket so the thing to limit me will be VRM thermals & capability.
I maxed my current MB until I smelt smoke and tuned back a notch and settled. (took some dmg but stable function)

I would have liked a better selection than we got compared what's available in similar prices on older tech.


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> I guess it's not Bulldozer super volcano we are dealing with here but we have no numbers at all for wattage on the Ryzen processors. That makes me a bit worried.
> 
> I have a alphacool watercooling kit to transfer so I can cool the cpu no problems with a new bracket so the thing to limit me will be VRM thermals & capability.
> I maxed my current MB until I smelt smoke and tuned back a notch and settled. (took some dmg but stable function)
> 
> I would have liked a better selection than we got compared what's available in similar prices on older tech.


It's okay (and a good idea) to have a healthy level of skepticism.

This thread might interest you:

I linked a specifically interesting post.

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/amd-zen-thread-inc-am4-apu-discussion.18665505/page-401#post-30533503


----------



## JackCY

Phases don't mean much, what does is quality and capacity. Even with Intel boards you have to cherry pick and avoid any boards with cost cut VRMs :/
Seems the same with AMD, even more so sometimes. Wait for user reviews and summaries with detailed VRM specs. What kind of FETs, caps, coils, how many phases, digital, analogue, hybrid, ...
You don't have to buy a board over $150 usually but you gotta cherry pick. Sadly some brands are moving up in popularity and volume of sales and join up the crazy Asus in making expensive but not that impressive boards. Underdogs on the other hand often try to bring more for less $$$. MSI used to be hated a few years back, certain people wouldn't even touch it, now after all the gaming crazy and gaming branded GPUs and mobos, it's a hype suddenly.


----------



## hojnikb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nukem*
> 
> 100% agree. Coming from 125~220 watt flagship AMD CPUs I think everyone is a little over concerned with power delivery. *65~95 watt CPUs should be a lot easier on VRMs.* Can't say for sure how all this will pan out for overclocking. Can't wait to start seeing results though.


not necessarily. Even if the rated wattage is lower, they could still pull the same amount of current or more. And current is what matter with vrms.


----------



## nukem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> not necessarily. Even if the rated wattage is lower, they could still pull the same amount of current or more. And current is what matter with vrms.


So... the current draw is what is high with fx CPUs and that's why they need quality vrms?


----------



## hojnikb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nukem*
> 
> So... the current draw is what is high with fx CPUs and that's why they need quality vrms?


Pretty much. As you can see from every datasheet out there, vrms are rated for current, not power


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> It's okay (and a good idea) to have a healthy level of skepticism.
> 
> This thread might interest you:
> 
> I linked a specifically interesting post.
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/amd-zen-thread-inc-am4-apu-discussion.18665505/page-401#post-30533503


Yeah that is where I found the first indication 4-phase might not cut it. They mention lower tier boards cooking and only the high-end manage a little extra. Though you pay Much for that little extra few Herz.
4.0Ghz seems like a nice round number but seems it may not be plausible on all cores max with 4-phase the low tiers use.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Phases don't mean much, what does is quality and capacity. Even with Intel boards you have to cherry pick and avoid any boards with cost cut VRMs :/
> Seems the same with AMD, even more so sometimes. Wait for user reviews and summaries with detailed VRM specs. What kind of FETs, caps, coils, how many phases, digital, analogue, hybrid, ...
> You don't have to buy a board over $150 usually but you gotta cherry pick. Sadly some brands are moving up in popularity and volume of sales and join up the crazy Asus in making expensive but not that impressive boards. Underdogs on the other hand often try to bring more for less $$$. MSI used to be hated a few years back, certain people wouldn't even touch it, now after all the gaming crazy and gaming branded GPUs and mobos, it's a hype suddenly.


I know there is difference's in quality the question I'm really specifically asking which boards have the quality parts? As we seem to lack in quantity on many ones.
Seems I'll have to be waiting around for that info.


----------



## nukem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> Pretty much. As you can see from every datasheet out there, vrms are rated for current, not power


Cool. I know watts=volts x amps, but I assumed the voltage was more the variable. I learn stuff everyday on here lol


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Yeah that is where I found the first indication 4-phase might not cut it. They mention lower tier boards cooking and only the high-end manage a little extra. Though you pay Much for that little extra few Herz.
> 4.0Ghz seems like a nice round number but seems it may not be plausible on all cores max with 4-phase the low tiers use.
> I know there is difference's in quality the question I'm really specifically asking which boards have the quality parts? As we seem to lack in quantity on many ones.
> Seems I'll have to be waiting around for that info.


Like 90% of the questions being asked about Ryzen right now can't really be answered. All we know is they are fast at stock speeds, somewhere in Broadwell territory. Oh, and that on liquid nitrogen they are really really fast...like world record fast.


----------



## 99belle99

I was just looking through the specs of my current X58 system and my board has a 24 phase VRM. It has been running an overclocked CPU for the past 8 years no problems at all. So I went looking up the current AM4 motherboards from Gigabyte and they have really poor VRM's this time around. What's up with that? I was all set to get a new Gigabyte board but know I'm not so sure. I will wait for reviews to see how they fair.


----------



## AlphaC

I would definitely say that Asrock X370 Taichi , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Professional (same as Taichi with different coloring and NIC) or ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero are the ones to get based on preliminary specifications review. They're the only ones advertising NexFETs used (the CSD87350Q5D normally used is 40A).

Easy math:
Asrock X370 Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro: 16 phases x 40A (hypothetical) = 640 A , assuming that is all for CPU , in reality it might be 6+2 doubled so 12 x 40 = 480A , worst case would be 240A due to doubler
ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero : 12 phases x 40A = 480 A , since it's using a doubler worst case would be 240A , it may very well be a 4+2 PWM controller though

The rest of the X370 boards will be a luck of the draw.

For example:
Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming K7 : 6+4 PowIRstage (unknown amperage) ... on par with NexFETs if it's the 40+ amp ones (IR3553 = 40A, IR3556 = 50A, IR3550 / IR3555 = 60A), but it has less total phases
---> _assuming_ IR 3555 = 60 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 60A = 360A
---> _assuming_ IR 3556 = 50 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 50A = 300A
---> _assuming_ IR 3553 = 40 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 40A = 240A
Gigabyte GA-AX370-GAMING 5 : 6+4 PowIRstage (unknown amperage) ... on par with NexFETs if it's the 40+ amp ones (IR3553 = 40A, IR3556 = 50A, IR3550 / IR3555 = 60A), but it has less total phases
---> _assuming_ IR 3555 = 60 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 60A = 360A
---> _assuming_ IR 3556 = 50 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 50A = 300A
---> _assuming_ IR 3553 = 40 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 40A = 240A
" AX370-Gaming 5 features a 6+4 phase power delivery design equipped with 4th gen. IR® digital power controllers and 3rd gen. PowIRstage® ICs featuring Isense technology, which provides more precise current sensing accuracy. This helps evenly distribute the thermal loading between the PowerIRstage® ICs, preventing the overheating of each individual PowerIRstage®, resulting in longer lifespan and better reliability."

Asrock X370 Killer & X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 : 12 phases unknown mosfet type & amperage, 45A chokes , 12K black Nichichon capacitors
----> edit, Feb 24: from OCUK it is 8+4

ASUS Prime X370-Pro : 10 unknown phases (allegedly Digital)
MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium: 10 unknown phases _, if they're the Fairchild FDMF5823DC like on the X99S MPower then they can do 55A each ; MSI Z170A XPower Gaming Titanium Edition uses 60A IR3555 PowIRStages_
MSI X370 Pro Carbon : 10 unknown phases
BIOSTAR X370 RACING GT7: 14 unknown phases

B350 contenders
Asrock B350 Pro4 & AB350 Gaming K4 (6+3 as per https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asrock-ab350-pro4-amd-b350-socket-am4-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-153-ak.html , https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asrock-ab350-gaming-k4-amd-b350-socket-am4-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-152-ak.html , https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asrock-ab350m-pro4-amd-b350-socket-am4-ddr4-micro-atx-motherboard-mb-154-ak.html) "Supports 95W Air Cooling"

If you're planning on maxing every clockspeed out, I'd wait for an Asus X370 Crosshair VI Extreme, Gigabyte X370 SOC Force, or Asrock x370 OC Formula. If the Ryzen CPUs are all they claim to be, then those boards should come in the near future if not before Zen+.


----------



## josephimports

The Biostar GT7 has Digital Power+ which may include ir3555a power stages. Ill be removing the heatsinks once it arrives to confirm.









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> The Biostar GT7 has Digital Power+ which may include ir3555a power stages. Ill be removing the heatsinks once it arrives to confirm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Intriguing indeed. Ferrite chokes, powerpaks, and IR pwm according to the specs available on their page. Not super-alloys and nexfets but it's not bargain-basement d-pak garbage either. I'm looking forward to this board. I've decided to give it a try as Biostar seems to be pushing hard for relevance in the mainstream market once again. I think it will be a pleasant surprise.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> If you're planning on maxing every clockspeed out, I'd wait for an Asus X370 Crosshair VI Extreme, Gigabyte X370 SOC Force, or Asrock x370 OC Formula. If the Ryzen CPUs are all they claim to be, then those boards should come in the near future if not before Zen+.


That's why I'm not buying into the Titanium or Hero yet. I feel like MSI and ASUS are gauging interest for high-end options with Ryzen and I'm not going to spend more than I have to this early on. I'll revisit it if and when extreme overclocking boards appear.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> The Biostar GT7 has Digital Power+ which may include ir3555a power stages. Ill be removing the heatsinks once it arrives to confirm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


In that picture that's only 10 PowIRStages. That would only put it on par with a Gigabyte Gaming 5

Given that Biostar appears to be using an ITE chip for fans cooling the CPU and case and I'd rather not bother with them.

edit: I didn't notice that picture was from a LGA1151 instead of AM4, so nevermind


----------



## SuperZan

I'm not saying I expect drastic revisions, but to be fair that is a pic from an LGA board so there might be some differences.


----------



## Undervolter

About Biostars...Before buying, i would let someone else do the guinea pig, especially if Ryzen pulls a lot of amperes and you guys are interested in overclocking. My one and only recent experience with Biostar, showed that they prefer to cut corners on the VRM.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1612857/i-found-out-why-biostar-isnt-selling

Just a word of caution, because all manufacturers cut somewhere and usually they keep cutting corners at the same area for a long period of time. One other note that i observed yesterday doing a quick browsing. It appears that Asrock has learnt lessons from AM3+ and now advertzises 2Oz copper in the AM4 motherboards. Meaning, no longer thin, overheating PCB, which on its turn was prematurely overheating mosfets, causing to throttle. On another note, MSI still advertizes Military Class 4, but again, once you click on details, you only read about dark caps and chokes. Which leads to suspect that they are, as per tradition, using Nikos mosfets on AM4 too. So, one should await for thorough reviews, especially on an untested new generation of motherboards. Aspiring Gigabyte users should also wait to see how much weirdness will be present in BIOS.

My personal hunch, is that ASUS and Asrock will have the more easygoing motherboards. Asrock used to cut corners on VRM in AM3+, but at least, with the 2oz copper it should behave better and BIOS was always easy. It remains to be seen whether Asrock's love for doublers continues or not. Not overclock king, but it should be an easygoing motherboard. ASUS will probably keep overclocking crown. MSI's UEFI seems much better than in AM3+ too.


----------



## SuperZan

I remember reading that when you posted it and while I don't disagree with your conclusions, it's always been the case with low-end Biostar. They're not as big a company as some of others so they don't have the resources to make a consistently solid stack. I've found from past experience that their 'best' boards were usually competitive a la http://www.overclockers.com/biostar-ta890fxe-motherboard-review/ . The caveat has always been that their low-end boards are not very good and better left to OEM's and such.

My interest is piqued. I'll happily play the guinea pig this time around as I like several boards thus far but am not overwhelmed by any. I'll try this out and see what comes out as we move forward.


----------



## Nighthog

Great info guys, just what I was looking for Thanks AlphaC and Undervolter!

Msi looking at the motherboard pictures we seem to see Nikos around the board where they are visible. Like around RAM and the unsinked mosfets around cpu for the cheaper boards. They look like Nikos comparing photos of other MSI boards. Though can't read the letters.

I'm guessing they are using a doubled 4-phase on the X370 Gaming Pro Carbon. As they have used before. Can't think they would go the extra mile to go true 8-phase on this board when all other iterations used doublers and Nikos with the various Gaming Pro Carbon boards.
They used the same layout for the the +2 section as the regular 4-phase ones. Easy enough to just double the 4-phase section.

Great info on the Gigabyte gaming 5. Was thinking they used the same lowRDS(on) as usual. But a 6+4phase powIRstage is much better. (that info wasn't there before)

Sadly only Gigabyte, Msi and Asus are available for me where I live at the moment. Would liked the Asrock Taichi.


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I remember reading that when you posted it and while I don't disagree with your conclusions, it's always been the case with low-end Biostar. They're not as big a company as some of others so they don't have the resources to make a consistently solid stack. I've found from past experience that their 'best' boards were usually competitive a la http://www.overclockers.com/biostar-ta890fxe-motherboard-review/ . The caveat has always been that their low-end boards are not very good and better left to OEM's and such.
> 
> My interest is piqued. I'll happily play the guinea pig this time around as I like several boards thus far but am not overwhelmed by any. I'll try this out and see what comes out as we move forward.


By all means, i don't disagree. I also removed the thermal pad and posted a pic in the FX8300 owners thread and let's say that the pad wasn't in good conditions... However, i advice caution, because since Biostar is probably the most untested brand, weird things can emerge. Some BIOS settings were weird for me for sure.

Also, i bought that motherboard without any expectations for overclocking. Heck, i run undervolted. Yet, it throttled at 3.5Ghz!

Here's that motherboard, is sold from 86EUR min to 94EUR max, right now (i was an early adopter and grabbed it for 75EUR when it first landed in the first shop).

http://www.trovaprezzi.it/prezzo_schede-madri_biostar_ta970_plus.aspx

In my local Amazon, it sells for 94EUR:
https://www.amazon.it/Biostar-TA970-Plus-scheda-madre-attacco/dp/B00TWIPD9O/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488011301&sr=8-1&keywords=Biostar+TA970+plus

The Gigabyte 970 UD3P, can be found at 75 EUR and it goes all they way to 4.5Ghz

http://www.trovaprezzi.it/categoria.aspx?id=29&libera=Gigabyte+970+UD3P

For 84EUR, you can find the MSI 970 Gaming, that also overclocks.
http://www.trovaprezzi.it/categoria.aspx?id=29&libera=MSI+970+Gaming

For 100EUR, you have the ASUS Aura:

http://www.trovaprezzi.it/categoria.aspx?id=29&libera=ASUS+970+AURA

101EUR in Amazon: https://www.amazon.it/Asus-970-PRO-Gaming-Scheda/dp/B01A9GLESG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488011361&sr=8-1&keywords=ASUS+970+AUra

Bottom line: I wasn't expecting any overclocking records, but what the heck, for a motherboard that is sold more than the Gigabyte 970 UD3P and currently in Amazon for 7 EUR less than the ASUS Aura, i would expect to NOT throttle at 3.5Ghz!







I mean, for 7 EUR more (going by Amazon prices), the Aura is leagues above it!

Bottom line: This might be a case of bad model, where it looks better than it is. It can happen. But, since here most people like extreme overclock, the same thing can happen to more costly boards. Meaning, it may look good, but overclock lower than the competition at comparable prices. So, caution is always a good thing, in products with dubbious performance. That's all i say. I am not saying that i KNOW that Biostar AM4 will be a bad deal. They may actually be a terrific deal out of a need to make a comback to the market. I just advice caution. Let the reviewers do the legwork for you.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> By all means, i don't disagree. I also removed the thermal pad and posted a pic in the FX8300 owners thread and let's say that the pad wasn't in good conditions... However, i advice caution, because since Biostar is probably the most untested brand, weird things can emerge. Some BIOS settings were weird for me for sure.
> 
> Also, i bought that motherboard without any expectations for overclocking. Heck, i run undervolted. Yet, it throttled at 3.5Ghz!
> 
> Here's that motherboard, is sold from 86EUR min to 94EUR max, right now (i was an early adopter and grabbed it for 75EUR when it first landed in the first shop).
> 
> http://www.trovaprezzi.it/prezzo_schede-madri_biostar_ta970_plus.aspx
> 
> In my local Amazon, it sells for 94EUR:
> https://www.amazon.it/Biostar-TA970-Plus-scheda-madre-attacco/dp/B00TWIPD9O/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488011301&sr=8-1&keywords=Biostar+TA970+plus
> 
> The Gigabyte 970 UD3P, can be found at 75 EUR and it goes all they way to 4.5Ghz
> 
> http://www.trovaprezzi.it/categoria.aspx?id=29&libera=Gigabyte+970+UD3P
> 
> For 84EUR, you can find the MSI 970 Gaming, that also overclocks.
> http://www.trovaprezzi.it/categoria.aspx?id=29&libera=MSI+970+Gaming
> 
> For 100EUR, you have the ASUS Aura:
> 
> http://www.trovaprezzi.it/categoria.aspx?id=29&libera=ASUS+970+AURA
> 
> 101EUR in Amazon: https://www.amazon.it/Asus-970-PRO-Gaming-Scheda/dp/B01A9GLESG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488011361&sr=8-1&keywords=ASUS+970+AUra
> 
> Bottom line: I wasn't expecting any overclocking records, but what the heck, for a motherboard that is sold more than the Gigabyte 970 UD3P and currently in Amazon for 7 EUR less than the ASUS Aura, i would expect to NOT throttle at 3.5Ghz!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, for 7 EUR more (going by Amazon prices), the Aura is leagues above it!
> 
> Bottom line: This might be a case of bad model, where it looks better than it is. It can happen. But, since here most people like extreme overclock, the same thing can happen to more costly boards. Meaning, it may look good, but overclock lower than the competition at comparable prices. So, caution is always a good thing, in products with dubbious performance. That's all i say. I am not saying that i KNOW that Biostar AM4 will be a bad deal. They may actually be a terrific deal out of a need to make a comback to the market. I just advice caution. Let the reviewers do the legwork for you.


All very true. I'm trying not to take too many of my preconceptions from AM3+ in though, because in terms of quality boards across the lineup, only ASUS really shined. I think that's probably because they're the biggest vendor and thus have the most resources to expend on a socket that was considered, by vendors anyway, to effectively be DOA. We saw even MSI and Gigabyte and Asrock fail to be consistent with AM3+ so of course a smaller vendor would be even more likely to have cut a lot of corners.

I'm just bored with ASUS and the MSI Xpower Titanium just isn't inspiring me. The Taichi looks to be the best price/performance buy for sure, but since I anticipate changing boards anyway I'm personally going to roll the dice for nostalgia's sake.







I'm not too worried about it as I'm not expecting the world to begin with.


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> All very true. I'm trying not to take too many of my preconceptions from AM3+ in though, because in terms of quality boards across the lineup, only ASUS really shined. I think that's probably because they're the biggest vendor and thus have the most resources to expend on a socket that was considered, by vendors anyway, to effectively be DOA. We saw even MSI and Gigabyte and Asrock fail to be consistent with AM3+ so of course a smaller vendor would be even more likely to have cut a lot of corners.
> 
> I'm just bored with ASUS and the MSI Xpower Titanium just isn't inspiring me. The Taichi looks to be the best price/performance buy for sure, but since I anticipate changing boards anyway I'm personally going to roll the dice for nostalgia's sake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not too worried about it as I'm not expecting the world to begin with.


Yeah, at the end, every manufacturer cuts corners somewhere. Asrock in AM3+ was more about giving extra features. But most of the time, VRM and PCB were suffering. Gigabyte also used doublers, but otherwise construction wise it was better, but suffered in BIOS. MSI was a mixed bag.

Honestly, only yesterday i took the time to go a bit to Asrock and MSI websites. I liked in general Asrock's offerings for the fact alone that they put more copper in their motherboaords (they are now equal to the Gigabyte Ultradurable in AM3+). I also liked the MSI offerings and UEFI, but i always get worried about Nikos. The powerpak Nikos in AM3+ didn't behave badly, but the fact that in some cases melted the thermal pads, indicate that they still have heat issues. Also, the fact that even MSI never includes them in the "military class" thing and that nobody else uses them... At any case, i liked the B350 Tomahawk colours. For me, i wouldn't have need for x370. The Taichi i saw it, looks good in specs, but i don't like white colour on the motherboard, if i can avoid it. Anyway, not much problem for me. I don't plan to be early adopter. I hope Ryzen will run without issues in Win7 and go to Ryzen 2nd gen or, if i can't resist before than, buy when i am certain that there won't be a new stepping/revision of Ryzen 1st gen. My FX is plenty for now. But if Ryzen runs without hinderance in Win7, i will certainly buy them just because whatever comes after, won't run in Win7 normally. I will go for 8 core Zen for sure. Don't know if 1st or 2nd gen, but 8 core it will be. I actually like the idea of 65W 8 core. I think it will serve me well for years and allow me to drop fan rpm even further.

If i were to buy NOW, i would not preorder any motherboard. It's uncharted territory. By AM3 instinct, i would go to ASUS, Asrock, MSI, Gigabyte, Biostar, in that order. Normally i 'd put Gigabyte 2nd, but i fear the BIOS bugs. Like you said, this is based on preconceptions from AM3. Which is why i wouldn't preorder a motherboard.


----------



## lukart

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5vqsqp/ryzen_1700_oc_40ghz_but_only_in_a_top_tier_mobo/

Looks like you should really get a decent board for these Ryzen if you want to overclock


----------



## SuperZan

To be fair, Gibbo sells motherboards.  Later in the originating thread he talks about the MSI Pro Carbon as being a 'high-end' board and MSI is well-known for using NIKOS components on boards in that price range. This tells me that Ryzen overclocking will be limited on phase-limited boards and boards with weak-link VRM but boards with decent components and good phase designs will overclock well. It's obviously a sliding scale and the absolute best components will overclock the absolute best, but that also costs and the vendor has to either cut corners elsewhere (features, PCB quality, etc) or charge more. I haven't yet seen a board I want to spend a bundle on yet. I'm sure they'll come in time, though.

Also, there isn't any Biostar available locally. I'm getting my hands on one, but only because my sister lives in New York. Really, though, overclocking will come down to what it always comes down to. Heat and power management. Every board that isn't like a Rampage or something makes compromises somewhere. Know your caps/chokes/MOSFETS and determine whether a board can handle what you're throwing at it.


----------



## ChronoBodi

So um, a Gigabyte AX370 Gaming 5 has good VRMs compared to Asus Prime?

Because that was my only option until a MC rep quickly went into the back and got me the Gigabyte board.

Just curious what the VRMs is on Asus Prime compared to Gigabyte.


----------



## MadOver

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I would definitely say that Asrock X370 Taichi , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Professional (same as Taichi with different coloring and NIC) or ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero are the ones to get based on preliminary specifications review. They're the only ones advertising NexFETs used (the CSD87350Q5D normally used is 40A).
> 
> Easy math:
> Asrock X370 Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro: 16 phases x 40A (hypothetical) = 640 A , assuming that is all for CPU , in reality it might be 6+2 doubled so 12 x 40 = 480A , worst case would be 240A due to doubler
> ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero : 12 phases x 40A = 480 A , since it's using a doubler worst case would be 240A , it may very well be a 4+2 PWM controller though
> 
> The rest of the X370 boards will be a luck of the draw.
> 
> For example:
> Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming K7 : 6+4 PowIRstage (unknown amperage) ... on par with NexFETs if it's the 40+ amp ones (IR3553 = 40A, IR3556 = 50A, IR3550 / IR3555 = 60A), but it has less total phases
> ---> _assuming_ IR 3555 = 60 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 60A = 360A
> ---> _assuming_ IR 3556 = 50 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 50A = 300A
> ---> _assuming_ IR 3553 = 40 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 40A = 240A
> Gigabyte GA-AX370-GAMING 5 : 6+4 PowIRstage (unknown amperage) ... on par with NexFETs if it's the 40+ amp ones (IR3553 = 40A, IR3556 = 50A, IR3550 / IR3555 = 60A), but it has less total phases
> ---> _assuming_ IR 3555 = 60 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 60A = 360A
> ---> _assuming_ IR 3556 = 50 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 50A = 300A
> ---> _assuming_ IR 3553 = 40 A , max possible for CPU = 6 x 40A = 240A
> " AX370-Gaming 5 features a 6+4 phase power delivery design equipped with 4th gen. IR® digital power controllers and 3rd gen. PowIRstage® ICs featuring Isense technology, which provides more precise current sensing accuracy. This helps evenly distribute the thermal loading between the PowerIRstage® ICs, preventing the overheating of each individual PowerIRstage®, resulting in longer lifespan and better reliability."
> 
> Asrock X370 Killer & X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 : 12 phases unknown mosfet type & amperage, 45A chokes , 12K black Nichichon capacitors
> ----> edit, Feb 24: from OCUK it is 8+4
> 
> ASUS Prime X370-Pro : 10 unknown phases (allegedly Digital)
> MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium: 10 unknown phases _, if they're the Fairchild FDMF5823DC like on the X99S MPower then they can do 55A each ; MSI Z170A XPower Gaming Titanium Edition uses 60A IR3555 PowIRStages_
> MSI X370 Pro Carbon : 10 unknown phases
> BIOSTAR X370 RACING GT7: 14 unknown phases
> 
> B350 contenders
> Asrock B350 Pro4 & AB350 Gaming K4 (6+3 as per https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asrock-ab350-pro4-amd-b350-socket-am4-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-153-ak.html , https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asrock-ab350-gaming-k4-amd-b350-socket-am4-ddr4-atx-motherboard-mb-152-ak.html , https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asrock-ab350m-pro4-amd-b350-socket-am4-ddr4-micro-atx-motherboard-mb-154-ak.html) "Supports 95W Air Cooling"
> 
> If you're planning on maxing every clockspeed out, I'd wait for an Asus X370 Crosshair VI Extreme, Gigabyte X370 SOC Force, or Asrock x370 OC Formula. If the Ryzen CPUs are all they claim to be, then those boards should come in the near future if not before Zen+.


Those 16 phases are a beast, the Fatal1ty is now worth is name








I wonder why they didnt release the OC-Formulas, I would expect the Taichi and Fatal1ty to use 12 and the oc 16...


----------



## Nickshih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MadOver*
> 
> Those 16 phases are a beast, the Fatal1ty is now worth is name
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder why they didnt release the OC-Formulas, I would expect the Taichi and Fatal1ty to use 12 and the oc 16...


Hi Guys

just saw this article accidentally .

I have no plan to build X370 OC formula for AM4 so far , AMD's binary source code limited lots possibility of overclocking .

But X370 Taichi is good for cpu clocking and 24/7 for sure .

X299 Oc formula will be next target .


----------



## knock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> just saw this article accidentally .
> 
> I have no plan to build X370 OC formula for AM4 so far , AMD's binary source code limited lots possibility of overclocking .
> 
> But X370 Taichi is good for cpu clocking and 24/7 for sure .
> 
> X299 Oc formula will be next target .


Thank you very much for the info. Looking forward to the X299 boards.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> just saw this article accidentally .
> 
> I have no plan to build X370 OC formula for AM4 so far , AMD's binary source code limited lots possibility of overclocking .
> 
> But X370 Taichi is good for cpu clocking and 24/7 for sure .
> 
> X299 Oc formula will be next target .


Can you provide insight into the X370 Taichi VRM? Asrock's site is vague, it lists DSM, 60A chokes and IR PWM (as well as ASRock Hyper BCLK Engine II and 300W EX OC).

Is it on par / better / worse than that of the X370 Crosshair VI Hero that is so darn popular?

If there's no X370 OC Formula then the Asrock X370 Taichi based on X370 Fatal1ty Pro Gaming which is the flagships will be the best VRM AsRock has to offer, am I right?


----------



## Soggysilicon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Can you provide insight into the X370 Taichi VRM? Asrock's site is vague, it lists DSM, 60A chokes and IR PWM (as well as ASRock Hyper BCLK Engine II and 300W EX OC).
> 
> Is it on par / better / worse than that of the X370 Crosshair VI Hero that is so darn popular?
> 
> If there's no X370 OC Formula then the Asrock X370 Taichi based on X370 Fatal1ty Pro Gaming which is the flagships will be the best VRM AsRock has to offer, am I right?


When I was shopping boards, as best as I could tell the Taichi was identical with the Fatal1ty in this regard. I would of gone with it instead of the C6H if it had the AM3 cooler support out of the box but it doesn't. The Taichi, Fatal1ty PG, and C6H where the only 3 boards that made my first draft selection.


----------



## Nickshih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Can you provide insight into the X370 Taichi VRM? Asrock's site is vague, it lists DSM, 60A chokes and IR PWM (as well as ASRock Hyper BCLK Engine II and 300W EX OC).
> 
> Is it on par / better / worse than that of the X370 Crosshair VI Hero that is so darn popular?
> 
> If there's no X370 OC Formula then the Asrock X370 Taichi based on X370 Fatal1ty Pro Gaming which is the flagships will be the best VRM AsRock has to offer, am I right?


VRM on Taichi is true 12+4 phases.
TI Dual-N Mos is very strong and trustable.
I will say the Taichi has the best power delivery design in the market so far, especially for Ryzen. You can reach over 200 watts after overclcoking cpu on aircooling.

Fatality pro gaming is expensive than Taichi bcz of cost up by 5G lan. VRM design is the same as Taichi.


----------



## xLegendary

So actually both share the same power circuit? true 12+4 phases...
Just some added components like the 5G lan make it more expensive


----------



## Nickshih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xLegendary*
> 
> So actually both share the same power circuit? true 12+4 phases...
> Just some added components like the 5G lan make it more expensive


Yes. Same pcb with different features for users.


----------



## PsyM4n

Not impressed.

When x79 boards were released, both Intel and MSI boards were using high quality renesas DrMOS from day one, all of them, with VRMs consisting of at least 6 phases just for the CPU cores (excluding the memory controller phases).
Even when Gigabyte messed up, they went with high quality International Rectifier FETs and fixed their mess.

When x99 boards were released, again some companies released boards with high quality IR FETs, or Fairchild DrMOS at reasonable prices.

With Ryzen boards, so far you are expected to pay a large premium to get a board with high quality, powerful VRM. Relatively cheap boards I saw had up to 6 phases for the cores and the memory controller, plus 3 phases max for the integrated GPU... that are not used on the processors released so far.

Considering the common instances of catastrophic failures on motherboard VRMs for previous high end AMD processors, you would think that manufacturers would no longer cheap out on VRM quality and quantity. Well... they did.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> VRM on Taichi is true 12+4 phases.
> TI Dual-N Mos is very strong and trustable.
> I will say the Taichi has the best power delivery design in the market so far, especially for Ryzen. You can reach over 200 watts after overclcoking cpu on aircooling.
> 
> Fatality pro gaming is expensive than Taichi bcz of cost up by 5G lan. VRM design is the same as Taichi.


By 12+4 true phases you mean that it has 6+2 doubled by IR3598 , IR3599 or some other frequency divider as on the Intel OC Formula boards?

If you can affirm that it is the same VRM as on the Z170 OC Formula and Z270 Formula (basically tried and true since Z77/Z87/Z97) it would net AsRock many more buyers of the board since the CH VI Hero is plagued with BIOS issues according to early reports, although oddly enough the ASUS X370-Pro does not nearly have as many complaints.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Not impressed.
> 
> When x79 boards were released, both Intel and MSI boards were using high quality renesas DrMOS from day one, all of them, with VRMs consisting of at least 6 phases just for the CPU cores (excluding the memory controller phases).
> Even when Gigabyte messed up, they went with high quality International Rectifier FETs and fixed their mess.
> 
> When x99 boards were released, again some companies released boards with high quality IR FETs, or Fairchild DrMOS at reasonable prices.
> 
> With Ryzen boards, so far you are expected to pay a large premium to get a board with high quality, powerful VRM. Relatively cheap boards I saw had up to 6 phases for the cores and the memory controller, plus 3 phases max for the integrated GPU... that are not used on the processors released so far.
> 
> Considering the common instances of catastrophic failures on motherboard VRMs for previous high end AMD processors, you would think that manufacturers would no longer cheap out on VRM quality and quantity. Well... they did.


Many of the cheap boards are using 4+3 or 6+3 for the phase count. The first portion is for CPU, second portion is for SOC not memory


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Many of the cheap boards are using 4+3 or 6+3 for the phase count. The first portion is for CPU, second portion is for SOC not memory


Read again what I previously wrote.


----------



## WallySimmonds

I'm thinking about getting the Taichi, but I'm just wondering what CPU to pair with it. Have ordered the 1700x but is there much point - should i just go with the 1700?


----------



## ku4eto

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WallySimmonds*
> 
> I'm thinking about getting the Taichi, but I'm just wondering what CPU to pair with it. Have ordered the 1700x but is there much point - should i just go with the 1700?


If everything goes well, i am gettin the Taichi or the Killer for MB, and the 1700 for CPU. No reason to get XFR cpu,as i can manually overclock, saves me quite the money.


----------



## Nickshih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> By 12+4 true phases you mean that it has 6+2 doubled by IR3598 , IR3599 or some other frequency divider as on the Intel OC Formula boards?
> 
> If you can affirm that it is the same VRM as on the Z170 OC Formula and Z270 Formula (basically tried and true since Z77/Z87/Z97) it would net AsRock many more buyers of the board since the CH VI Hero is plagued with BIOS issues according to early reports, although oddly enough the ASUS X370-Pro does not nearly have as many complaints.
> Many of the cheap boards are using 4+3 or 6+3 for the phase count. The first portion is for CPU, second portion is for SOC not memory


　
X370 Taichi 12+4 phases
VRM controller : IR35201
Driver : IR3598.
Mosfet : Ti87350_40A
Choke : 0.22uH 60A

yes this is 6+2 doubled by IR3598 .


----------



## ku4eto

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> 
> X370 Taichi 12+4 phases
> VRM controller : IR35201
> Driver : IR3598.
> Mosfet : Ti87350_40A
> Choke : 0.22uH 60A
> 
> yes this is 6+2 doubled by IR3598 .


Soo what are the pro's and con's of doubled phases?

I presume bigger max load per phase, but they share the same VRM, meaning worse voltage delivery (ripple)?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ku4eto*
> 
> Soo what are the pro's and con's of doubled phases?
> 
> I presume bigger max load per phase, but they share the same VRM, meaning worse voltage delivery (ripple)?


z97 OC Formula seems to use the same doubler if I'm not mistaken.

http://sinhardware.com/images/vrmlist.png


----------



## Nickshih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ku4eto*
> 
> Soo what are the pro's and con's of doubled phases?
> 
> I presume bigger max load per phase, but they share the same VRM, meaning worse voltage delivery (ripple)?


That is why we need to develop 4-5 months early before launch to make product stable and solid. Different types of caps ,power trace layout and firmware of controller will determine result we have. Seems so far so good.


----------



## Nickshih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> z97 OC Formula seems to use the same doubler if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> http://sinhardware.com/images/vrmlist.png


Z97 oc formula vrm is actually stronger. That is dual stack mosfet. Like 2 pcs Ti dualN per phase


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> Z97 oc formula vrm is actually stronger. That is dual stack mosfet. Like 2 pcs Ti dualN per phase


I figured they weren't the same but similar. More than enough for Ryzen.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WallySimmonds*
> 
> I'm thinking about getting the Taichi, but I'm just wondering what CPU to pair with it. Have ordered the 1700x but is there much point - should i just go with the 1700?


Ryzen 7 1700 is a good bet since they all seem to have the same clockspeed wall under water & air
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> 
> X370 Taichi 12+4 phases
> VRM controller : IR35201
> Driver : IR3598.
> Mosfet : Ti87350_40A
> Choke : 0.22uH 60A
> 
> yes this is 6+2 doubled by IR3598 .


Exactly what I needed. Thanks Nick


----------



## variant

So when will the Taichi will be in stock to order?


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> The Gigabyte 970 UD3P, can be found at 75 EUR and it goes all they way to 4.5Ghz


4.4 GHz without resorting to BCLK. Anything higher and the board doesn't post. Plus, the VRMs get super hot. I can run benchmarks at 4.8, even 5 GHz for some, but even at 4.5 on air the VRM temps get too high with Prime unless you use a very high level of airflow through/onto them. I replaced the thermal pad and it didn't help.

The highest clock I can say was 1 hour large FFT in-place Prime stable was 4.7 but the VRM temp was out of spec.

Despite the flaws the 2.0 version of the UD3P (the one I have) was a great value (at Micro Center) until ASUS started selling Aura boards at Micro Center with rebates. But for those without a Micro Center pricing is very different.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I would definitely say that Asrock X370 Taichi , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Professional (same as Taichi with different coloring and NIC) or ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero are the ones to get based on preliminary specifications review.


Then I looked at the data you provided:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Asrock X370 Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro: worst case would be 240A due to doubler
> 
> ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero : since it's using a doubler worst case would be 240A , it may very well be a 4+2 PWM controller though
> 
> Gigabyte GA-AX370-Gaming K7 : 240A
> 
> Gigabyte GA-AX370-GAMING 5 : 240A


The same 240A is what you gave as your worst-case scenario number for every board you put amperage numbers with. However, the Hero board is even more of a question, according to your data.


----------



## Karagra

So im guessing after the X370 Taichi the next best vrms go in this order? Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 then ASRock X370 Killer SLI/ac and X370 Killer SLI?


----------



## AlphaC

Newegg has ETA March 7,2017

Microcenter has the Fatal1ty Professional at certain locations but not the Taichi http://www.microcenter.com/product/476355/Fatal1ty_X370_Professional_Gaming_AM4_ATX_AMD_Motherboard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Then I looked at the data you provided:
> The same 240A is what you gave as your worst-case scenario number for every board you put amperage numbers with. However, the Hero board is even more of a question, according to your data.


The preliminary CH VI Hero number was based on before I found out about the doubling scheme used (i.e. if not done properly with phase interleaving it would be half what is possible)

It's actually 4+2 doubled on the CH VI Hero

Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 / K7 is 6+2 with the 2 phases for SOC doubled to 6+4 as far as I can tell , but only K7 has the base clock gen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> So im guessing after the X370 Taichi the next best vrms go in this order? Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 then ASRock X370 Killer SLI/ac and X370 Killer SLI?


Fatality Professional = Taichi > Asrock X370 Gaming K4 >= Killer SLI

Killer SLI is not worth it IMO since it lacks USB 3.1 (USB 3.1 is supposed to be part of the B350 and X370 chipset)

From the motherboard thread it seems the ASUS X370 Prime Pro may be be better than X370 Gaming K4 based on parts used ,even though the X370 Gaming K4 has a Post Code LED for troubleshooting.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The preliminary CH VI Hero number was based on before I found out about the doubling scheme used (i.e. if not done properly with phase interleaving it would be half what is possible)
> 
> It's actually 4+2 doubled on the CH VI Hero
> 
> Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 / K7 is 6+2 with the 2 phases for SOC doubled to 6+4 as far as I can tell , but only K7 has the base clock gen


That's fine but it makes no sense to state that certain boards are the best choice for purchase when all of the ones you provided numbers for had *the same* worst-case scenario of 240 amps.

Preliminary or not that recommendation is illogical. It's based on faith rather than fact:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> I would definitely say that Asrock X370 Taichi , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Professional (same as Taichi with different coloring and NIC) or ASUS X370 Crosshair VI Hero are the ones to get based on preliminary specifications review.


Definitely is even worse.


----------



## AlphaC

What you're quoting is over a week old.

They both listed NexFETs on their specs so the switching frequencies were going to be better than that of ones that did not have said mosfets. Ryzen is heavily reliant on quick thermal and power response so that is one of the major factors.

The only differentiation a week ago without any uncovering the heatsinks was purely phase count.

CH VI Hero does double the proper way anyway.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> What you're quoting is over a week old.


That's not relevant to my point.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> They both listed NexFETs on their specs so the switching frequencies were going to be better than that of ones that did not have said mosfets. Ryzen is heavily reliant on quick thermal and power response so that is one of the major factors.


Then why post all that stuff about amperage, implying it is important data to be used to support your "definite" recommendation?

Even if we ignore all the stuff in that post about amperage comparisons we're still left with a "definite" recommendation based on not having enough data.


----------



## Artikbot

I've ordered an AX370-Gaming 5 that should be here by the end of the week. I'll see if I can get some basic information on how capable the power delivery on it is.

Seems like they're using PowIRstage driver+FET packages, though they don't say which ones. I'm ready to see 45A parts, but since it's shared with the AX370-Gaming K7 I might be pleasantly surprised.

Either way, even the small 45A parts are plenty capable in a 6+4 arrangement for even a highly strung Ryzen under water.


----------



## Karagra

In the next few months can any of you see a board coming out that might surpass the X370 Taichi enough to wait before buying?


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> In the next few months can any of you see a board coming out that might surpass the X370 Taichi enough to wait before buying?


I'm hoping that someone will step up and offer a hybrid water-air VRM sink like what has been available on Intel since 2013. In fact, ASUS offered two versions of that sink within a matter of months. The first one stupidly had proprietary fittings and the revision (roughly September 2013) didn't.

Having to put up with additional noise and clunky DIY fan mounts to cool the VRMs with air is something I'm not willing to do anymore considering the money I've put into making a custom loop.


----------



## Artikbot

To be honest unless it's for LN2/Dice/LHe use any current mid-high end board (basically anything with a X370) has an already capable enough regulation to keep up with the majority of overclocks we'll see on Ryzen.

Or at least the initial batches, knowing how they clock and the power figures we see.

I'm not seeing any particularly atrocious choices FET-wise so far.


----------



## Karagra

Yeah i have a custom loop.... Thanks Fx-9590 I am just thinking praying I pick the board that might get some EKWB Love.


----------



## Junkboy

While looking around for folks opinions on vrms I came across this which is not something I can understand but I hope others can help tell us what a 4C10N or ISL95712 are and how they helps us choose a motherboard.









Tabelle:

primäre VCC
sekundäre VCC
Modell
Controller
echte
Phasen Anzahl
Doppler highside
MOSFET lowside
MOSFET
Controller
echte
Phasen Anzahl
Doppler highside
MOSFET lowside
MOSFET Quelle
ASRock
AB350M-HDV ISL95712 (4+3) 4 - 2x siehe primär 3 - 2x B1
AB350M ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
AB350M Pro4 ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
AB350 Pro4 ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4 ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
X370 Killer SLI IR 4 - SM4337 SM4336 siehe primär 2 - SM4337 SM4336
Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 IR 4 - SM4337 SM4336 siehe primär 2 - SM4337 SM4336 Y1
X370 Taichi IR
Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming IR
ASUS
Prime B350M-A ASP1106GGQW (4+2) 4 - 4C09B 2x 4C06B siehe primär 2 - 2x 4C09B 2x 4C06B B1
Prime B350M-A/CSM ASP1106GGQW (4+2) 4 - 4C09B 2x 4C06B siehe primär 2 - 2x 4C09B 2x 4C06B
Prime 350-Plus ASP1106GGQW (4+2) 4 - 4C09B 2x 4C06B siehe primär 2 - 2x 4C09B 2x 4C06B R1 B1
Prime X370-Pro ASP
ROG Crosshair VI Hero ASP1405I (4+2) 4 4x
CSD 87350
siehe primär 2 2x
CSD 87350
Y1

Copied and pasted some but source is here.

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html

Also I sold my main rig so on mobile and as such I'm too lazy to format better, apologies.


----------



## Kriant

I would love to see some info on Titanium VRM's. After cancelling my CH6 pre-order (because given my luck, I would def. get a board that would commit seppuku with my USB stick when flashing to the latest bios), I am trying to figure out whether I want Titanium or Fatal1ty Pro Gaming.









It is sad though, that I had to part with CH6 that was just about to be shipped today =\. Oh well. At least I got my 1800x sitting on my shelf already.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> While looking around for folks opinions on vrms I came across this which is not something I can understand but I hope others can help tell us what a 4C10N or ISL95712 are and how they helps us choose a motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Tabelle:
> 
> primäre VCC
> sekundäre VCC
> Modell
> Controller
> echte
> Phasen Anzahl
> Doppler highside
> MOSFET lowside
> MOSFET
> Controller
> echte
> Phasen Anzahl
> Doppler highside
> MOSFET lowside
> MOSFET Quelle
> ASRock
> AB350M-HDV ISL95712 (4+3) 4 - 2x siehe primär 3 - 2x B1
> AB350M ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
> AB350M Pro4 ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
> AB350 Pro4 ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
> Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4 ISL95712 (3+3) 3 3x siehe primär 3 - B1
> X370 Killer SLI IR 4 - SM4337 SM4336 siehe primär 2 - SM4337 SM4336
> Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 IR 4 - SM4337 SM4336 siehe primär 2 - SM4337 SM4336 Y1
> X370 Taichi IR
> Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming IR
> ASUS
> Prime B350M-A ASP1106GGQW (4+2) 4 - 4C09B 2x 4C06B siehe primär 2 - 2x 4C09B 2x 4C06B B1
> Prime B350M-A/CSM ASP1106GGQW (4+2) 4 - 4C09B 2x 4C06B siehe primär 2 - 2x 4C09B 2x 4C06B
> Prime 350-Plus ASP1106GGQW (4+2) 4 - 4C09B 2x 4C06B siehe primär 2 - 2x 4C09B 2x 4C06B R1 B1
> Prime X370-Pro ASP
> ROG Crosshair VI Hero ASP1405I (4+2) 4 4x
> CSD 87350
> siehe primär 2 2x
> CSD 87350
> Y1
> 
> 
> Copied and pasted some but source is here.
> 
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html
> 
> Also I sold my main rig so on mobile and as such I'm too lazy to format better, apologies.


Thank you!









I can explain it succinctly to you: ISL controller means it generally is not a fully digital VRM (hardwareluxx mentions they do not have SVI2 support).

4C09B or other such numbers are model numbers for the mosfets, you can look up datasheets to draw conclusions on thermal limits and current limits at normal VRM temperatures of 40-60°C.

For example this is the datasheet for the 4C10N:
www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C10N-D.PDF
and this is the 4C06N:
www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C06N-D.PDF

"echte Phasen" = true phases
"Anzahl Doppler " = number of doublers
"primäre VCC" = primary VCC , so the CPU phases
"sekundäre VCC" = secondary VCC , so the SOC phases

Translation of their conclusion:
Quote:


> Rating / Speculation:
> 
> In the table itself, I would just like to enter correct information, with the timing of their appearances.
> For speculation and for the gathering of information is in the course course enough space.
> 
> - With ASRock already the same designs can be identified on different boards, IMHO applies with regard to the VRMs:
> X370 Taichi = Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming
> X370 Killer SLI = Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4
> On all these boards, IR controllers (IR3565A and / or IR3565B?) Are located, which can already be recognized by the high-resolution images of geizhals.
> 
> X370 Taichi and Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming look very interesting for overclockers, if the IR controller is an IR35201, it could be used in the 6 + 2 mode and provide for the only native six phases on an AM4 board using doubler to be made twelve. The same would then happen with the two phases for the secondary VCC.
> The IR35201 is considered a top-class reference (for example, on Z170M OCF) and it is rumored that the ASUS ASP1400BT label (e.g., Maximus IX Apex) is nothing else.
> 
> Budget-oriented, the ASUS X370-Pro and ASRock X370 Killer SLI and Fatal1ty X370 Gaming K4 have the potential for the OC tip, all with probably four doubled phases for the primary VCC and a digital IR controller.
> 
> It is interesting how MSI and ASUS are switching two FETs in parallel with both the lowside FET and the highside FET, if the secondary voltage is controlled only over two phases. In the future iGP will probably need a lot of power.


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Thank you!


No, no, thank you sir.


----------



## Karagra

Do you think going Taichi + 1700 and OC is better than a cheaper board and a 1800x OC? I feel when OC they hit right around the same and I'm guessing the 1700 is just a lowered binned 1800x


----------



## Karagra

Also what do you guys think the VRMS on the Aorus K7 will be like?
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128997&ignorebbr=1


----------



## Kriant

Not sure if it was posted here before, but, per gamernexus (and per MSI) MSI Titanium has a 6+4 phase.

http://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/2749-msi-am4-motherboards-x370-xpower-b350-tomahawk

Now, if we can only figure out what components MSI uses =)


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> Do you think going Taichi + 1700 and OC is better than a cheaper board and a 1800x OC? I feel when OC they hit right around the same and I'm guessing the 1700 is just a lowered binned 1800x


Techspot used the R7 1700x on a Taichi. http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/page2.html

also AMD Ryzen 7 1800X @ 4249.01 MHz http://valid.x86.fr/m2amqe , 4199.02 MHz http://valid.x86.fr/u5xhc7

I feel getting the Ryzen 7 1700 with the X370 motherboard that has features you want (i.e. don't buy Asrock B350 boards or the Asrock X370 Killer without USB 3.1 or the cheapo ASUS Prime ATX boards with 4+3 phase) is your best bet

Biggest issues for all the X370 boards by browsing around:

Asrock x370 Fatal1ty Professional: 5GB LAN is the biggest difference to Taichi, expensive for that feature difference
Asrock X370 Taichi: only 2 USB 3.1 ports , can't find anywhere but Newegg
ASUS Crosshair VI Hero: buggy BIOs so far leading to some boards bricking (expected to be fixed or just RMA)
Gigabyte X370 gaming 5: unknown PowIRStage amperage , but decent results from reviewers
Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7: expensive and nowhere to be found , no real reviews
Biostar GT7: Great VRM design with PowIRStages but apparently the BIOS lacks refinement , at MSRP is a bit pricey
ASUS Prime X370 Pro: uses NexFETs similar to ASUS CH VI Hero but no rampant reports of bricking, reasonable pricing but no LED debug and OC features & such ( clear CMOS jumper (no button))
MSI X370 Xpower: noone knows what is under the heatsinks , price is high given it has no base clock generator (Microcenter has it at $250 USD which is more reasonable... I feel $220 would what this should be priced as per Z170/Z270)
MSI X370 Pro Carbon : no one knows what is under the heatsinks , price is not the greatest (this should be analogous to a $140-150 Intel board) , clear CMOS jumper (no button), no debug LED
Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 : VRM can get toasty under overclocks (60°C) but nothing ridiculous , would buy only to overclock up to 3.8-3.9GHz , clear CMOS jumper (no button)
Asrock Killer SLI (and Killer SLI /AC) : supposedly the same VRM as Fatal1ty K4 ... NO USB 3.1 (USB 3.1 is part of the X370 chipset, how could Asrock omit this?







), audio is ALC892, clear CMOS jumper (no button), and no debug LED

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kriant*
> 
> Not sure if it was posted here before, but, per gamernexus (and per MSI) MSI Titanium has a 6+4 phase.
> 
> http://www.gamersnexus.net/news-pc/2749-msi-am4-motherboards-x370-xpower-b350-tomahawk
> 
> Now, if we can only figure out what components MSI uses =)


Unless it can push 50-60A per phase it will be worse than the Gigabyte X370 boards and definitely worse than Asrock Taichi/Fatal1ty Professional and Asus CH VI Hero. It lacks a base clock generator also : something the ASUS CH VI Hero, Asrock Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro , Gigabyte X370 K7 have.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> Also what do you guys think the VRMS on the Aorus K7 will be like?
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128997&ignorebbr=1


same as Gaming 5 but with base clock generator


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> just saw this article accidentally .
> 
> I have no plan to build X370 OC formula for AM4 so far , AMD's binary source code limited lots possibility of overclocking .
> 
> But X370 Taichi is good for cpu clocking and 24/7 for sure .
> 
> X299 Oc formula will be next target .


Thanks for the confirmation.

Quick question, do you know if there will be an X370 Supercarrier (ex: similar to the Z270 Supercarrier, a flagship board)?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nickshih*
> 
> 
> X370 Taichi 12+4 phases
> VRM controller : IR35201
> Driver : IR3598.
> Mosfet : Ti87350_40A
> Choke : 0.22uH 60A
> 
> yes this is 6+2 doubled by IR3598 .


Agree. Seems to be the best of the AMD X370 boards so far, VRM wise. Thanks +Rep.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Techspot used the R7 1700x on a Taichi. http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/page2.html
> 
> also AMD Ryzen 7 1800X @ 4249.01 MHz http://valid.x86.fr/m2amqe , 4199.02 MHz http://valid.x86.fr/u5xhc7
> 
> I feel getting the Ryzen 7 1700 with the X370 motherboard that has features you want (i.e. don't buy Asrock B350 boards or the Asrock X370 Killer without USB 3.1 or the cheapo ASUS Prime ATX boards with 4+3 phase) is your best bet
> 
> Biggest issues for all the X370 boards by browsing around:
> 
> Asrock x370 Fatal1ty Professional: 5GB LAN is the biggest difference to Taichi, expensive for that feature difference
> Asrock X370 Taichi: only 2 USB 3.1 ports , can't find anywhere but Newegg
> ASUS Crosshair VI Hero: buggy BIOs so far leading to some boards bricking (expected to be fixed or just RMA)
> Gigabyte X370 gaming 5: unknown PowIRStage amperage , but decent results from reviewers
> Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7: expensive and nowhere to be found , no real reviews
> Biostar GT7: Great VRM design with PowIRStages but apparently the BIOS lacks refinement , at MSRP is a bit pricey
> ASUS Prime X370 Pro: uses NexFETs similar to ASUS CH VI Hero but no rampant reports of bricking, reasonable pricing but no LED debug and OC features & such
> MSI X370 Xpower: noone knows what is under the heatsinks , price is high given it has no base clock generator (Microcenter has it at $250 USD which is more reasonable... I feel $220 would what this should be priced as per Z170/Z270)
> MSI X370 Pro Carbon : no one knows what is under the heatsinks , price is not the greatest (this should be analogous to a $140-150 Intel board)
> Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 : VRM can get toasty under overclocks but nothing ridiculous , would buy only to overclock up to 3.8-3.9GHz
> Asrock Killer SLI (and Killer SLI /AC) : supposedly the same VRM as Fatal1ty K4 ... NO USB 3.1 (USB 3.1 is part of the X370 chipset, how could Asrock omit this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), audio is ALC892, and no debug LED
> Unless it can push 50-60A per phase it will be worse than the Gigabyte X370 boards and definitely worse than Asrock Taichi/Fatal1ty Professional and Asus CH VI Hero. It lacks a base clock generator also : something the ASUS CH VI Hero, Asrock Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro , Gigabyte X370 K7 have.
> same as Gaming 5 but with base clock generator


It's looking like the Asrock X370 Taichi is the best value. Base clock generation, best VRM of them probably (I don't think any of the others will beat 12 +4 x 40A TI NextFET Mosfets). Maybe if they ship with a really powerful choke and IR6894/IR6811 DirectFET Mosfet, but otherwise unlikely.

The Asrock x370 Fatal1ty Professional probably has the same 5GB/s Aquantia AQtion LAN as on the Fatal1ty Z270 Professional Gaming i7 and Z270 Supercarrier.

X370 XPower ... perhaps the same 60A IR3555M is my guess - not on the radar right now due to the high price. MSI claims it can take over 250A, but nobody has taken off the heatsinks to photograph one. It's a lot cut down from the Z270 XPower. Lack of Base Clock Generator seals its fate. Maybe they will release an updated revision. On X99, they first released an X99S XPower, then about 6 months after release, an X99A XPower featuring 2x USB 3.1 ports and the OC Socket (MSI calls this a Turbo Socket). If they do, it needs to be a better board overall to justify the price.

If the Gigabyte is the same as the Z270 Gaming K7, then you are looking at 192A for the CPU, and 128A for the rest.






Hmm .... yeah the Asrock Taichi seems like the one to get, unless you need that 5 Gbps LAN, then go with the X370 Fata1ty Professional Gaming. Maybe the Gigabyte, Asus, and Biostar when the BIOS matures. I have my doubts though - the Asrock has better VRM than what I think they will have and no "killer feature" that the Asrocks lack. MSI needs a second revision as discussed and more competitive pricing.


----------



## AlphaC

The Gigabyte x370 is better than the z270 counterparts since they advertise PowIRStages, which means IR3550 / IR3553 / IR3556

There's no way they used 6+4 phases of Vishay SiRA12/SiRA18 parts for CPU and SOC , parts that buildzoid supposes is 32A per phase
Quote:


> AX370-Gaming 5 features a 6+4 phase power delivery design equipped with 4th gen. IR® digital power controllers and 3rd gen. PowIRstage® ICs featuring Isense technology, which provides more precise current sensing accuracy. This helps evenly distribute the thermal loading between the PowerIRstage® ICs, preventing the overheating of each individual PowerIRstage®, resulting in longer lifespan and better reliability.



http://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-AX370-GAMING-5-rev-10#sp

edit: from the hardwareluxx listing that linked to another site:



Judging by size it's not an IR3550 (60A) or IR3555 (60A , 6mm x 6mm x 0.9mm PQFN package) or 50A IR3556 (6mm x 6mm x 0.9mm PQFN package) , so it's probably a 40A IR3553 (4mm x 6 mm x 0.9mm PQFN package)

edit 2:
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/power/dc-dc-converter/dc-dc-integrated-power-stage/powlrstage-integrated-power-stage/channel.html?channel=5546d4624d6fc3d5014d9fde47ea5bd8#goto_producttable
for more PowIRStages


----------



## DADDYDC650

Seems like I guessed right with the Asrock Fatal1ty Pro. Now if only G.Skill would send me my damn RAM!


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Techspot used the R7 1700x on a Taichi. http://www.techspot.com/review/1345-amd-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x/page2.html
> 
> also AMD Ryzen 7 1800X @ 4249.01 MHz http://valid.x86.fr/m2amqe , 4199.02 MHz http://valid.x86.fr/u5xhc7
> 
> I feel getting the Ryzen 7 1700 with the X370 motherboard that has features you want (i.e. don't buy Asrock B350 boards or the Asrock X370 Killer without USB 3.1 or the cheapo ASUS Prime ATX boards with 4+3 phase) is your best bet
> 
> Biggest issues for all the X370 boards by browsing around:
> 
> Asrock x370 Fatal1ty Professional: 5GB LAN is the biggest difference to Taichi, expensive for that feature difference
> Asrock X370 Taichi: only 2 USB 3.1 ports , can't find anywhere but Newegg
> ASUS Crosshair VI Hero: buggy BIOs so far leading to some boards bricking (expected to be fixed or just RMA)
> Gigabyte X370 gaming 5: unknown PowIRStage amperage , but decent results from reviewers
> Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7: expensive and nowhere to be found , no real reviews
> Biostar GT7: Great VRM design with PowIRStages but apparently the BIOS lacks refinement , at MSRP is a bit pricey
> ASUS Prime X370 Pro: uses NexFETs similar to ASUS CH VI Hero but no rampant reports of bricking, reasonable pricing but no LED debug and OC features & such ( clear CMOS jumper (no button))
> MSI X370 Xpower: noone knows what is under the heatsinks , price is high given it has no base clock generator (Microcenter has it at $250 USD which is more reasonable... I feel $220 would what this should be priced as per Z170/Z270)
> MSI X370 Pro Carbon : no one knows what is under the heatsinks , price is not the greatest (this should be analogous to a $140-150 Intel board) , clear CMOS jumper (no button), no debug LED
> Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 : VRM can get toasty under overclocks (60°C) but nothing ridiculous , would buy only to overclock up to 3.8-3.9GHz , clear CMOS jumper (no button)
> Asrock Killer SLI (and Killer SLI /AC) : supposedly the same VRM as Fatal1ty K4 ... NO USB 3.1 (USB 3.1 is part of the X370 chipset, how could Asrock omit this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), audio is ALC892, clear CMOS jumper (no button), and no debug LED


Great write-up, I agree with your conclusions thus far. I've really found the GT7 a pleasant surprise. The UEFI needs work, but it's easier to fix that than a weak VRM design so I'll take the bad with the good. Definitely right about the MSRP though those of us able to source it from the US got a nice little m.2 (albeit SATA) which I've used for my clean Windows install. It's also handling memory fairly well, so I'm optimistic about further improvements.

Cheers, though. Your posts are a great resource for undecideds looking at boards IMO.


----------



## Karagra

Anyone else impatiently waiting for the X370 Motherboards to come back into stock?


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128997

Newegg now has the Gigabyte X370 K7 at $210 so that's semi-reasonable : I take back what I said about the K7 being very expensive , it's just packing features other than power phases









If the PowIRStages are 40A it irks me though , that's a 240A max current output compared to even the midrange ASUS X370 Prime Pro with the same number of CPU phases at 40A per phase

If you value the better overall board quality, LED everywhere (not my thing but some people might love it), SATA express (not that useful), U.2 , OC features such as base clock gen, reset & CMOS button it could be well worth the $40-50 over the $160-170 X370 Prime Pro. The issue Gigabyte will have is presenting the value proposition vs the slightly cut down Taichi which has been $175-185 and $210 MSRP : the main advantage is USB 3.1 but the Taichi has 2 M.2 slots & wifi/bluetooth. The biggest advantage Gigabyte has is the amount of complaints on their X370 boards has been low and reports on X370 boards with respect to memory are generally favorable thus far , so unless you plan on pumping around 250W into your CPU (doesn't look that will happen on water /air , most reviews have it under 200W at the wall at 4GHz) the theoretical 240A (realistically up to 180A) is alright given the IR3553 thermal curve.

That does bring into question the Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 pricing at $195 though , base clock gen seems the biggest difference between the two since I couldn't see any major differences besides one choke on the right of the board (not the memory phase , probably some auxiliary function) not having the "P" with lightning logo. I expect it will see a price cut by maybe $20 in the next quarter or half year because of this to separate the K7 from it.


----------



## Obvcop

Could anybody answer me this question if possible. I plan on doing a lot of overclocking (custom loop) so have been looking at the Taichi. I have USB 3.1 front panel bays and was wondering if this board has internal USB 3.1 headers? If it doesn't can any of you recommend the next best board on terms of vrm configuration that also has 3.1 headers


----------



## madmalkav

Is someone taking measures of the VRMs heatshink sizes and fixing points to the motherboard to see if current VRM waterblocks can be used with this motherboards?


----------



## fixapc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> Well, your speculation on VRM manufacturers is just that...speculation. We really have no idea what parts will go into these boards, and if a 6 phase B350 can spit out 150W safely, you'll see plenty of good OC's. My FX-8350 eats 180W ~1.5V full load, so there's no real NEED for 300W outputs on Ryzen.
> 
> I recommend going 6-phase like you want (Gigabyte or something) and immediately swapping out the TIM for some Sarcon or something if you're really worried about thermal load.
> 
> Edit: We're not dealing with Bulldozer/Piledriver here. We may find that the Ryzen chips do just fine on heatsinked 6 phase boards.


No hes 1000% correct on the vrms, i have experience wasting a few boards overclocking with the cheaper VRMs.

Vrms have alot to do with how the voltage and power is regulated and delivered to the processor. Cheaper VRMs push less power and deliver the power less accurately.

Think of it like static on an analog tv screen.

If your going to buy a cheap board at least buy a board with heat sinks on the VRMs.

Alot of the times the IC's have a number printed on the chip and you can do some googling to get the specifics if you want to get down to the details.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Seems like I guessed right with the Asrock Fatal1ty Pro. Now if only G.Skill would send me my damn RAM!


Edit : Got my brand new RAM replacements but crap UPS delayed my CPU until later today.


----------



## soth7676

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Edit : Got my brand new RAM replacements but crap UPS delayed my CPU until later today.


at least you are getting both on the same day rather than waiting even longer...


----------



## Nighthog

Great work guys. Lots of interesting info coming about now.

Problem seems the be most motherboards are gonna take quite a while to be released.
Many of the ones in the better range excluding Asus are still at a minimum 1 week to a month away locally.

I was interested in the Taichi but availability seems minimal here. And it might seem overkill from what people can coax out from the current Chips. I've been eyeing the Gigabyte K7 but it's still a week away. I do wonder if and when The "true" Gigabyte Gaming 7 is to announced. K7 is basically a Gaming 5. The true 7 would be better but that is another ridiculous price hike.


----------



## Karagra

I just realized two boards use 8+4 cup power pins. From my understanding thats for extreme overclocking. If so why did they not put waterblocks on the boards? Asus Hero and Msi Titanium


----------



## Soggysilicon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> Anyone else impatiently waiting for the X370 Motherboards to come back into stock?


1800x shipped today from Frys... pre-ordered 1am on the 23rd... still no word on muh C6H ordered the 26th... so yes... impatiently... but then again still on the fence about what vidya' card to pair with it... so there is time... oh and memory... and dodgy bios revs...


----------



## Kriant

I will be naughty, and double post in this thread as well.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/03/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-review/amp/




As was noted in the other thread, and on MSI forums (I am so glad people replied to my thread there







) this board uses International Rectifier IR35201 Dual Output Digital Multi-Phase Controller

P.S. Shot a comment about mosfets, maybe someone from that site will reply.


----------



## lukart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Great work guys. Lots of interesting info coming about now.
> 
> Problem seems the be most motherboards are gonna take quite a while to be released.
> Many of the ones in the better range excluding Asus are still at a minimum 1 week to a month away locally.
> 
> I was interested in the Taichi but availability seems minimal here. And it might seem overkill from what people can coax out from the current Chips. I've been eyeing the Gigabyte K7 but it's still a week away. I do wonder if and when The "true" Gigabyte Gaming 7 is to announced. K7 is basically a Gaming 5. The true 7 would be better but that is another ridiculous price hike.


Yes, it seems taichi is hard to find... might wait a little bit longer and if not Fatal1ty one


----------



## Artikbot

This is what Gigabyte uses on the X370-Gaming 5:



















CPU: IR3358, 4+6 phases with various labelling on the silk screen. I'm not sure it's as straightforward as 6+4, there seems to be some further splitting of the phases depending on what parts of the processor they feed.

Memory: 4x On Semi NTMFS4C10NT1G... all of them N-channel? I'm missing something.

There's more converters down the bottom of the memory, but that could also be for the M.2 and IO around that area. The packages seem too low power (small QFNs) to be delivering to the memory. Could be though.

Perhaps those ones I've labelled as memory are simply PSU input switching transistors.

At any rate, seems like the processor voltage regulation on this board is beyond sorted.


----------



## superstition222

RAM speed support may be more important than VRM quality for Zen, once a certain minimum VRM quality level has been met.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> ISL controller means it generally is not a fully digital VRM (hardwareluxx mentions they do not have SVI2 support).


Intersil has got some fully digital ones.








I think your translator did a bad job, the ISL95721 of course is supporting SVI2.
What I wanted to say in that post was just the fact that SVI2 seems to be the only requirement AMD has got for the VRM controllers on AM4 boards.

offtopic: I benefited from your work on gathering VRM infos in the past a lot so now might be the right time to say: Thanks a lot!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kriant*
> 
> [...] this board uses International Rectifier IR35201 Dual Output Digital Multi-Phase Controller


That's quite strange due to the fact that these three ICs on the backside seem to be doublers, isn't it?
With an IR35201 native 6+2 could be implemented so why should MSI go for three true phases with three doublers?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> This is what Gigabyte uses on the X370-Gaming 5:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Can you tell what the power stages are?


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Can you tell what the power stages are?


You mean concerning the labelling on the silk screen?

I'll try to make a guess and let you know.


----------



## br0da

Yeah that would be awesome.








Looks like IR3550M to me.


----------



## Artikbot

The switching stage is IR3558s all around btw


----------



## br0da

Oh you already told us so, sorry! Nevermind my post.


----------



## AlphaC

So that means 45A rating instead of 40A from the IR3553.

That's rather good



IR3558 is PQFN / 5 x 6 which makes sense.

It can't be IR3550 or IR3555 , those 60A phases are 6x6


----------



## Artikbot

I wouldn't run them anywhere near 45A though. At that point you're putting out over 12W nearly 8W sorry I can't read of heat from each converter, times ten, you do the math. It'll cook alive with that heatsink.


----------



## Kriant

@AlphaC what do you think are these:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kriant*
> 
> I will be naughty, and double post in this thread as well.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/03/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-review/amp/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As was noted in the other thread, and on MSI forums (I am so glad people replied to my thread there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) this board uses International Rectifier IR35201 Dual Output Digital Multi-Phase Controller
> 
> P.S. Shot a comment about mosfets, maybe someone from that site will reply.


----------



## Artikbot

That looks like a fairly standard discrete converter. Probably done because of MSI's bad experiences with Driver MOS packages in the past and because it allows for greater heat transfer from each individual package onto the heatsink.

My bets are on 60A per phase for the ones on the left, in a regular 2/1 low/high side arrangement, with the driver on the back of the board. Top ones l wouldn't begin to guess.


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> That looks like a fairly standard discrete converter. Probably done because of MSI's bad experiences with Driver MOS packages in the past and because it allows for greater heat transfer from each individual package onto the heatsink.
> 
> My bets are on 60A per phase for the ones on the left, in a regular 2/1 low/high side arrangement, with the driver on the back of the board. Top ones l wouldn't begin to guess.


Thanks for your input. The top ones look odd, compared to the side arrangement. I assume that the top are going to be exclusively used as +4 for SOC?
It's a pain that MSI is so secretive about the components used for their "top of the line" board.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kriant*
> 
> @AlphaC what do you think are these:


I think it's MSI being cheap and running 2 mosfets per choke if it's a PoWIRStage but there seems to be a driver mosfet going to a low and high side. The likely alternative is they are still using PowerPAKs or solution that requires both a low+high side. If you look at Gigabyte X370 boards or even Z170 Xpower with PowIRStages, or NexFET setups (such as Asrock x370 Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro ,ASUS X370 Prime Pro) they do not have 2 mosfets side by side running to a choke.

IR3555 60A phases on the Z170 and Z270 Xpower were square 6x6 PQFN packages and had one per choke along with tantalum capacitors.

IMO The X370 XPower seems like a cashgrab by people that buy on looks and name only, when less expensive boards carry base clock generators and it doesn't. In addition I've seen on another thread that the CPU allegedly get only 6 phases to it on this board and 4 go to the SOC, if that is true then you're looking at a weaker VRM than the Gigabyte boards / ASUS Prime let alone the Asrock Taichi/Fatal1ty Pro + Biostar GT7.

I personally can't say it's a decent value, not even if they cut the price by $50 to $250 because for most people the Gigabyte X370 boards are likely the best fit (especially since it seems Ryzen memory is a bigger factor and the Gigabyte boards allegedly an run 3600Mhz now) and those barely break $210. It's actually a poor value even over their own X370 Pro Carbon.


----------



## Artikbot

Judging on the arrangement, that doesn't look like a PowIRstage at all.

Infineon would most likely bash someone's head in if they saw two packages driving a single inductor.

I bet it's just a discrete 2/1 arrangement.


----------



## Karagra

How would you guys rate the Asus Hero vs the Asrock taichi overclocking wise?


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> How would you guys rate the Asus Hero vs the Asrock taichi overclocking wise?


At this point, VRM-wise I'd prly have to say Taichi. It will all boil down the Bios flexibility imho.

IF Asus fixes their bricking issue something this/next week - than it will go down purely to bios flexibility.

Right now - Taichi has arguably sturdier VRM, and no bricking issue.


----------



## Nighthog

Taking a look at a Asrock Fatal1ty x370 Gaming k4 the Bios Custom P-state settings seam quite a neat feature.

I've used edited P-states quite a lot on the older platform through software to enable OC and down-clock in idle.
I wonder if this feature is available in more boards or is there software there for any board? The VRM on that board didn't seem enough for 4Ghz though. (60C+ with ~3.8ghz maxed for a reviewer)

EDIT:

What do you guys say the Gigabyte lower end boards could manage when the VRM is OnSemi
1x 4C10N highside 2x 4C06N lowside in 4 phase configuration. Took a quick look at the pdf files but didn't know what to look for.
The highside is rated max (Id MAX) 46A and lowside 69A but no idea what it really means, something else I need to look for?

Maybe it's Continuous Drain Cuurent? then it's 15A and 20A for 25C...

My current chassis is mATX but I do have 2 old ATX cases laying around though they are not lookers.


----------



## Artikbot

Well, the current itself doesn't tell you much. You need to calculate the waste power output to know what you can realistically do with it.

The X370 Gigabyte boards have a theoretical maximum processor package current capacity of 450A, but at that current they're putting out about 80W of heat... which the board can't even begin to handle.

It's a bit more complicated on full bridge configurations, as you've got to account that either one or the other switch is in an on state, and you have three times more switching losses.

Neat thing about driver MOS configurations is they give you the waste power at any given current, which makes it super duper easy.

Real ghetto way of doing it is by using the RdsOn figures and giving it about 0.05W or so switching losses per transistor being switched (which is kinda about right for low voltage, converter-optimised power FETs 1MHz switching speeds and on the high-ish side).

Sooo a ballpark would be, the high side switch has 5.3mOhm RdsOn, roughly about the same for the low side switches.

Either one or the other are conducting at any given time, so for the maximum current rating of the high-side switch you're looking at 11W of heat output per phase at 46A current output.

Now there's absolutely no way you're cooling that, in fact with that heatsink and normal airflow you're likely to cool about 15, maybe 20W effectively. So about 30A per phase, totalling 4 and at an operating voltage of 1.3V... You're around the 150W mark on processor power consumption to keep the regulators happy.

That's a very rough number and making lots of ommissions (accurate switching losses, driver losses, inductor losses...) that in reality have quite an effect, but it's more to give an estimation than anything else.


----------



## AlphaC

The IR3558 datasheet suggests 5W of power loss @35A without a heatsink on it. Even if you adjust it 15% for 1.5V voltage output instead of 1.2V (as per Figure 12), that's total of ~6W per phase.



The rudimentary way to calculate would be difference between maximum junction temperature and ambient temperature divided by thermal resistance

Max power dissipation = (T_Jmax-T_ambient)/θ_JA
= (150°C-25°C) / (20.8 °C/W)
= 6W

at a worse ambient temperature you'd follow the derating curve
http://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/power/dc-dc-converter/dc-dc-integrated-power-stage/powlrstage-integrated-power-stage/IR3558/productType.html?productType=5546d462533600a401533d251e255e49
http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3558.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd9d141769

Let me know if you have some other way to calculate it.

For the CSD87350Q5D NexFETS at 1.5V output voltage it's a 1.05X normalizing factor vs 1.3V and a power loss of ~6W at 30A ; it has 50°C/W thermal resistance
http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D
www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf


----------



## sydefekt

Some more MSI Titanium VRM shots


----------



## Nighthog

Thanks for the rough calculation there Artikbot and AlphaC for more detail. Just haven't had the time to set myself into learning to be doing the calculations and the data yet.
Much appreciated.

And The MSI Titanium.. Are those NIKOS I read?

Highside 1 x NIKOS PK616BA (GUF0S3101)
Lowside 2 x NIKOS PK632BA (VUF2S1P03)

Same for CPU and SOC, SOC only gets 1 of each though.

I really didn't think they would be NIKOS on their best board.

This VRM has the same parts as their AM3+ boards. 970A Gaming And 990FXA Gaming. though those had 2x of both.
And I might mention those are practically half the price.


----------



## Artikbot

@AlphaC

I was making use of the pre-calculated chart at 25C ambient, it makes your life a hell of a lot easier (do OnSemi even provide the data necessary to do manual calculations?)

8W is the figure specified at 45A power draw.

Then as you said you've got thermal derating, but it's pointless to even consider it because you're already putting out way more power than you can dissipate.

E: I see you're using the temperature figures and the dissipation capacity to find the maximum power being put out - however doesn't that just give you the power the package moves out, not what it generates?

You've also got other nearby chips putting out as much heat, so I'm not sure you'd be able to use its full dissipation capability.

Using the heat generation is how I've always done it, so of course do correct me if you've found your way to be more accurate.


----------



## br0da

@sydefekt: What about the backside? Can you tell what these doublers / drivers are?


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Thanks for the rough calculation there Artikbot and AlphaC for more detail. Just haven't had the time to set myself into learning to be doing the calculations and the data yet.
> Much appreciated.
> 
> And The MSI Titanium.. Are those NIKOS I read?
> 
> Highside 1 x NIKOS PK616BA (GUF0S3101)
> Lowside 2 x NIKOS PK632BA (VUF2S1P03)
> 
> Same for CPU and SOC, SOC only gets 1 of each though.
> 
> I really didn't think they would be NIKOS on their best board.
> 
> This VRM has the same parts as their AM3+ boards. 970A Gaming And 990FXA Gaming. though those had 2x of both.
> And I might mention those are practically half the price.


They've gone for a... weird choice for the high side. Probably trying to cheap out, it's a 50A 7mOhm N-FET.

Low side however is far nicer. 2x78A, 3.3mOhm.

Given the duty cycles we're going to see, it's likely this is a very efficient setup (as what is conducting most of the time is the low side). Heat-wise, probably better than what Gigabyte uses.

It's quite poor in terms of thermal conductivity compared to PowIRstages, but there's more packages putting out the same amount of heat... Should balance out I reckon.

The small ICs on the back look like standard gate drivers to me, judging by the position.

Doesn't look bad from where I stand if I'm honest.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> They've gone for a... weird choice for the high side. Probably trying to cheap out, it's a 50A 7mOhm N-FET.
> 
> Low side however is far nicer. 2x78A, 3.3mOhm.
> 
> Given the duty cycles we're going to see, it's likely this is a very efficient setup (as what is conducting most of the time is the low side). Heat-wise, probably better than what Gigabyte uses.
> 
> It's quite poor in terms of thermal conductivity compared to PowIRstages, but there's more packages putting out the same amount of heat... Should balance out I reckon.
> 
> The small ICs on the back look like standard gate drivers to me, judging by the position.
> 
> Doesn't look bad from where I stand if I'm honest.


Well you know more, I only know what I've read and judging by what people had for issues on AM3+ I didn't think they were that high on the quality side of things? Single mosfets burning out?


----------



## Artikbot

They used DrMOS packages with AM3+, with no temperature-based load balancing (like PowIRstage does when matched to an adequate controller). Or perhaps it was controlled and they just set temperature thresholds far too high - they are usually programmable.

So each individual DrMOS package was putting out tons of heat and passing tons of current while not being controlled (or improperly controlled), which caused a single phase to fail. A failed phase in that setup causes either a shorted converter (catastrophic failure - there's a risk of 12V being fed through to the processor if the package doesn't just burn up), or the remaining phases to try and sink a shorted load to ground - catstrophic failure again.

The shorted IC in question would then light up in smoke once the computer was booted up again, as a result of the processor being stuck in maximum performance mode during board startup and thus draining quite a fair bit of current.

And you know the rest.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> not necessarily. Even if the rated wattage is lower, they could still pull the same amount of current or more. And current is what matter with vrms.


Pretty much this, everything else is speculation. You'd need to see some data of how much current the platform pulls under worst condition.


----------



## Artikbot

That's a reasonably easy estimation knowing the system power draw.


----------



## ihatelolcats

are any of the B350 boards worthwhile? i see that the taichi is a favorite but it's really expensive. i like the b350 chipset because it doesn't have extra features i won't use. thanks


----------



## MAMOLII

ASROCK TAICHI NAKED.... https://news.xfastest.com/review/32324/asrock-x370-taichi/


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> They used DrMOS packages with AM3+, with no temperature-based load balancing (like PowIRstage does when matched to an adequate controller). Or perhaps it was controlled and they just set temperature thresholds far too high - they are usually programmable.


DrMos were used in GD80 and GD65. The Gaming series used Nikos.

http://www.overclock.net/t/911584/and-here-is-why-i-absolutely-hate-msi/350

Myself, considering that the 970 Gaming was 6+2 with 4 Nikos mosfets per phase and costing 85 EUR, i find it hilarious that the MSI x370 Titanium with 3 Nikos per phase, costs ATM 335 EUR. Talk about maximized profit margin. Yeah, the rest is better, but come on, VRM and capacitors are major cost burdens for motherboards. And there is nothing amazing about the Titanium in that. It's probably the most overhyped AM4 motherboard.


----------



## Artikbot

The brand tells absolutely nothing though. What series/model of transistors did they use?

DrMOS is a blanket name to refer to ICs that include in a single package the high/low side switches and the gate drivers for them. It's in a way similar to PowIRstage, but not so fancy for the most part.


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MAMOLII*
> 
> ASROCK TAICHI NAKED.... https://news.xfastest.com/review/32324/asrock-x370-taichi/


Look at "them corners". Such indecency, Taichi, you need to cover yourself!


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> The brand tells absolutely nothing though. What series/model of transistors did they use?
> 
> DrMOS is a blanket name to refer to ICs that include in a single package the high/low side switches and the gate drivers for them. It's in a way similar to PowIRstage, but not so fancy for the most part.


The brand tells many things, if they have a steady record of increased heat, which is why they melt the thermal pads in AM3+. I think they are the exact models in the Gaming series, but i am tired to search the 970 thread in the forum. If you aren't bored, there is a dedicated 970 Gaming thread where it shows the exact model.

Yes,i know what DrMos is, GD80 had Fairchild DrMos.

*EDIT*: And here you are sir, the EXACT mosfets of the 85 EUR MSI 970 Gaming in deed. Only 3 per phase now, instead of 4 per phase in the 970 Gaming:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1501416/msi-970-gaming-anyone#post_22562258

P.S: A Google search for "MSI 970 Gaming oil" , explains the particular thermal properties of these mosfets. Let's hope that in AM4, the current draw is less than in AM3+, so oil leaks won't be observed.

But, would i pay 335EUR for that motherboard? Not even dead.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MAMOLII*
> 
> ASROCK TAICHI NAKED.... https://news.xfastest.com/review/32324/asrock-x370-taichi/


So we were right: TI 87350D MOSFET









It's a IR35201 driving 6+2 doubled to 12+4.

What's interesting is the memory uses a uPI uP1674P controller for 2 87350D mosfets , this is the same as Z170 OC Formula

The biggest advantage over PowIRStages for NexFETS is a higher allowable switching frequency (1.5MHz v 1MHz). Since Ryzen without overclocks switches voltages very quickly based on sensors even if you don't need the amperage it's an advantage over the cheaper Low RDS on type mosfets if the motherboard manufacturer allows faster switching, not just safety margin. With the IR3558 It seems that PowIRStage is better able to deal with heat however and the efficiency is just marginally better.

P.S. in case anyone needs to estimate losses themselves see page 15 for IR3558 manual:


Spoiler: IR3558 datasheet






and page 13 for TI CSD87350Q5D


Spoiler: TI CSD87350Q5D datasheet


----------



## PsyM4n

DrMOS is a standard defined by Intel. Other similar packages just do not confront to the standard for some reason (by not using some required parts, or by using proprietary parts that the maker doesn't wish to make public).

Note that there are various DrMOS implementations and revisions of the standard. DrMOS packages can have some serious flaws and limitations (ie: fairchild and renesas for am3/x58/z68 sockets, with no over-temperature protection and high losses at high switching frequencies) or can be quite advanced (ie: fairchild on x99 and renesas on z77/x79 sockets, with OTP and low losses at high switching frequencies).


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> That's a reasonably easy estimation knowing the system power draw.


Yes, mind you this only tells you half the story...


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> Some more MSI Titanium VRM shots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2980652/width/350/height/700
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/2980653/width/350/height/700


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Thanks for the rough calculation there Artikbot and AlphaC for more detail. Just haven't had the time to set myself into learning to be doing the calculations and the data yet.
> Much appreciated.
> 
> And The MSI Titanium.. Are those NIKOS I read?
> 
> Highside 1 x NIKOS PK616BA (GUF0S3101)
> Lowside 2 x NIKOS PK632BA (VUF2S1P03)
> 
> Same for CPU and SOC, SOC only gets 1 of each though.
> 
> I really didn't think they would be NIKOS on their best board.
> 
> This VRM has the same parts as their AM3+ boards. 970A Gaming And 990FXA Gaming. though those had 2x of both.
> And I might mention those are practically half the price.


That's laughable...

it shouldn't be named Xpower and shouldn't cost $300 USD MSRP. It's using sub $150 board circuitry ....

No Base clock gen.

No tantalum caps

3 USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports (USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0 speed)

No Sata express

NIKOS mosfets.

Come on MSI, what are you thinking!


----------



## Medusa666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> That's laughable...
> 
> it shouldn't be named Xpower and shouldn't cost $300 USD MSRP. It's using sub $150 board circuitry ....
> 
> No Base clock gen.
> 
> No tantalum caps
> 
> 3 USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports (USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0 speed)
> 
> No Sata express
> 
> NIKOS mosfets.
> 
> Come on MSI, what are you thinking!


Is this correct? If Yes, I will remove my pre-order for this motherboard.

While I'm in this thread you guys seem very expertly, what motherboard would you recommend? Is the ASUS Crosshair good, ASUS Prime has decent price but how is the VRM? Gigabyte Aorus boards?

Would really appreciate a good reply.

Thank you.


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> Is this correct? If Yes, I will remove my pre-order for this motherboard.
> 
> While I'm in this thread you guys seem very expertly, what motherboard would you recommend? Is the ASUS Crosshair good, ASUS Prime has decent price but how is the VRM? Gigabyte Aorus boards?
> 
> Would really appreciate a good reply.
> 
> Thank you.


Asus CH6....provided ( PROVIDED) that today's beta bios that elmor uploaded will fix the self-bricking issue. Otherwise Asrock Taichi and Fatal1ty Gaming Pro seem like very solid choices (Taichi probably more so, unless you want that 5 gb/s Ethernet/LAN port). Gigabyte seem to be lacking a bit in VRM department, but from what we heard so far - their ram support seem to be doing better than on other boards.


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> Is this correct? If Yes, I will remove my pre-order for this motherboard.
> 
> While I'm in this thread you guys seem very expertly, what motherboard would you recommend? Is the ASUS Crosshair good, ASUS Prime has decent price but how is the VRM? Gigabyte Aorus boards?
> 
> Would really appreciate a good reply.
> 
> Thank you.


I'm bias, I won't lie (cause I bought the board) but Asus CH6 is the way to go if you're worried about VRM temperatures. The TI NexFETs they use are crazy efficient. One report was saying 46C max on their OC. That's like, ice cold for a VRM.

Anyone citing the brick bug...it's been fixed with the latest beta BIOS.


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> I'm bias, I won't lie (cause I bought the board) but Asus CH6 is the way to go if you're worried about VRM temperatures. The TI NexFETs they use are crazy efficient. One report was saying 46C max on their OC. That's like, ice cold for a VRM.
> 
> Anyone citing the brick bug...it's been fixed with the latest beta BIOS.


* Potentially fixed =) I prefer the "wait and see" approach. But I do hope that it's fixed as my board is arriving on Tuesday.


----------



## Medusa666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kriant*
> 
> Asus CH6....provided ( PROVIDED) that today's beta bios that elmor uploaded will fix the self-bricking issue. Otherwise Asrock Taichi and Fatal1ty Gaming Pro seem like very solid choices (Taichi probably more so, unless you want that 5 gb/s Ethernet/LAN port). Gigabyte seem to be lacking a bit in VRM department, but from what we heard so far - their ram support seem to be doing better than on other boards.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> I'm bias, I won't lie (cause I bought the board) but Asus CH6 is the way to go if you're worried about VRM temperatures. The TI NexFETs they use are crazy efficient. One report was saying 46C max on their OC. That's like, ice cold for a VRM.
> 
> Anyone citing the brick bug...it's been fixed with the latest beta BIOS.


Wow, thanks for the fast replies, I really appreciate it, so the Asus CH6 or the Taichi would be best VRM wise?

I was looking at the Prime, mainly cause it seemed good Bang for the Buck, however I'm willing to spend if the quality is much higher.

Most important ot me is that the board is durable and will function well electronically the coming 4-5 years, so VRM, caps etc.


----------



## Karagra

Well I was waiting for the Asrock Fatal1ty X370 but the ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero just went up for grabs on newegg so I went for it, hopefully I made the right choice. So I will now have
XFX 480 RX Black Ediiton
Ryzen 1700
Asus VI Hero
G Skill Flare X 2666 16gb
1000W EVGA Platinum
Anyone here think the Asus ROG 12 Phase will be much different from the Fatal1ty 16 Phase?


----------



## Kriant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> Wow, thanks for the fast replies, I really appreciate it, so the Asus CH6 or the Taichi would be best VRM wise?
> 
> I was looking at the Prime, mainly cause it seemed good Bang for the Buck, however I'm willing to spend if the quality is much higher.
> 
> Most important ot me is that the board is durable and will function well electronically the coming 4-5 years, so VRM, caps etc.


I am willing to say both are top notch. Pure numbers-wise Taichi might have the edge, but Asus generally pumps outer faster updates. Do keep in mind that given how Ryzen overclocks, I sincerely doubt that you will ever reach either board's limits. It boils down to the other features and price.


----------



## SuperZan

Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro and Crosshair VI Hero are in their own class in terms of VRM. Biostar GT7 / Prime Pro are very solid designs. Giga Gaming 5 is doing well also and probably belongs here. I think you're fine if you go with any of those boards, so price, features, and comfort level with the UEFI come into play. The MSI boards are alright, but not to my taste in terms of components. I think I got more beef with the GT7 for what I paid versus the Titanium, but I can't get RAM past 2933MHz, so Biostar has work to do on that end.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> The brand tells many things, if they have a steady record of increased heat, which is why they melt the thermal pads in AM3+. I think they are the exact models in the Gaming series, but i am tired to search the 970 thread in the forum. If you aren't bored, there is a dedicated 970 Gaming thread where it shows the exact model.
> 
> Yes,i know what DrMos is, GD80 had Fairchild DrMos.
> 
> *EDIT*: And here you are sir, the EXACT mosfets of the 85 EUR MSI 970 Gaming in deed. Only 3 per phase now, instead of 4 per phase in the 970 Gaming:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1501416/msi-970-gaming-anyone#post_22562258
> 
> P.S: A Google search for "MSI 970 Gaming oil" , explains the particular thermal properties of these mosfets. Let's hope that in AM4, the current draw is less than in AM3+, so oil leaks won't be observed.
> 
> But, would i pay 335EUR for that motherboard? Not even dead.


All of what you're making a point around is a particular model of FETs in a particular application.

That in itself is very much irrelevant to how the X370 Platinum performs.

Much like you wouldn't say 'The Porsche 924 is terrible therefore all Porsches are terrible cars' you cannot extrapolate an entire semiconductor manufacturer's products based on one particular model of transistor from one particular series in one particular application.

Just by choosing the output inductor poorly you could have a mess of a regulator or one that works perfectly well, nothing else changed.


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> All of what you're making a point around is a particular model of FETs in a particular application.
> 
> That in itself is very much irrelevant to how the X370 Platinum performs.
> 
> Much like you wouldn't say 'The Porsche 924 is terrible therefore all Porsches are terrible cars' you cannot extrapolate an entire semiconductor manufacturer's products based on one particular model of transistor from one particular series in one particular application.
> 
> Just by choosing the output inductor poorly you could have a mess of a regulator or one that works perfectly well, nothing else changed.


Dear friend, i didn't even enter into the subject of how X370 performs. I just commented on the mosfet quality of this 335 EUR motherboard. I wouldn't even dare put the name "Porsche" next to Nikos, but i will explain to you, the long history of Nikos and heat issues (you know, when something has higher impedance than the competition, it heats more and this has been Nikos' problem for years, playing catch up with more known manufacturers).

So, let's go to AM3 platform:

http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents

^ Yes, these were Nikos.



^ These are other Nikos. Other companies use Nikos as a benchmark.

This is what "The Stilt" (if you don't know him, google "The Stilt AMD") wrote about the specific Nikos in MSI 970 Gaming (which are the same of the x370):



You will also, strangely, never find MSI mentioning the "amazing" Nikos mosfets, under her "military class" boasting, if you visit her site. I wonder why. You know, you click "military class" on their website, and you read all about the amazing dark caps, the super wow chokes, but never about the unbeatable Nikos mosfets...

This is from Sin's Hardware:

http://sinhardware.com/images/vrmlist.png

Intel motherboards. Nobody, uses Nikos for CPU power, except for MSI and that for 1 model. Now, it could be that Nikos is simply the best and the others can't afford it and only MSI can. Or that the others prefer worse mosfets and only MSI strives for excellence. Or, it can be that only MSI has a longstanding contract with Nikos or simply they are cheaper and MSI prefers to use them, while the others don't.

By all means, i didn't and don't make any comment on the X370 performance. I just consider Nikos a brand with known history for overheating mosfets, which everyone else avoids for CPU power and i don't think that a 335 EUR motherboard should sport them. If you will, not for performance's sake, but for quality's sake for the money they ask. Rather than Porsche, it's more like the Lada of mosfets.

These are from AM3+ (the same mounted on the MSI Titanium):





^ In AM3+, MANY motherboards, had problems. There were 4 phase motherboards fighting for their life. But NONE, had mosfets that managed to melt the thermal pad of the VRM heatsinks and make it leak oil. Except from the Nikos.

Looking at this progression in time, what is your conclusion? Mine is that Nikos was and is, behind the competition in heat generation of its mosfets and for 335 EUR, one should get better mosfets. By all means, it is probable that the X370 Titanium, also thanks to the fact that Ryzen can't overclock, will never arrive to such temperatures. However, i think it is useful to a buyer to know WHICH exactly mosfets the motherboard he buys are and their "history". They are mosfets used on a 85 euro AM3+ motherboard, where they were actually more per phase. I think for the money asked, that's too low.

That's all. Goodnight.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> In AM3+, MANY motherboards, had problems. There were 4 phase motherboards fighting for their life. But NONE, had mosfets that managed to melt the thermal pad of the VRM heatsinks and make it leak oil. Except from the Nikos.


Actually, that was due to the characteristics of the thermal pad used on that particular board model. Pads on other boards didn't melt. Instead, the board itself or even the mosfets themselves were disintegrating. Some am3+ gigabyte boards with "8" phases would do that. The mosfets were from other companies too.

Up until mid 2011, massively manufactured CPU FETs couldn't manage high power output at high frequencies without consequences. You either needed to go overboard with the cooling (ie: liquid cooler with high power pump) or get yourself some properly configured exotic (for back then) vrm configuration (ie: evga x58 classified).

Back then you even had relatively expensive boards fry, cause up until then motherboard manufacturers haven't encountered CPUs pulling like 300 watts when overclocked. No design experience, no adequate massively produced components on the market either.

Even since mid 2011, when components meant for such loads started coming out, some manufacturers had gigantic stocks left of old components, and the am3 boards themselves were based on older designs. Not to mention that even if all else was good, some manufacturers weren't experienced in handling high power properly. For example, am3 and lga2011 boards from gigabyte were terrible in the power consumption department.


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Actually, that was due to the characteristics of the thermal pad used *on that particular board model*.


Is that so? Do you have an official source for that assertion or is it your conclusion? As for the "particular board model". No, it's not just the MSI 970 Gaming. It's also the 990FX Gaming (that uses the same mosfets):

From Amazon.com


From Newegg.com





Quote:


> Pads on other boards didn't melt. Instead, the board itself or even the mosfets themselves were disintegrating. Some am3+ gigabyte boards with "8" phases would do that. The mosfets were from other companies too.


I am not sure whether you are making a point in favour or against the mosfets in question here. I didn't say that the pads on other boards melted either. The pads, melted on the 970 Gaming and 990 Gaming, the only ones that had the new generation of Nikos, that also had the highly irregular scheme for AM3+ new gen mosfets, of putting 4 per phase, instead of 3 (my guess, because exactly MSI was afraid about their heat generation, so preferred to put 4 to distribute more the heat. This didn't stop the pad from melting).

So, let me summarize:

- MSI GD65 and GD80 (not using the new power Nikos): didn't melt their pads.
- MSI 970 and 990 Gaming (with the 2 new Nikos power paks): melted the pads.
- Other MSI AM3+ motherboards (with older gen Nikos D-Paks): Didn't melt the pads, commonly burst into flames, when overheated.

Your conclusion is that the pads on the 970 and 990 are to blame? Why? MSI suddenly chose to put subpar pads on their top line? Or could it be that simply the pads had to deal with this new mosfet that was a bit "too hot" for "normal" pads?

Quote:


> Up until mid 2011, massively manufactured CPU FETs couldn't manage high power output at high frequencies without consequences. You either needed to go overboard with the cooling (ie: liquid cooler with high power pump) or get yourself some properly configured exotic (for back then) vrm configuration (ie: evga x58 classified).
> 
> Back then you even had relatively expensive boards fry, cause up until then motherboard manufacturers haven't encountered CPUs pulling like 300 watts when overclocked. No design experience, no adequate massively produced components on the market either.
> 
> Even since mid 2011, when components meant for such loads started coming out, some manufacturers had gigantic stocks left of old components, and the am3 boards themselves were based on older designs. Not to mention that even if all else was good, some manufacturers weren't experienced in handling high power properly. For example, am3 and lga2011 boards from gigabyte were terrible in the power consumption department.


You mention "other GIgabyte boards" and a long story about mosfet progression. Do you have any more specific data about a mosfet company with a long record of heat issues? Because this is all a bit vague. You see, no motherboard can be immortal. But, i have been around computers since 1990, but it's only Nikos that i regularly encounter with problems of the same nature. ASUS used to use Nikos too. They stopped quickly and use them sparringly for non critical areas (like RAM). The rest of manufacturers have done the same. Why, according to you?

I will give you a hint.

- Nikos was founded in 1998. If you search for their awards or product certification, this is what you get:
http://english.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/ptdetail.phtml?Category=103961&Part=CompanyProfile

- Let's go to Renesas, a company founded in 2002. They are certified for use in cars:
https://www.renesas.com/en-eu/about/company/profile/business.html

- Let's go to israeli Vishay. Certified for use from aerospace (NASA), to cars, to medical equipments. Now, if you 'd tell me that other board manufacturers than Gigabyte don't use them, because they are pricey, i could believe you.

http://www.vishay.com/quality/

- ON Semi-conductors, founded in 1998. Various awards, car use cerfified:
http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/content.do?id=1039
http://www.onsemi.com/site/pdf/ON-Semiconductor-Corporate-History.pdf

But, why don't others use the marvellous Nikos for CPU power and even MSI didn't include it en masse in Intel, like she did in AMD motherboards? This list here, spans from 2010 to 2013 and it's not because 95% of OCN members were running MSI motherboards with Nikos mosfets. They are multiple models. It simply happened that the frequency of problems of this brand was much higher than the rest:

http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents

We are in 2017 and newer mosfet generation of the same brand, melts the thermal pads. Sure, it can be that out of a devilish quincidence, MSI decided suddenly to cheap out on the thermal pads of her top the line AM3+ motherboards, to the point that they melted. But then again, why did MSI put 4 per phase with a new mosfet model, when nobody else did that? Maybe because they knew about the heat generation? I mean, to you, in order to have a suspicion that this is a subpar brand, what more info would you require? Just curious. Or, can you point to another brand of mosfets that has a similar track record for 7 years? Cause, believe me, i have googled in the past every mosfet manufacturer, but didn't find the same opinions that i found on Nikos. And i googled in 2 different languages.

Anyway, i am not going to convince you, but it will also take more than generic tales to convince me too, about the quality of Nikos. But i think the debate and the presentation of the arguments of the 2 sides, is useful for aspiring buyers of this 335 EUR motherboard, so that they knew the value they get for their buck. Otherwise, i wouldn't bother, i 've been through this before.

Again. Will they provoke problems? Most likely not. Ryzen can't overclock to save its life. Just like a Lada can be an excellent city car and some say also claim it's resilient. However, for such an expensive motherboard, i don't think they are a good purchase. I would have written the same if the mosfets used were from APEC. With the difference that APEC doesn't have a known, bad track record on par with Nikos.

EDIT: Just to illustrate, "everlasting quality with military class" , says in X370 Titanium's website:



https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-XPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM.html#productFeature-section

What's missing?







They boast about the chokes, the caps, the PCI slots, the USB, the antihumidity PCB, the ESD protection, the memory steel armor, but not about the mosfets! Why so shy! Do you have an explanation?

Mine is, that if you google "Nikos mosfets bad quality" , "Renesas/On-semi...put what you like"; the results won't be the same.


----------



## SteelBox

Does MSI use this moafets on ther gpu?


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteelBox*
> 
> Does MSI use this moafets on ther gpu?


I am not really much into GPUs, since i am not a gamer, but i have seen a Nikos mosfet on an MSI R7 260X, if i am not mistaken. In fact, at the end i just bought a Sapphire 260X, because i freaked out. I am not sure they are the same though, as the ones used for motherboards. I only managed to read "Nikos" from a zoomed-in photograph of the card, that i found in Newegg. They may well be other mosfet models used in GPUs. I don't know if they are used on more high end cards.


----------



## Artikbot

I get it @Undervolter, you hold a personal grudge against Nikos becuse of AM3+.

But it is just is just that, a grudge.

So now if you could please be rational and wait to see how these boards perform before writing humongously long posts on how terrible they are, that would be great.

If they are proven to fail, I will be the first one to say yes, you were right, MSI screwed up again and these transistors probably aren't up for the task.

But until then, can you leave AM3+ behind and stay impartial?


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I get it @Undervolter
> , you hold a personal grudge against Nikos becuse of AM3+.
> 
> But it is just is just that, a grudge.
> 
> So now if you could please be rational and wait to see how these boards to before writing humongously long posts on how terrible they are, that would be great.
> 
> If they are proven to fail, I will be the first one to say yes, you were right, MSI screwed up again and these transistors probably aren't up for the task.
> 
> But until then, can you leave AM3+ behind and stay impartial?


First, i am not interested in your pseudopsychological assessments. I presented some arguments about the quality of this mosfet brand, because like most products out there, not all brands are the same. They may be for you, it's OK, i am not trying to convince you. I am just illustrating some things and let others to decideif these are worthy of a 335 EUR mobo. Impartiality isn't something that can be self-claimed either. Arguments are more interesting.

Yes, let's leave 7 years of brand history behind and give Nikos a clean slate. I can go the extra mile and make you happy and say "Yes, Nikos, is on par with the best mosfet manufacturers. World class mosfets for a world class motherboard".


----------



## TomiKazi

Well I got a bit nervous about this VRM talk, a subject I know almost nothing about. I guess I'll be one of the 'testers' then (Titanium).


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TomiKazi*
> 
> Well I got a bit nervous about this VRM talk, a subject I know almost nothing about. I guess I'll be one of the 'testers' then (Titanium).


I wouldn't bother. Possibly a big headache. Stick with Asrock Taichi, Pro or Asus Hero.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> I am just illustrating some things and let others to decideif these are worthy of a 335 EUR mobo.


Which is perfectly fine, we've already assessed that the X370 Titanium isn't worth the money and other options should be considered instead, as even Gigabyte's X370 Gaming 5 that costs over 100€ less is a better product overall, in pretty much all departments.

But leave the flaming until we know how far we can flame. If it is a dud, then you can go full steam ahead and have hard reasons to do so. If you flame and it turns out to be a good board, all you do is look like a moron.

I'm not saying that you look like a moron don't get me wrong, what I mean to say is... reserve your judgement until reviews and user experiences are out.


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Which is perfectly fine, we've already assessed that the X370 Titanium isn't worth the money and other options should be considered instead, as even Gigabyte's X370 Gaming 5 that costs over 100€ less is a better product overall, in pretty much all departments.
> 
> But leave the flaming until we know how far we can flame. If it is a dud, then you can go full steam ahead and have hard reasons to do so. If you flame and it turns out to be a good board, all you do is look like a moron.
> 
> I'm not saying that you look like a moron don't get me wrong, what I mean to say is... reserve your judgement until reviews and user experiences are out.


Why is it flaming presenting some data on the EXACT mosfet model used??? Did i use a characterization or made a personal attack on anyone? Why do you have this vision? Just because you don't like what i wrote? If you think i am flaming, why don't you flag my posts to the mods as flaming?

If anything, you twisted my words. I never claimed that the mosfets in question will fail. I said actually the opposite, that their problems won't arise probably, because Ryzen can't overclock. And you can't draw current if you can't overclock. Another question is longevity over time compared to others. This doesn't change that they are from a subpar brand and that are cheap for such a costly board.

Why is it so terrible if someone posts the experience of the same mosfets in AM3+ and of the general brand since 2010? Just because you rushed to say that brand means nothing? My judgement was about brand quality for such an expensive board, not about whether they will burst into flames or not.

Remember, how all this started? I just wrote few lines, you came to say that brand means nothing:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/110#post_25910705

I just then explained why brand means something,according to me. Why is this so irritating to you? "You hold a grudge", "You are flaming", "not to say you are a moron", are your phrases, not mine. And i would be the one flaming???

Bottom line: Nikos mosfets, were never used by other manufacturer for CPU power for any motherboard that was considered "TOP". They were always used for their CHEAPNESS. And if i am wrong, instead of ad hominem attacks, one could simply prove the opposite.


----------



## Nighthog

I think the issue is getting a little out of hand. Artikbot you aren't really responsive to the issues the brand has had and accusing the other for flaming doesn't help. Practically baiting there.

I think the price is just ridiculous. The setup is designed for about 200Watt cpu:s and reading the Ryzen reviews none have really reached that wattage yet what I have seen OC:ing the Ryzen chips.
Looking at each iteration of the design using these NIKOS they have increased the size of the heatsink with each new board and generation it seems.

They started with 990FXA gaming and 970 Gaming. Then came 970A Gaming Pro Carbon that uses the same thing but now with larger heatsinks. Now he have Titanium and is the heatsink even larger this time if I'm not completely mistaken in memory?

They seem to be taking steps to mitigate the heat from these things. At first on am3+ they supported the FX-9590 but later it was removed on the lower end boards. Too much heat I reckon. And active cooling recommended for VRM. The FXA kept the support only because it had a larger heatsink i think.

Something I find interesting is the X370 Gaming Pro Carbon has 8 phases. but I think in doubled 4-phase design for cpu power. If it does have the same chips in same configuration could it actually not be better than the Titanium? Though I wonder. Could be 1x of both. No image available yet.

On another note i wonder about the small chips on the backside on the MSI Titanium under the VRM. There are 3 on cpu and 2 on SOC side. Are they doublers? Doubled 3+2 phase?


----------



## Artikbot

...I'm just gonna end it here. I'm not bothered enough to continue arguing.


----------



## PsyM4n

Again, the pads on the aforementioned 970/990 boards melted due to their properties. They just reached their melting point. There are other pads that wouldn't melt at that point. What I'm saying here is that the board or the mosfets themselves would disintegrate due to the heat instead. You would have failure again.

MSI's fault with the 2 (so far) affected boards isn't the use of NIKOS FETS. These particular MOSFET models are perfectly fine low Rds(on) FETs, not bad, not great either. It's the fact that they put two pairs of FETs in a 6+2 setup on such a small area that results in failure (the whole combo results in failure). It's as if the whole design is meant to block the heat dissipation.


----------



## Tasm

I think the GA Gaming 5 is the best choice if you want more features than the PRIME and dont want to pay the extra for the Taichi/Hero/Professional.

Overall, looks a pretty good package


----------



## sydefekt

I believe the VRM heatsinks are bigger and better on the X370 Titanium. I also took off the silver plastic covers on them for better airflow.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Again, the pads on the aforementioned 970/990 boards melted due to their properties. They just reached their melting point. There are other pads that wouldn't melt at that point. What I'm saying here is that the board or the mosfets themselves would disintegrate due to the heat instead. You would have failure again.
> 
> MSI's fault with the 2 (so far) affected boards isn't the use of NIKOS FETS. These particular MOSFET models are perfectly fine low Rds(on) FETs, not bad, not great either. It's the fact that they put two pairs of FETs in a 6+2 setup on such a small area that results in failure (the whole combo results in failure). It's as if the whole design is meant to block the heat dissipation.


So what kind of Thermal pads or properties of pads should be used for these Nikos? When I took out the heatsinks the pads looked good with good contacts; the pads were the gooie ones similar to the pads on the Fury TriX VRMs.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> I think the GA Gaming 5 is the best choice if you want more features than the PRIME and dont want to pay the extra for the Taichi/Hero/Professional.
> 
> Overall, looks a pretty good package


I can't wait for my chip to get here and confirm or deny that statement lol


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> So what kind of Thermal pads or properties of pads should be used for these Nikos? When I took out the heatsinks the pads looked good with good contacts; the pads were the gooie ones similar to the pads on the Fury TriX VRMs.


Something that has similar thermal performance and can withstand high temperatures without melting. There are pads that do not melt even if the mosfet reaches disintegration temperatures or even pops.

Blaming the mosfet when the thermal pad melts is no different than blaming the cpu cause the thermal grease on it evaporated.


----------



## Soggysilicon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> First, i am not interested in your pseudopsychological assessments. I presented some arguments about the quality of this mosfet brand, because like most products out there, not all brands are the same. They may be for you, it's OK, i am not trying to convince you. I am just illustrating some things and let others to decideif these are worthy of a 335 EUR mobo. Impartiality isn't something that can be self-claimed either. Arguments are more interesting.
> 
> Yes, let's leave 7 years of brand history behind and give Nikos a clean slate. I can go the extra mile and make you happy and say "Yes, Nikos, is on par with the best mosfet manufacturers. World class mosfets for a world class motherboard".


Interesting discussion for sure. Having of used and abused a MSI NF980-G65 for some years, as well as other MSI products... _AND_ shopped motherboards (comparing and contrasting prices and features) before settling on something my 2c may be of use to someone.

First off Undervolter has provided a great deal of accurate information about MSIs BOM for motherboards. Specifically as it concerns the VRM architecture. His work is meritorious of praise rather than criticism. Mind if the criticism had been against his facts or a "misinterpretation of the data" then the push and pull of truth seeking would bare that out. However, a criticism of "text on a screens emotional state" contributes little in the ways of facts, but could be very telling if we wanted to qualitatively sample MSI's brand equity.

As I began shopping for a base to build up a my own R7 system, I started with the MSI Ti, operating under the bias that Cost = Value and tbh a little fan boi' brand loyalty. As my experiences with the company have been mostly positive.

This means that the MSI offering was my baseline. That said this is where I start, not where I end up. Once I created a spread sheet comparing and contrasting cost and features the MSI product fell off my radar. My own conclusions not being much different than most the folk on this site. Now does this mean that the MSI Ti is objectively bad? No not really, but like others I could not _see_ where the inflated cost to the consumer was coming from, if simply making an account of the MSI Ti displayed technology and on board components.

My subjective analysis was that it was a B product being sold as a top tier A(++) unit, which in the A tier "apples to apples comparison" I penalize to a B(-) or C(+). The score (to me) is hemmed in by its cost.

Purely speculating it would appear MSI has chosen to go with a high price strategy to avoid initial brand dilution by cost comparison. I would say that just about anyone shopping an AM4 motherboard has come across the MSI Ti, specifically because it is the de'facto most expensive AM4 in the market.

That is, that it is intentionally priced higher to capitalize on the bias of Cost = Value. As with ANYTHING, its worth whatever the market will bare. So fair value does not equal market value, being that all the MSI Ti. boards have, like the rest of the X370s, sold out.

Now, being a bit of a technology and performance snob, I found that all the X370 boards are no better than an A (-) or B (+), when aggregated with their cost in my eyes simply based on components with maybe the exception of the _Taichi_ (which as best as I was able to tell was the First board to sell out and stay sold out).

Thing is, artificial scarcity and / or low production runs work in a companies favor when demand is high as it allows a lot of fine tuning to marginal cost and benefits to the board manufacturers. This is important information for manufacturers that are using the R7 launch as an indicator for the mainstream market Ryzen series coming out in the months to come. Its close to textbook agile business analysis.


----------



## PsyM4n

The point is that most "high end" desktop boards that were released in the past 2-3 years are overpriced for what they offer. At least up until a few years back, when paying over 200-300$ you knew that the board had fancy vrms that could take a beating, protection ICs were all over the place for usb/sata/pcie/etc, and you even had configuration options for extreme scenarios (phase/ln2 cooling and the likes).

Nowadays, the price remains the same, while some of the above are conveniently left out. Cases like the X370 Ti one are on the extreme end, where the board has about double the price it should.


----------



## Nighthog

Ok I decided the take a joke chance with a cheap board and push it to it limits and see what you can get if you go budget OC.

If it burns I'll take a look at the 2x more expensive ones.

Various boards are arriving next week so much better availability then. The board was one of the few last ones so had to make a decision now or wait a week for delivery for a later buy or pick something else entirely.

Ordered a Ga-AB350-Gaming 3. Might not make 4Ghz but we shall see how much it can take.

Paring it with some Corsair 2x8Gb (CMK16GX4M2A2666C16R) and a Ryzen 7 1700. That memory was in QVL for the higher end boards so I hope it will work out.

So I picked the cheapest memory, cheapest cpu and Almost the cheapest Motherboard. The cheapest didn't have enough sound outputs for my needs.

Now to order that Am4 bracket for my water cooling...


----------



## Karagra

I have seen reviews of b350 hitting 3.8-4.0 with a 1700. I just can't seem to find it I will keep looking for you.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> I have seen reviews of b350 hitting 3.8-4.0 with a 1700. I just can't seem to find it I will keep looking for you.


Saw someone getting Above 4Ghz on a Asus Prime B350-Plus with a larger air cooler, Macho Hr-02. Hitting about ~71C in stress testing. No mention of VRM temps though.

1.437volts

Link: http://www.overclock.net/t/1623547/amd-ryzen-motherboard-thread/1650#post_25915622


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> If it burns I'll take a look at the 2x more expensive ones.


Amperage-wise and with the VRM temperature you'll not get any problems on the Gigabyte board.
If you're overclocking your RyZen CPU at a voltage of 1,45V and you're pulling 100 amps out of the VRMs the lowside will not have a higher power dissipation then about 2.5 watts per phase.
That would be 10W for the hole lowside, that shouldn't be a big deal for the heatsinks even if the highside, the chokes and the caps are heating them up a little bit too.

I'd expect timing and latency and the over- / under-shooting of the analog controller more as a problem.


----------



## AlphaC

As far as the XPower :
To be fair the same NIKOS mosfets were used on the Z270 Gaming M7 & X99A Gaming Pro Carbon / MSI X99A TOMAHAWK but with 8+2 instead of 6+4. They were also used in the same configuration (3+2 doubled) for the Z170 Gaming M9.

In Sin's reviews at Tweaktown they did not peak over 60°C when overclocked i7 quadcores hit 4.5GHz for the M9 (4.5GHz is nothing you need an overclocking board for though) ; the X99 solutions with 2 more sets of mosfets (2 more CPU phases) were pushing 50°C at 4GHz for the X99 platform. Ryzen is a different beast and a *top of the line board* that is designed for overclocking should _not_ be using these.

If I paid $300 for an Xpower I'd be annoyed about finding these mosfets under the heatsink and return it for a cheaper solution with a base clock gen, and better power delivery. It's not like the non-overclocking features are stellar.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Ok I decided the take a joke chance with a cheap board and push it to it limits and see what you can get if you go budget OC.
> 
> If it burns I'll take a look at the 2x more expensive ones.
> 
> Various boards are arriving next week so much better availability then. The board was one of the few last ones so had to make a decision now or wait a week for delivery for a later buy or pick something else entirely.
> 
> Ordered a Ga-AB350-Gaming 3. Might not make 4Ghz but we shall see how much it can take.
> 
> Paring it with some Corsair 2x8Gb (CMK16GX4M2A2666C16R) and a Ryzen 7 1700. That memory was in QVL for the higher end boards so I hope it will work out.
> 
> So I picked the cheapest memory, cheapest cpu and Almost the cheapest Motherboard. The cheapest didn't have enough sound outputs for my needs.
> 
> Now to order that Am4 bracket for my water cooling...


On Semi 4C10N , 4C09N , 4C06N , 4C05N should be able to push roughly 25-30A with a 6W power dissipation
These are essentially what you find on the Gigabyte B350 and ASUS B350 boards.

From the Ryzen thread the most I've seen used by the CPU even on MSI boards is ~185W Power_In and ~150W Power_out at 4GHz as per the VRM controller's reporting to hwinfo64 , with VRM readings of about 55°C. That means you figure if it is at 1.4V there is about 100-110A going into the VRM (confirmed by the screenshots of hwinfo64 reading 107A on the MSI board). Over 4 phases means heat output is roughly 24W power dissipation in the form of heat if you go by the On Semi stats instead of the MSI's NIKOS parts. The NIKOS parts appear to be losing about 10W more to heat relative to what On Semi parts would be.

On Sgt Bilko's board which is a CH VI Hero the 1.395V he put into the CPU V_Core required ~ 100W CPU package power and the same thing goes for nosequeponer's CHVI Hero for Ryzen 7 1700X 3.9GHz @ 1.417V (VRM temperature only hit 36°C); bluej511 required just over 90W CPU package power to hit 3.9GHz on his Aorus Gaming 5.

Meanwhile cssorkinman's Xpower was pushing 4GHz @ 1.376V V_core and had a VRM temperature of 53°C and CPU package power of 135W. This could just be a leaky CPU sample but at that ~100A output it is already heating up a bit.

All of this makes sense since the efficiency of the IR3558 parts on the Gaming 5 is between 92 to 94 percent efficient at ~ 5-25A (so figure about 10W losses). The TI CSD87350Q5D NexFETs are about 91-93% efficient between about 5A and 30A (so figure about 13W losses and then add in driver losses).


----------



## ManofGod1000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I get it @Undervolter
> , you hold a personal grudge against Nikos becuse of AM3+.
> 
> But it is just is just that, a grudge.
> 
> So now if you could please be rational and wait to see how these boards perform before writing humongously long posts on how terrible they are, that would be great.
> 
> If they are proven to fail, I will be the first one to say yes, you were right, MSI screwed up again and these transistors probably aren't up for the task.
> 
> But until then, can you leave AM3+ behind and stay impartial?


Undervolter is correct in what he is saying. Thankfully, I caught the leaking before it damaged the board I had replaced the thermal pad with one from Arctic Cooling and placed a fan above to blow down on the vrm heatsink. The board is working solid now and I just sold it to a friend with and FX 8350 and 32 GB of ram. I also make sure to recommend he places the top fan in a downward orientation to help as well.

Although I like the look of the MSI boards, I was not entirely interested in getting another one based upon my 970 Gaming experience. (The new pad did not melt at all, thankfully.)


----------



## sydefekt

Seems to me that X370 Titanium manufacturer took the AM3 design and made an AM4 Titanium version out of it. That would have warranted the branding by itself. However it falls terribly short when you consider the Z170/270 Titanium counterparts as wells as the competing AM4 boards of quality VRMs at lower $.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> On Semi 4C10N , 4C09N , 4C06N , 4C05N should be able to push roughly 25-30A with a 6W power dissipation
> These are essentially what you find on the Gigabyte B350 and ASUS B350 boards.


Keep in mind that they use two 4C06N parallel.
That lowers the RDS(on) by 50% so the power dissipation per phase will be lower than 3W when less than 30A where pulled through each phase.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The NIKOS parts appear to be losing about 10W more to heat relative to what On Semi parts would be.


That would be quite odd since the BK632BA FETs are more efficient than 4C06Ns.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Keep in mind that they use two 4C06N parallel.
> That lowers the RDS(on) by 50% so the power dissipation per phase will be lower than 3W when less than 30A where pulled through each phase.
> That would be quite odd since the BK632BA FETs are more efficient than 4C06Ns.


That's going off what I found in the AMD CPU thread as far as the NIKOS parts go.

185W Power_in - 150W Power_out = 35W power loss


http://www.overclock.net/t/1624139/lightbox/post/25915421/id/2982252

edit: If it's not obvious to people, that is the whole VRM including driver


----------



## Medusa666

So the ASUS Crosshair VI or the Gigabyte K7 has the best VRMs?


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> I was just looking through the specs of my current X58 system and my board has a 24 phase VRM. It has been running an overclocked CPU for the past 8 years no problems at all. So I went looking up the current AM4 motherboards from Gigabyte and they have really poor VRM's this time around. What's up with that? I was all set to get a new Gigabyte board but know I'm not so sure. I will wait for reviews to see how they fair.


24 phase? Really? What model board?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> Why is it flaming presenting some data on the EXACT mosfet model used??? Did i use a characterization or made a personal attack on anyone? Why do you have this vision? Just because you don't like what i wrote? If you think i am flaming, why don't you flag my posts to the mods as flaming?
> 
> If anything, you twisted my words. I never claimed that the mosfets in question will fail. I said actually the opposite, that their problems won't arise probably, because Ryzen can't overclock. And you can't draw current if you can't overclock. Another question is longevity over time compared to others. This doesn't change that they are from a subpar brand and that are cheap for such a costly board.
> 
> Why is it so terrible if someone posts the experience of the same mosfets in AM3+ and of the general brand since 2010? Just because you rushed to say that brand means nothing? My judgement was about brand quality for such an expensive board, not about whether they will burst into flames or not.
> 
> Remember, how all this started? I just wrote few lines, you came to say that brand means nothing:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/110#post_25910705
> 
> I just then explained why brand means something,according to me. Why is this so irritating to you? "You hold a grudge", "You are flaming", "not to say you are a moron", are your phrases, not mine. And i would be the one flaming???
> 
> Bottom line: Nikos mosfets, were never used by other manufacturer for CPU power for any motherboard that was considered "TOP". They were always used for their CHEAPNESS. And if i am wrong, instead of ad hominem attacks, one could simply prove the opposite.


Undervolter, most everyone her appreciates what you have posted over the years about motherboards and the quality of the power phase components. If it helps one person make an informed buying decision then its worthwhile.


----------



## The Stilt

It is rather shocking to see MSI using Niko-Semi fets on a board this expensive








Especially when they are now using one of the best VRM controller (IR Salem) there is, and the board otherwise looks pretty solid as well.
Could someone take a hi-res photo of the back side of the board, showing the drivers in the VRM region?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> It is rather shocking to see MSI using Niko-Semi fets on a board this expensive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Especially when they are now using one of the best VRM controller (IR Salem) there is, and the board otherwise looks pretty solid as well.
> Could someone take a hi-res photo of the back side of the board, showing the drivers in the VRM region?


cssorkinman and some other owners in the XPower thread (http://www.overclock.net/t/1624134/official-msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-am4-owners-club) might be able to help you with that. If anything it should have some tantalum caps and IR3555 parts similar to the Intel Xpower boards on a new revision. All of them should complain to MSI to get a revision 1.1 with proper power delivery for that price.









Maybe it's meant as a GPU overclocking board if MSI gave up on overclocking the Ryzen CPU, it has a GPU power connector 6 pin at the bottom.

From the thread
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kriant*
> 
> Found it.
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/elchapuzasinformatico.com/2017/03/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-review/amp/


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> That's laughable...
> 
> it shouldn't be named Xpower and shouldn't cost $300 USD MSRP. It's using sub $150 board circuitry ....
> 
> No Base clock gen.
> 
> No tantalum caps
> 
> 3 USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports (USB 3.1 Gen 1 = USB 3.0 speed)
> 
> No Sata express
> 
> NIKOS mosfets.
> 
> Come on MSI, what are you thinking!


Just canceled my MSI Titanium back-order due to this. Not going to spend 300 bucks for what essentially amounts to a flashy board with crappy components. Asus Crosshair VI Hero it is assuming they aren't self bricking with the new bios anymore.


----------



## Soggysilicon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Just canceled my MSI Titanium back-order due to this. Not going to spend 300 bucks for what essentially amounts to a flashy board with crappy components. Asus Crosshair VI Hero it is assuming they aren't self bricking with the new bios anymore.


Did the exact same thing!









Now if only the C6H will ever ship I'll be in good shape.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Soggysilicon*
> 
> Did the exact same thing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now if only the C6H will ever ship I'll be in good shape.


Yeah the worst part is the wait







Well at least it was an excuse to use my amazon prime account









The question is will it ship before I get paid again in two weeks when I can actually order the CPU lol, I'm hoping I won't be sitting forlornly at an 1800x with nothing to put it into.


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chrisjames61*
> 
> 24 phase? Really? What model board?


Gigabyte X58A-UD7

http://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-X58A-UD7-rev-10#ov


----------



## wstanci3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Soggysilicon*
> 
> Did the exact same thing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now if only the C6H will ever ship I'll be in good shape.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Yeah the worst part is the wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well at least it was an excuse to use my amazon prime account
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The question is will it ship before I get paid again in two weeks when I can actually order the CPU lol, I'm hoping I won't be sitting forlornly at an 1800x with nothing to put it into.


If ShopBLT is anything to go by, the Hero/Gaming5 will *probably* have much more stock in retailers end of this week and the following.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Soggysilicon*
> 
> Did the exact same thing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now if only the C6H will ever ship I'll be in good shape.


Hopefully the BIOS on the Crosshair VI Hero will be less buggy. I know they're working on it for sure since there has been much backlash on that aspect of it. It's a solid motherboard for sure and Elmor is actively helping users with their issues over on http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> That's incorrect, there's no hardware revision. The bricking issue is fixed with 0902 bios, just update to that after getting the board and you'll be fine.


The CH VI Hero has BCLK overclocking as well as the Asrock Fatal1ty Professional (5GB LAN is sort of superfluous but the Power/Reset button is nice if you are overclocking outside of a case), Asrock Taichi , and Gigabyte Gaming K7.

The only thing really lacking on the CH VI Hero is PS/2 for keyboards (a niche use) & dual M.2.


----------



## Soggysilicon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Yeah the worst part is the wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well at least it was an excuse to use my amazon prime account
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The question is will it ship before I get paid again in two weeks when I can actually order the CPU lol, I'm hoping I won't be sitting forlornly at an 1800x with nothing to put it into.


To late for me!!!! My 1800x showed up a couple days ago...










Waiting for Vega anyways as a GPU upgrade... so whats a few more days... weeks... months...


----------



## Soggysilicon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Hopefully the BIOS on the Crosshair VI Hero will be less buggy. I know they're working on it for sure since there has been much backlash on that aspect of it. It's a solid motherboard for sure and Elmor is actively helping users with their issues over on http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread.
> The CH VI Hero has BCLK overclocking as well as the Asrock Fatal1ty Professional (5GB LAN is sort of superfluous but the Power/Reset button is nice if you are overclocking outside of a case), Asrock Taichi , and Gigabyte Gaming K7.
> 
> The only thing really lacking on the CH VI Hero is PS/2 for keyboards (a niche use) & dual M.2.


The Hero for me is a compromise... I don't want to fabricate a mount for my old trusty EK HF Supreme "Gold"... minimizing shop time... and the Base Clock for PLL/DLL tuning really should be on all the x370 boards, the lack of it is akin to a fancy new suit complete with sandals...









Shame to lose the PS/2 KB really useful for getting out of some jams, but I will very likely never utilize more than one M.2 as a pig trough (winblows storage device). The 3 amp header is nice... but I need to look at the traces and check for isolation... Already have a 150w fan controller... All in all I think the Taichi is the best board for the freedom coupons, but that availability!









Who knows I may even toss on a string of RGB lights for the giggles...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Keep in mind that they use two 4C06N parallel.
> That lowers the RDS(on) by 50% so the power dissipation per phase will be lower than 3W when less than 30A where pulled through each phase.
> That would be quite odd since the BK632BA FETs are more efficient than 4C06Ns.
> 
> 
> 
> That's going off what I found in the AMD CPU thread as far as the NIKOS parts go.
> 
> 185W Power_in - 150W Power_out = 35W power loss
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624139/lightbox/post/25915421/id/2982252
> 
> edit: If it's not obvious to people, that is the whole VRM including driver
Click to expand...

I'd sure like someone else to post a picture showing the same test and information with any other board at the settings I was using. Not sure you can trust software for all of those things but it would be interesting.

My rig is in a lian li F9 case at the moment, being cooled by an H-100 , there is very little airflow in the area of the VRMs - I'm not concerned.

Having good luck so far - no problems getting it up and running -15 minutes after installing the hardware I was up and running @ 4 ghz cl 14 1T 3200 mhz without touching anything but ram voltage and setting AXMP. I've seen others have a far worse time of it . No update so far on the bios, maybe they got it closer to right than the others?

Later I did set up another HDD just for experimenting with ram speeds and upon trying for 4 dimms at cl14 3200 , I managed to bork that os install - but I was going directly against what they say it can do so it's all on me - not a big deal at any rate.

Anyone wanna take a stab at IBT AVX at 4 GHZ and post screenies one while its running and one when complete?

EDIT:
Put a fan on the VRM area and ran it again




Almost Identical socket and core temps aren't they?


----------



## Nighthog

Alright my CPU arrived and have it on my desk with some memory. Should be about 24hours and I should have my motherboard if all goes alright.

I think I made a mistake not to order a new PSU. Lots of dinky old ones around and the main one in the current computer. It's a oldie. The others are ancient.

Does Ryzen need modern PSU? Or does a 9.5year old Corsair HX620 work if I pull it out of my main computer?


----------



## chew*

FYI just want to point this out..

There is no such thing as a real 8 10 12 16 phase etc etc.

There is 6 and lower. There is redundant phases. 6+6 etc etc (12 phase if your in marketing )

There are 4 phase alignments and 2+2 there are even 3.

6 is plenty for the vcore providing the components used are not cheap

4 might be overkill for SOC especially if quality components are used for your typical air/water crowd.

Redundancy does not hurt in most cases but in many if the pwm is built with quality components redundancy is not necessary.


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> It is rather shocking to see MSI using Niko-Semi fets on a board this expensive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Especially when they are now using one of the best VRM controller (IR Salem) there is, and the board otherwise looks pretty solid as well.
> Could someone take a hi-res photo of the back side of the board, showing the drivers in the VRM region?


Is this what you need? IR3598 at the back.





Also some pics of the memory side.


----------



## br0da

Hopefully they are in dual drivers mode.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> Is this what you need? IR3598 at the back.


Thanks.
Unbelievable, IR35201 + IR3598 combined with Niko-Semi fets.
Casting pearls before swine, etc


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Thanks.
> Unbelievable, IR35201 + IR3598 combined with Niko-Semi fets.
> Casting pearls before swine, etc


Whats up Stilt long time no see.

And yah kind of blows your mind huh?

I called it on review day. Boards will matter.

Now the big question can we get an extremely well built PWM on a no fluff No crazy bugs board with good bios support at an affordable cost with some usefull OC features for those that want to fool around on hwbot moments.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> Is this what you need? IR3598 at the back.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> Unbelievable, IR35201 + IR3598 combined with Niko-Semi fets.
> Casting pearls before swine, etc
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Thanks.
> Unbelievable, IR35201 + IR3598 combined with Niko-Semi fets.
> Casting pearls before swine, etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whats up Stilt long time no see.
> 
> And yah kind of blows your mind huh?
> 
> I called it on review day. Boards will matter.
> 
> Now the big question can we get an extremely well built PWM on a no fluff No crazy bugs board with good bios support at an affordable cost with some usefull OC features for those that want to fool around on hwbot moments.
Click to expand...

You guys are just lucky I don't go sub zero with my MSI's


----------



## chew*

I will OC anything but in the LN2 game right now as it stands current boards offered if you entered a low clock 5g challenge with the MSI you are crippled and fighting a losing battle. It will be impossible to fight the effeciency of boards running 3200 ram on 24x memory divider unless your benching 3d


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I will OC anything but in the LN2 game right now as it stands current boards offered if you entered a low clock 5g challenge with the MSI you are crippled and fighting a losing battle. It will be impossible to fight the effeciency of boards running 3200 ram on 24x memory divider unless your benching 3d


I was just poking the bear(s)







.

I don't have the patience to be a competitive overclocker - memory tuning separates the men from the boys and that takes a lot of time to squeeze the last bit of performance out of a rig.

I do see a definite advantage in that area with my CHV-Z's vs my other AM3+ boards.

On limited cooling however , it's had for any of my boards to beat the 990 GD - 80


----------



## chew*

Ehh imo platform + ln2. = not ready yet.

Fools rush in.


----------



## AlphaC

http://www.clubedohardware.com.br/artigos/placas-mae/placa-m%C3%A3e-gigabyte-ab350-gaming-3-r36672/?nbcpage=5
Gigabyte AB350-Gaming 3 = On Semi 4C10N + 4C06N driven by ISL 95712 PWM controller


----------



## SliceTbone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Hopefully the BIOS on the Crosshair VI Hero will be less buggy. I know they're working on it for sure since there has been much backlash on that aspect of it. It's a solid motherboard for sure and Elmor is actively helping users with their issues over on http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread.
> The CH VI Hero has BCLK overclocking as well as the Asrock Fatal1ty Professional (5GB LAN is sort of superfluous but the Power/Reset button is nice if you are overclocking outside of a case), Asrock Taichi , and Gigabyte Gaming K7.
> 
> The only thing really lacking on the CH VI Hero is PS/2 for keyboards (a niche use) & dual M.2.


I was thinking Taichi would have the BCLK as well?


----------



## chew*

4 boards do. Ch6 taichi fatality gaming 7


----------



## Nighthog

Called in sick for work. Damn headache and nausea. A plus... my motherboard arrived the moment I felt like getting up from bed.

Walked to the store where it arrived. Though.. that walk. wobbly.

Gonna throw this thing inside an old case and stuff to see if it boots. Not gonna take parts yet from main rig. Want to have it handy if there is trouble.


----------



## BuZADAM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> So the ASUS Crosshair VI or the Gigabyte K7 has the best VRMs?


+1 Which mb have the best vrm ?


----------



## Redwoodz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ehh imo platform + ln2. = not ready yet.
> 
> Fools rush in.


Good to see you around.







I am bidding my time as well.


----------



## Nighthog

Ok took a while. Removing old hardware was troublesome as the motherboard spacers/stands didn't want to unscrew themselves properly. Just spinning in place.

There were other trouble with PSU, fan was hitting something. Removed the fan guard seemed to fix that.

But at last I could boot without issues. Entered bios and all seemed well.

F4 Bios on this one. Did a quick test with the X.M.P profile and it loaded the memory settings without issue for now. No hard drive or OS on the system yet.

Ryzen 7 1700 with Wraith Spire cooler
Gigabyte Ga-AB350-Gaming 3
Corsair 2x8Gb 2666C16 1.2v memory. (CMK16GX4M2A2666C16R ver 5.30)
ATi 5450 512Mb.

And various spare junk parts to house and power it.
Pioneer DVD drive
A Old Cooler Mater Centurion 5 ATX case and some junk PSU 500Watt Q-tec, didn't want to use the other one that was even junkier.
12V line was only like 150watts on the other one.

This for a quick system test.. Took 4hours.


----------



## hang10z

Not to derail this thread, but I have searched and cannot seem to find a definitive answer yet. How does the ASUS X370 Prime Pro look VRM wise? Does it use the same components as the C6 Hero but less # of phases?

I can certainly take photos if they are needed once it comes in, never fun waiting for a newegg shipment. lol

Thanks for the assistance.


----------



## br0da

Got it in here, for photos klick the "B1" link in the "Quelle" column.
The controller is the same as the one on the CH6 but it's operating in 6+2 mode instead of 4+2.
ASUS is using six independent IR drivers for the CPU VCC on this board so there are six true phases with the same NexFETs as on the CH6. No doubling.
A very interesting design I'd say.


----------



## Nighthog

Ok, made the rebuild with main computer parts.

Just swapped in the hard drives, gpu + PSU.

You know it it's tricky to take out a full custom watercooling loop from a case without draining the system and taking it out intact to get at some parts.

Windows10 finds my new system fine (no reinstall, just straight transfer) and driver cd was handy for lan drivers









Ryzen 7 1700
GA-AB350-Gaming 3
Corsair LPX 2x8Gb 2666C16
XFX RX 480 RS 4Gb

Corsair HX620 PSU

Cruxial MX300 525Gb
3x old hardrives 7200rpm
Pioneer dvd-rw drive.

My watercooling will be installed as soon as I get my AM4 adapter.

CPU-Z:
http://valid.x86.fr/raz6ir


----------



## hang10z

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Got it in here, for photos klick the "B1" link in the "Quelle" column.
> The controller is the same as the one on the CH6 but it's operating in 6+2 mode instead of 4+2.
> ASUS is using six independent IR drivers for the CPU VCC on this board so there are six true phases with the same NexFETs as on the CH6. No doubling.
> A very interesting design I'd say.


Awesome thanks for that info... it looks like I most likely won't have to replace the board then, that should work great. It lacks some features but I do not see myself missing most of them. Maybe the second m.2 slot... lol

Thanks again for the quick reply and for helping me out.


----------



## ihatelolcats

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Got it in here, for photos klick the "B1" link in the "Quelle" column.
> The controller is the same as the one on the CH6 but it's operating in 6+2 mode instead of 4+2.
> ASUS is using six independent IR drivers for the CPU VCC on this board so there are six true phases with the same NexFETs as on the CH6. No doubling.
> A very interesting design I'd say.


nice post


----------



## Nighthog

A neat feature is the 6 temp sensors in various spots on this board. Though I've yet to find software to see them but inside the BIOS.

VRM was ~37C when I first booted and cpu 33C~idling.

I've yet to see any stability issues. My windows sadly needs to be reactivated, windows servers seem down so can't do it right now.

I ran some Memtest in windows and they went through 1 round of all memory without errors, my Corsair LPX 2666C16 works like a charm.
It's late today and this has taken a toll and I'm really tired.

EDIT:
Found gigabyte app that shows the temps

Running some Prime95 blend or smallFFT, VRM reach 60C+
3200Mhz ~1.1volt (all auto settings, not under load 1 cpu constanly boosts 3750Mhz with 1.380volts, so voltage goes down under load...)


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I called it on review day. Boards will matter.
> 
> Now the big question *can we get an extremely well built PWM on a no fluff No crazy bugs board with good bios support at an affordable cost with some usefull OC features* for those that want to fool around on hwbot moments.


^ This is all I want to know right now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.clubedohardware.com.br/artigos/placas-mae/placa-m%C3%A3e-gigabyte-ab350-gaming-3-r36672/?nbcpage=5
> Gigabyte AB350-Gaming 3 = On Semi 4C10N + 4C06N driven by ISL 95712 PWM controller


So for the layman...is that good or bad?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> ^ This is all I want to know right now.
> So for the layman...is that good or bad?


Depends on how high you want to overclock and with what voltage. It probably isn't going to help much as far as overclocking past 3.8GHz goes: Nighthog states that the VRM hits 60°C+ even when at 1.380V boost. I'm not sure if that is improper LLC (load line calibration settings) since they are experiencing V_droop (aka. voltage drop) under load and have everything auto.

4 phase with 25A-30A continuous VRM parts = at the limit for 100A that 4GHz normally requires however the board appears to band-aid this by running two 4C06N lowside per phase instead of one. I've seen 65°C VRM temperature listed for a MSI Tomahawk @1.36 V.

Ideally you'd want 6+ decent phases (i.e. 40A+ PowIRstage or 40A NexFET) for the CPU like the ASUS X370 Prime Pro (midrange) if not doubled up like the Asrock Fatal1ty K4 which had similar issues with 60°C VRM (not terrible but getting hot) under overclocks. If only the ASUS X370 Prime Pro board had OC-ing features such as clear CMOS + better memory support (and memory phases).

Split between 4 phases = on 25% of the time
Split between 6 phases = on 16.7% of the time
It's a difference of phases turning on an extra 7-8% of the time.

Cheap boards are running 3+3 doubled to 6+3 , or 4+3 with LowRDs(on) mosfets such as those from OnSemi's , Sinopower , or NIKOS. Midrange are doing 6+4 with decent phases (Gigabyte Gaming 5/ ASUS Prime Pro) or doubling up cheaper mosfets (X370 Fatal1ty K4 / Killer SLI). Higher end OCing boards such as CH VI Hero , Biostar X370GT7, or Fatal1ty Professional are running 4+2 or 6+2 decent phases (NexFETs) doubled to 8+4 or 12+4.


----------



## Nighthog

Seems the VRM will need some serious help if you want to OC on this board. Passive temps aren't great at all loading up all 16threads in Prime95.

Currently running 3500Mhz (+0.000v offset = 1.176~1.188 cpu-z) and VRM are at 76...77... suddenly increasing (was 72C a moment ago) 78... small FFT.

Active cooling directed seems recommended.

79C degrees.

...

80C hit now on VRM MOS and 70C on CPU


----------



## PsyM4n

It's fine. Standard MOSFETs are meant to work at high temperatures, around 110-130c. If it goes above 130c it's a problem and above ~150c things will eventually smoke.

This does not apply to DrMOS. These are meant to run cooler. Consider their limit at 20c lower than the limit of typical FETs.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> It's fine. Standard MOSFETs are meant to work at high temperatures, around 110-130c. If it goes above 130c it's a problem and above ~150c things will eventually smoke.
> 
> This does not apply to DrMOS. These are meant to run cooler. Consider their limit at 20c lower than the limit of typical FETs.


Are you sure? Looking at my experience on my older Gigabyte Am2+ motherboard with lowRSD(on) 4-phase no heatsink when the "VRM" started to go above 70 degrees things started to melt and smell burnt. (though I have no idea where exactly that temp sensor was so it might not be the mosfet temp itself but in the area close by.)
With some active cooling on the vrm on that board that temp decreased a lot.


----------



## PsyM4n

Yeah, for the mosfet to smoke, temperature exceeded 150c.


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Are you sure? Looking at my experience on my older Gigabyte Am2+ motherboard with lowRSD(on) 4-phase no heatsink when the "VRM" started to go above 70 degrees things started to melt and smell burnt. (though I have no idea where exactly that temp sensor was so it might not be the mosfet temp itself but in the area close by.)
> With some active cooling on the vrm on that board that temp decreased a lot.


While mosfets are usually rated for max tolerace of 125-150C, this doesn't mean that it's fine for sustained periods of time. Which is why motherboard manufacturers have implemented the VRM throttling, which in a Biostar motherboard i have kicks in at 90C and in an Asrock at around 100C (and that motherboard is in the top 5 ranking for most RMAed motherboards in the 1st year of use).

So, unless motherboard manufacturers are clueless, i 'd consider 90C as maximum safety threshold for sustained use. The lower, the better. 70C shouldn't be a problem for the mosfets.

But, there is something to say about motherboard readings. Not all motherboards have the sensors at the same place and not all software can reliably read the sensors of the motherboard. For example, my guess is, that if you put a sensor in AM4 motherboards, more to the right of the CPU mosfets (closer to the RAM mosfets), it will show higher temp than a sensor positioned more to the left. Because of the placement in L of the mosfets. The best thing , is to have an IR thermometer and manually read temperatures on the back of the motherboard. When i did so in my AM3+ motherboards, there were temperature differences within the mosfet area (the outer mosfets were cooler than the inner ones).


----------



## br0da

- edited -


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Seems the VRM will need some serious help if you want to OC on this board. Passive temps aren't great at all loading up all 16threads in Prime95.
> 
> Currently running 3500Mhz (+0.000v offset = 1.176~1.188 cpu-z) and VRM are at 76...77... suddenly increasing (was 72C a moment ago) 78... small FFT.
> 
> Active cooling directed seems recommended.
> 
> 79C degrees.
> 
> ...
> 
> 80C hit now on VRM MOS and 70C on CPU


Same outcome I found on gaming 5.

No big surprise when I used active cooling I was able to get it stable higher.......

The problem I always have is i bench on a box..........users run a pc in a case some with bad airflow.....so if i notice an issue on a box i must make it a point to let the endusers know what i am experiencing.


----------



## bardacuda

So...so far it seems the ASUS Prime Pro, ASRock Killer SLI, and Fatality K4 are the contenders for the sweet spot of overclockability vs. affordability.

The Gigabyte Gaming 5 is more expensive and underwhelming compared to the 3 boards already mentioned.

Anything MSI = big NOPE (for me at least)...and the Gigabyte B350 Gaming 3, ASUS B350 Prime Plus, and the ASRock B350 Pro4 are kinda crappy (only 3 or 4 cheap true phases) if I understand correctly.

Not sure where the two Biostar GT5 boards stand.

The CH 6 Hero, Taichi, Fatality Pro Gaming (non-K4), and GT7 would be the best overclocking options if one was willing to spend that much.

That leaves the Gigabyte Gaming K7 as the only other unknown and a little on the expensive side.

Does this seem like a fair assessment?


----------



## chew*

I read somewhere gaming 7 was reportedly $7usd more than gaming 5? sounds a bit far fetched if you ask me.

My breakdown of it is this

B350 ASUS and GIGA top line B350's 3.6 all core realistic 24/7 or fine if you just run a R7 @ stock.

I have the ASUS bios needs work. It can bench up to 4.1 but that's Benchable not realistic 24/7

In the low end x370 category i'm going to go out on a limb and say ASUS and GIGA

Both Have decent PWM both need bios work......

In the top end x370

My picks are ASROCK taichi and the ASUS ch6 unless it is confirmed later that the Gaming 7 beefed up Gaming 5's PWM and they change the heatsinks........

Once again both the ASUS and the Taichi appear to need bios work.

Seems to be a pattern here in the bios department lol.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> So...so far it seems the ASUS Prime Pro, ASRock Killer SLI, and Fatality K4 are the contenders for the sweet spot of overclockability vs. affordability.
> 
> The Gigabyte Gaming 5 is more expensive and underwhelming compared to the 3 boards already mentioned.
> 
> Anything MSI = big NOPE (for me at least)...and the Gigabyte B350 Gaming 3, ASUS B350 Prime Plus, and the ASRock B350 Pro4 are kinda crappy (only 3 or 4 cheap true phases) if I understand correctly.
> 
> Not sure where the two Biostar GT5 boards stand.
> 
> The CH 6 Hero, Taichi, Fatality Pro Gaming (non-K4), and GT7 would be the best overclocking options if one was willing to spend that much.
> 
> That leaves the Gigabyte Gaming K7 as the only other unknown and a little on the expensive side.
> 
> Does this seem like a fair assessment?


Not really. Gaming5/7 uses the same VRM configuration, which is pretty decent. I would put them as the same level as Prime PRO/KillerSli/Fat k4. Probably even above if you consider the whole package.

But all those boards are solid.

I will stay way from MSI models as well.


----------



## chew*

It depends they could swap parts out for higher current capability without changing PCB or VRM configuration. If they do that and change heatsinks then I would be willing to give it a shot ( gaming 7 )


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I read somewhere gaming 7 was reportedly $7usd more than gaming 5? sounds a bit far fetched if you ask me.


Here in Canada the Gaming 5 is $280 and the Gaming 7 is $305. The other 3 boards I mentioned in that class are between $220 and $250.

For comparison the cheapest of the "good" boards is the CH VI Hero at $330.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> My breakdown of it is this
> 
> B350 ASUS and GIGA top line B350's 3.6 all core realistic 24/7 or fine if you just run a R7 @ stock.
> 
> I have the ASUS bios needs work. It can bench up to 4.1 but that's Benchable not realistic 24/7
> 
> In the low end x370 category i'm going to go out on a limb and say ASUS and GIGA
> 
> Both Have decent PWM both need bios work......
> 
> In the top end x370
> 
> My picks are ASROCK taichi and the ASUS ch6 unless it is confirmed later that the Gaming 7 beefed up Gaming 5's PWM and they change the heatsinks........
> 
> Once again both the ASUS and the Taichi appear to need bios work.
> 
> Seems to be a pattern here in the bios department lol.


Thanks for the input! Hopefully ASUS can fix its issues with a simple BIOS update.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> Not really. Gaming5/7 uses the same VRM configuration, which is pretty decent. I would put them as the same level as Prime PRO/KillerSli/Fat k4. Probably even above if you consider the whole package.
> 
> But all those boards are solid.
> 
> I will stay way from MSI models as well.


I think I am going to go with the X370 Prime Pro @ $220 CAD. Price differences probably make more sense in USD but here the Gaming 5 is $50 more @ $280. Just waiting for a cheque to come in but hopefully I can get everything ordered by the end of the week or early next week and have some numbers/results for people late next week or last week of March.


----------



## chew*

Can anyone find me a high res shot of the ASMEDIA chip on the ASUS or ASROCK ( asrock is below PCI x slot 1).


----------



## Nighthog

Well currently testing memory OC on this gigabtye board.

Running my 2666Mhz @ 2933Mhz same timings more voltage. 1.350V set but gives 1.368Volts, no boot or other issues, Memtest in background.
I'm unsure if I should push more on cpu before I get my Am4 bracket for my water. It will help keeping down temps on VRM by brute force in proximity .

Hmm just noticed CPU-Z saying my memory is "single" ranked. I thought it was double ranked. struck gold?


----------



## etre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Well currently testing memory OC on this gigabtye board.
> 
> Running my 2666Mhz @ 2933Mhz same timings more voltage. 1.350V set but gives 1.368Volts, no boot or other issues, Memtest in background.
> I'm unsure if I should push more on cpu before I get my Am4 bracket for my water. It will help keeping down temps on VRM by brute force in proximity .
> 
> Hmm just noticed CPU-Z saying my memory is "single" ranked. I thought it was double ranked. struck gold?


https://community.amd.com/community/gaming/blog/2017/03/14/tips-for-building-a-better-amd-ryzen-system

DDR4 Speed (MT/s)
Memory Ranks DIMM Quantities
2667 Single 2
2400 Dual 2
2133 Single 4
1866 Dual 4


----------



## ANSZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I read somewhere gaming 7 was reportedly $7usd more than gaming 5? sounds a bit far fetched if you ask me.
> 
> My breakdown of it is this
> 
> B350 ASUS and GIGA top line B350's 3.6 all core realistic 24/7 or fine if you just run a R7 @ stock.
> 
> I have the ASUS bios needs work. It can bench up to 4.1 but that's Benchable not realistic 24/7
> 
> In the low end x370 category i'm going to go out on a limb and say ASUS and GIGA
> 
> Both Have decent PWM both need bios work......
> 
> In the top end x370
> 
> My picks are ASROCK taichi and the ASUS ch6 unless it is confirmed later that the Gaming 7 beefed up Gaming 5's PWM and they change the heatsinks........
> 
> Once again both the ASUS and the Taichi appear to need bios work.
> 
> Seems to be a pattern here in the bios department lol.


The AX370-Gaming K7 will be MSRP $209.99 in the US. As far as analysis of the VRM, I wasn't able to get a look at them.


----------



## chew*

Nevermind found what i'm looking for,


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> It depends they could swap parts out for higher current capability without changing PCB and heatsinks. If they do that then I would be willing to give it a shot ( gaming 7 )


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Here in Canada the Gaming 5 is $280 and the Gaming 7 is $305. The other 3 boards I mentioned in that class are between $220 and $250.
> 
> For comparison the cheapest of the "good" boards is the CH VI Hero at $330.
> Thanks for the input! Hopefully ASUS can fix its issues with a simple BIOS update.
> I think I am going to go with the X370 Prime Pro @ $220 CAD. Price differences probably make more sense in USD but here the Gaming 5 is $50 more @ $280. Just waiting for a cheque to come in but hopefully I can get everything ordered by the end of the week or early next week and have some numbers/results for people late next week or last week of March.


Well...it may be worth the extra for the Gaming 5 if you want a much better onboard audio quality. Creative X-FI MB5 can improve onboard audio.

In any case, they are both solid choices.

Personally, i dont think the top boards are worth it. Ryzen OC is really limited by the chip, not really by the board.


----------



## BuZADAM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Seems the VRM will need some serious help if you want to OC on this board. Passive temps aren't great at all loading up all 16threads in Prime95.
> 
> Currently running 3500Mhz (+0.000v offset = 1.176~1.188 cpu-z) and VRM are at 76...77... suddenly increasing (was 72C a moment ago) 78... small FFT.
> 
> Active cooling directed seems recommended.
> 
> 79C degrees.
> 
> ...
> 
> 80C hit now on VRM MOS and 70C on CPU


Do you have any fps drop issue , caused by high temp vrm ?


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BuZADAM*
> 
> Do you have any fps drop issue , caused by high temp vrm ?


Don't know yet. I have no idea what the throttling temperature is yet. Just stress testing and it seemed to do well so far even with the temps that high thus far.

Would need to stress the VRM more with higher clock and voltage to know for sure where the limits are. Got my Am4 adapter in transit so in a while I'll be able to test my water on this thing.
Should find limits quite quick with that.


----------



## BuZADAM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Don't know yet. I have no idea what the throttling temperature is yet. Just stress testing and it seemed to do well so far even with the temps that high thus far.
> 
> Would need to stress the VRM more with higher clock and voltage to know for sure where the limits are. Got my Am4 adapter in transit so in a while I'll be able to test my water on this thing.
> Should find limits quite quick with that.


Did you try any game in ?

ı used 990fxa-ud7 , ud3 and ud3 gaming . all have throttling issue . because passive vrm cooling. if you test with game and any get this issue please tell me . thanks.


----------



## etre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BuZADAM*
> 
> Did you try any game in ?
> 
> ı used 990fxa-ud7 , ud3 and ud3 gaming . all have throttling issue . because passive vrm cooling. if you test with game and any get this issue please tell me . thanks.


Irrelevant for this discussion. Those are different socket


----------



## BuZADAM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *etre*
> 
> Irrelevant for this discussion. Those are different socket


ı dont agree. vrm is vrm . still on mb's cooling passive and vrm too hot.

even socket diffrent , no matters getting too hot vrms
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *etre*
> 
> Irrelevant for this discussion. Those are different socket


ı dont agree with you because ,

even if socket different , no matters , vrm still too hot and cause throttle , fps drop. not enough passive cooling . mybe passive ok when mb maker using big hs than this.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> It's fine. Standard MOSFETs are meant to work at high temperatures, around 110-130c. If it goes above 130c it's a problem and above ~150c things will eventually smoke.
> 
> This does not apply to DrMOS. These are meant to run cooler. Consider their limit at 20c lower than the limit of typical FETs.


The spec sheets usually list 25°C and 70°C for all the ratings , in the case of the 4C06N it was 80°C.

So anything above 80°C is likely going to be inefficient power wise and/or thermal wise.

From 4C06N datasheet 
www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C06N-D.PDF
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Seems the VRM will need some serious help if you want to OC on this board. Passive temps aren't great at all loading up all 16threads in Prime95.
> 
> Currently running 3500Mhz (+0.000v offset = 1.176~1.188 cpu-z) and VRM are at 76...77... suddenly increasing (was 72C a moment ago) 78... small FFT.
> 
> Active cooling directed seems recommended.
> 
> 79C degrees.
> 
> ...
> 
> 80C hit now on VRM MOS and 70C on CPU


VRM at 80°C at 1.188V seems odd to me , are you sure it's right?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> It depends they could swap parts out for higher current capability without changing PCB or VRM configuration. If they do that and change heatsinks then I would be willing to give it a shot ( gaming 7 )


If they use the IR3555 60A PowIRStage mosfets on the K7, it'd be on par with the Crosshair VI Hero.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ANSZ*
> 
> The AX370-Gaming K7 will be MSRP $209.99 in the US. As far as analysis of the VRM, I wasn't able to get a look at them.


If this is the case, please enact a price cut program on the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 5 once stock of the motherboard gets to normal levels (maybe in a quarter year). The price differential between a $210 Gigabyte K7 and Gaming 5 at $195 seems to be iffy. I believe the Gaming 5 would sell better at $175-180.

The reasoning for lowering Gaming 5 pricing is it doesn't have a BCLK (Taichi does) , the Prime Pro with no OC features is $160, and the Pro Carbon from MSI is $180 (people that don't know anything about VRM will think the Pro carbon is stronger when it isn't, this also lacks BCLK). It needs to be a compelling purchase over a Gaming 3 with ALC1220 + RGB stuff on it.


----------



## ANSZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> If this is the case, please enact a price cut program on the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 5 once stock of the motherboard gets to normal levels (maybe in a quarter year). The price differential between a $210 Gigabyte K7 and Gaming 5 at $195 seems to be iffy. I believe the Gaming 5 would sell better at $175-180.
> 
> The reasoning for lowering Gaming 5 pricing is it doesn't have a BCLK (Taichi does) , the Prime Pro with no OC features is $160, and the Pro Carbon from MSI is $180 (people that don't know anything about VRM will think the Pro carbon is stronger when it isn't, this also lacks BCLK). It needs to be a compelling purchase over a Gaming 3 with ALC1220 + RGB stuff on it.


We are also releasing a more mainstream price on our AX370-Gaming K5 at MSRP $169.99 which will have BLCK support releasing in April. Pricing might change and stabilize for the Gaming 5 but no word on that.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ANSZ*
> 
> We are also releasing a more mainstream price on our AX370-Gaming K5 at MSRP $169.99 which will have BLCK support releasing in April. Pricing might change and stabilize for the Gaming 5 but no word on that.


Any word on the VRM ? Hopefully 6 phase CPU + _2 or 4 phase SOC_ with 40amps IR3553 also? I have seen some earlier shots with 4+3 , if those are also using 4C06N + 4C10N then it will not be a great value.

$150-170 boards are going to see a lot more attention when Ryzen 5 rolls around (likely April 11 if rumors are true)


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> If they use the IR3555 60A PowIRStage mosfets on the K7, it'd be on par with the Crosshair VI Hero.


/\ This.

Having benched a ton of gigabyte results on ln2 during deneb thuban era i can say then they were very reliable and consistant. I beat the living hell out of them and they took it every single bench session, boards lasted through 12 hours straight ln2 abuse and did this repeatedly 4-5 times before i would have to replace.

I would love to be able to do this again.

Currently as it stands i find myself a bit hesitant.

This is how reliable you used to be.
http://www.chew.ln2cooling.com/?Qwd=./MichiganEvent-1&Qiv=thumbs&Qis=M


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> If they use the IR3555 60A PowIRStage mosfets on the K7, it'd be on par with the Crosshair VI Hero.
> 
> 
> 
> /\ This.
> 
> Having benched a ton of gigabyte results on ln2 during deneb thuban era i can say then they were very reliable and consistant. I beat the living hell out of them and they took it every single bench session, boards lasted through 12 hours straight ln2 abuse and did this repeatedly 4-5 times before i would have to replace.
> 
> I would love to be able to do this again.
> 
> Currently as it stands i find myself a bit hesitant.
> 
> This is how reliable you used to be.
> http://ln2cooling.com/OC_Events/Michigan_OC_1
Click to expand...

990 UD 5 is the only Giga I have ever tried. The hardware is rock solid, the bios is awful as is easytune.

I've decided to give them another try however - X370 K-7 inbound.


----------



## Zhany

My very first computer build used a gigabyte board back in the LGA 775 days. It was rock solid, bios wasn't too too bad but this was before UEFI days, easy-tune was horrid though lol.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 990 UD 5 is the only Giga I have ever tried. The hardware is rock solid, the bios is awful as is easytune.
> 
> I've decided to give them another try however - X370 K-7 inbound.


Will you be returning the Xpower if the K7 turns out to be decent?


----------



## chew*

While we have what appears to be a gigabyte rep here i'm going to say this.

You (Gigabyte) shipped me from the USA as well as my buddy youngpro and 2 other overclockers to work on getting 790 polished up performance and bios wise.

I also worked with you on 890.

990 i did not and was planning on a extended leave. Interesting based on above post on 990 bios









Back then if a board failed on my bench you had me ship it out asap to inspect it. Now its drop correspondence and ignore? Seriously?

Back then you applied my input and ended up with a solid product. Now? Just read the forums...

Now i have never been anything but brutally honest. It's not me trying to be insulting. Im just a straight shooter. I dont say well um and beat around the bush.

That said im linked in a bunch of emails. Apparently someone took offense. Im sorry but it is nothing more than constructive criticism.

You have a well known AMD overclocker willing to work with you and your bios team and your product. Its a free resource so why not use it to your advantage?

My 2c.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 990 UD 5 is the only Giga I have ever tried. The hardware is rock solid, the bios is awful as is easytune.
> 
> I've decided to give them another try however - X370 K-7 inbound.
> 
> 
> 
> Will you be returning the Xpower if the K7 turns out to be decent?
Click to expand...

No way - the Titanium is awesome - 4025 mhz all cores stable on default core voltage and LLC setting - not going to screw that up









I think I'll use it as my daily driver in my Stryker case - will look great in there.

I'll set up the K7 on the Thermaltake P-5 - should really contrast that "case" well.


----------



## bardacuda

Have to say I am a little wary of going Gigabyte myself. The last motherboard I bought from Gigabyte showed up with bent pins...although I was able to RMA through the merchant but I did have to pay for return shipping. The last 2 video cards I bought from Gigabyte had poor ASIC quality chips compared to the other brands (~60-ish % vs. 75%+) and, at least from what I had read of other peoples' experience, it seemed common for Gigabyte cards to generally have lower quality chips. Any of these could just be chalked up to bad luck and skewed info, but...

I also had to RMA one of the video cards due to artifacting, and it was rejected because I had taken the heatsink off and cleaned it. Now...I could understand why that could be an issue, but in this case I made sure to read the warranty terms before doing so, and it specifically said that lack of proper maintenance would void the warranty. It was never overvolted and in fact the voltage was locked (something the other board manufacturers didn't restrict on the same model) and the temps never got above mid-70s C.

It stands to reason, in my mind at least, that letting the heatsink get full of dust would constitute lack of proper maintenance. So basically the only way not to void the warranty is to be NASA and only use Gigabyte video cards in clean rooms where they build space telescopes. You're not allowed to let it get dusty, but you're not allowed to do a careful job of cleaning it and a proper re-application of thermal paste and bring the thermals back to normal either. The kicker though, is that I also could not get any response to my e-mails asking for clarification on this beforehand or during the RMA process.

Again, I can admit that I may have just been unlucky or even exercised poor judgement, which could have happened with any other vendor...but to have those issues coupled with the non-existent customer service just put me off.


----------



## Tasm

Gigabyte makes great boards. AM4 is no exception.

Of course opinions will vary from personal experience, but the RMA/DOA statistics can prove many wrong.

GA has one of the lowest RMA/DOA rates on the market.


----------



## chew*

Statistics mean absolutely nothing to me. Then there is the X factor.

If company A sell 5000 units has to replace 100 and company B sells 500 has to replace 10....well yes i guess the stats are in there favor







Everything is a matter of perspective. Then there is rejected rma to consider.

https://youtu.be/g8tIk5v6JnE

https://youtu.be/DSRuV1g7X18

Excuse my lack of coherency made these while half asleep

I don't play favorites. I'm not a fanboy. I am a fan of what works.

Please tell me i broke it because i have no clue what i'm doing


----------



## etre

You might consider that is just bad practice in the shipping chain, in US.

I also notice when reading reviews how battered and abused the packaging is looking.

In Europe, the situation is better. I usually read the feedback from other buyers and doa parts are very uncommon. While on newegg you see doa comments often.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *etre*
> 
> You might consider that is just bad practice in the shipping chain, in US.
> 
> I also notice when reading reviews how battered and abused the packaging is looking.
> 
> In Europe, the situation is better. I usually read the feedback from other buyers and doa parts are very uncommon. While on newegg you see doa comments often.


Why assume it died in shipping? It is/was my review board. I think it was pretty well protected. And based on link below pic worked for awhile.









http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?293130-Ryzen-Return-of-the-Jedi&p=5254423#post5254423


----------



## etre

I'm not assuming anything in particular, I just notice a trend in US market. Someone above expressed concerns about Gigabyte products and I'm just pointing out that seems more of a regional problem, whatever the reason might be.

My experience with Gigabyte has been okish until now. Not flawless.

Anyway, since my case is mATX, I'm considering buying GIGABYTE GA-AB350M-Gaming 3 the other options being ASUS PRIME B350M-A.

I'm more concerned about vrms and the ability to OC an 1700 to 3.8 on these boards than doa.

Sorry to intrude.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *etre*
> 
> I'm not assuming anything in particular, I just notice a trend in US market. Someone above expressed concerns about Gigabyte products and I'm just pointing out that seems more of a regional problem, whatever the reason might be.
> 
> My experience with Gigabyte has been okish until now. Not flawless.
> 
> Anyway, since my case is mATX, I'm considering buying GIGABYTE GA-AB350M-Gaming 3 the other options being ASUS PRIME B350M-A.
> 
> I'm more concerned about vrms and the ability to OC an 1700 to 3.8 on these boards than doa.


Well lucky you I bought a Prime b350-plus to get by for now. I would say realistic expectations in a case. 3.6 or stock 24/7.


----------



## PsyM4n

In any case, if you want to go overboard with overclocking and/or plan to get a high TDP processor if/when they become available it would be better to avoid sub 12 phase AM4 boards.

There are some boards around the 200$ range that fit the criteria. Asrock's killer sli and fatal1ty, biostar's gt7 and especially the crosshair from asus if you don't plan to use it with an apu. Asrock even has more expensive boards than the asus crosshair, that also lack apu support, with even more phases, although the asus is already overkill since these boards probably lack gpu phases altogether.

Of the "cheaper" 12+ phase boards, the asrock ones only have one video output for the apu. Biostar's gt7 has more for multi-monitor support although it's priced a bit higher.


----------



## etre

So, with r7 1700:
- 3.6GHz is a best case scenario for B350 boards,
- 3.8GHz on decent X370, like Asrock Killer sli
- 3.9GHz and above if you get lucky with the binning (not very likely).

Well, that's a disappointment as a 3.6GHz 1700 should be about as fast as my years old i5 in single thread.

Anyway, thanks for feedback.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *etre*
> 
> So, with r7 1700:
> - 3.6GHz is a best case scenario for B350 boards,
> - 3.8GHz on decent X370, like Asrock Killer sli
> - 3.9GHz and above if you get lucky with the binning (not very likely).
> 
> Well, that's a disappointment as a 3.6GHz 1700 should be about as fast as my years old i5 in single thread.
> 
> Anyway, thanks for feedback.


What do you normally do with your rig?

Minimum FPS on BF1 64 player maps is about 3 to 4 X what it is on my 4790k at 4.4ghz when I disable HT vs 1800X at 4 ghz ( 1080 - low settings DX11)


----------



## etre

BF1 is more of a cherry picked argument. I remember reading somewhere that it can generate 10 threads. Not sure if it's 100% accurate. Anyway, this can't be the norm for all the games currently on the market. Maybe in a few years, yeah.

I'm more the kind that picks a mmo and sticks to it, playing other games rarely. MMOs usually are the last to upgrade to the latest trend, like 8c/16t cpus.

For now, I need good single core performance or is almost a side upgrade.

I may use cad programs or a video editor, but performance in those is not a deal breaker.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Statistics mean absolutely nothing to me. Then there is the X factor.
> 
> If company A sell 5000 units has to replace 100 and company B sells 500 has to replace 10....well yes i guess the stats are in there favor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything is a matter of perspective. Then there is rejected rma to consider.
> 
> https://youtu.be/g8tIk5v6JnE
> 
> https://youtu.be/DSRuV1g7X18
> 
> Excuse my lack of coherency made these while half asleep
> 
> I don't play favorites. I'm not a fanboy. I am a fan of what works.
> 
> Please tell me i broke it because i have no clue what i'm doing


Same goes for all those great dead HEROs...

I am not talking about raw numbers, i am talking about percentages per units sold.


----------



## chew*

Ill be honest with you as im always honest. If a product fails me and someone rushes in to spout off stats or defend said product then rushes to spout shortcomings of another brand.

Two things occur to me, fanboy, or employee/sponsored over clocker kissing azz.

Once again your ignoring the fact that it died and your not even curious why or what happened.

So how does that benefit this community and end users?

Oh and fwiw. I don't care what brand it is if this was asus i would do the same.


----------



## chew*

@ etre

I mean you can push it.....i have "benched" it a 4.1. I am also an idiot when it comes to over clocking. I will beat on anything.

But realistic wise even with llc cranked pwm switching frequency tuned voltage bounces around alot at the top end 1.45-1.50

It's just not made for it.

Heres a rough scale.

Low end boards 1.3v 24/7

Mid range boards 1.4 24/7

High end boards 1.5v 24/7

This should give decent reliabilty in each category and extend life.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ill be honest with you as im always honest. If a product fails me and someone rushes in to spout off stats or defend said product then rushes to spout shortcomings of another brand.
> 
> Two things occur to me, fanboy, or employee/sponsored over clocker kissing azz.
> 
> Once again your ignoring the fact that it died and your not even curious why or what happened.
> 
> So how does that benefit this community and end users?
> 
> Oh and fwiw. I don't care what brand it is if this was asus i would do the same.


I was not even talking to you honestly. I was trying to help some user that was talking about Gaming 7 and was having doubts because in the past he had some bad experience with the brand. Thus the statistics i talked about.

I mean..."if a product fails me"...how many years do you have on this man?

Every motherboard brand has failed me and at the same time every motherboard brand as made me happy. Its just how the things work.

Not a fanboy or employee. But i am in the retail business so i know what i am talking about.

If your board failed, it could be interesting knowing why of course, if you have the knowledge to reach a proper conclusion, bring it in


----------



## br0da

Sorry @Artikbot but I have to ask again about the powIRstages on your Gaming 5: You are sure that they are IR3558 parts, not IR3553?
In the hardwareluxx forum there is a guy with IR3553 chips on his Gaming 5.
-> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-6.html#post25400321


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Sorry @Artikbot but I have to ask again about the powIRstages on your Gaming 5: You are sure that they are IR3558 parts, not IR3553?
> In the hardwareluxx forum there is a guy with IR3553 chips on his Gaming 5.
> -> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-6.html#post25400321


I will pull my sink off to verify gaming 5.

*EDIT*

Best shots i could get with phone cam.

looks like a 3.

Just use a photo editor I'm sure you can get it to stand out better.

http://i1253.photobucket.com/albums/hh588/chewasterisk/Mobile%20Uploads/2017-03/20170316_123749_zpsq45usywu.jpg

http://i1253.photobucket.com/albums/hh588/chewasterisk/Mobile%20Uploads/2017-03/20170316_124508_zps1njdtfki.jpg

http://i1253.photobucket.com/albums/hh588/chewasterisk/Mobile%20Uploads/2017-03/20170316_124514_zpshhtyznuy.jpg


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Sorry @Artikbot but I have to ask again about the powIRstages on your Gaming 5: You are sure that they are IR3558 parts, not IR3553?
> In the hardwareluxx forum there is a guy with IR3553 chips on his Gaming 5.
> -> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-6.html#post25400321


So that means they are only 40A?


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Best shots i could get with phone cam.
> [...]


Thanks a lot! That's definitely a three I'd say.
Now I'm curious about what's on Artikbots board.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> So that means they are only 40A?


"only".








When they'll stay cooler than 80°C they'll be able to handle 25A each, since there are six phases that would be 150A in total. That really is enough for overclocking a R7 CPU I'd say.
Furthermore with a power dissipation of 3,5W @25A each they'll not reach 80°C if there is an airflow through the case and your room temperature isn't 40°C.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Thanks a lot! That's definitely a three I'd say.
> Now I'm curious about what's on Artikbots board.
> "only".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When they'll stay cooler than 80°C they'll be able to handle 25A each, since there are six phases that would be 150A in total. That really is enough for overclocking a R7 CPU I'd say.
> Furthermore with a power dissipation of 3,5W @25A each they'll not reach 80°C if there is an airflow through the case and your room temperature isn't 40°C.


Better shot with exposure set to highlight numbers. Definitely a 3. The PWM is solid for air/water.

The heatsinks being changed could improve dissipation thus improving efficiency.

Like I said mid range I would recommend it.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Sorry @Artikbot but I have to ask again about the powIRstages on your Gaming 5: You are sure that they are IR3558 parts, not IR3553?
> In the hardwareluxx forum there is a guy with IR3553 chips on his Gaming 5.
> -> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-6.html#post25400321


Pretty sure I read 3558. Hang on...

It looks like it might be a 3. Looked like an 8 at first glance!! These don't have the best etch in the world. Cheers for bringing it up.










Ah well. Considerably increased waste heat and considerably worse as current draw increases. I'll make sure it gets decent airflow then.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The spec sheets usually list 25°C and 70°C for all the ratings , in the case of the 4C06N it was 80°C.
> 
> So anything above 80°C is likely going to be inefficient power wise and/or thermal wise.
> 
> From 4C06N datasheet
> www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C06N-D.PDF
> 
> VRM at 80°C at 1.188V seems odd to me , are you sure it's right?


Well I was testing 16threads prime95 "SMALL FFT" for 3+ hours.

HWiNFO was reporting 10watts per core...
CPU Package Power: 110watts

I'm right now testing 3700Mhz with ~1.284-1.304 Volts (jumps around alot) Dynamic vcore +0.108V

Only using "BLEND" in prime95 and cpu package power hasn't reached 100watts yet. Each core reach about 9watt max on occasion.
VRM MOS: 74C
CPU: 72C
*
BLACKSCREEN* in writing (thank the gods Firefox recovered)

Ok upped the voltage to +0.144... Gives 1.320V in cpu-z and other software.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Considerably increased waste heat and considerably worse as current draw increases.


Considerably? I think that's already awfulizing.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Pretty sure I read 3558. Hang on...
> 
> It looks like it _might_ be a 3. Looked like an 8 at first glance!! These don't have the best etch in the world. Cheers for bringing it up.
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/b2BP0zh.png
> 
> Ah well. Considerably increased waste heat and considerably worse as current draw increases. I'll make sure it gets decent airflow then.


Seems kind of dramatic considering the IR3553 and IR3558 only have 5A rating difference. Under the Safe operating range graph it has 30A for the IR3553M and 35A for the IR3558 , both with no airflow (0LFM).

At 25A the IR3553 is ~3.5W power loss ; for IR3558 it is just under 3W. Using 1.4V output instead of 1.2V increases the power loss by 10% in both cases.

Earlier I guessed that it was a IR3553M based on sizing.

For comparison at 25A & 1.4V the TI NexFET has similar power loss ~ 4W.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Seems kind of dramatic considering the IR3553 and IR3558 only have 5A rating difference. Under the Safe operating range graph it has 30A for the IR3553M and 35A for the IR3558 , both with no airflow (0LFM).
> 
> At 25A the IR3553 is ~3.5W power loss ; for IR3558 it is just under 3W. Using 1.4V output instead of 1.2V increases the power loss by 10% in both cases.
> 
> Earlier I guessed that it was a IR3553M based on sizing.


Waste power charts (those are very useful... no need to calculate anything - and the test conditions are fairly comparable to what a motherboard sees) indicate just under 4 3.5W per phase for the 3553 vs just under 3 for the 3558.

Add that for each phase and it is quite a bit more heat to take care of (under seemingly normal 3.8GHz clocks it's about... 6-7W more?)

It's not going to make or break anything (especially not on a mid-high end board), but it's a bit disappointing.

I ddin't mean to make it sound dramatic anyway. Just that I'm slightly disappointed by the choice.

They're still fantastic parts and very thermally stable in terms of performance.


----------



## Tasm

Interesting.

Should be enough to run any chip at 4.0 / 4.1 GHz + 1.45V max anyway.


----------



## Artikbot

Unless more light can be cast on what does each phase drive (assuming there's not an even load across them) - yes, way more than enough for pretty much any application bar potentially extreme cooling.


----------



## Nighthog

I'll ask as I can't find a straight answer.

What is the temperature limits of these Ryzen processors? I should have checked that more before I started doing this. I heard some high number and didn't think much of it.

What temperature does Ryzen 7 1700 start to throttle? Is it 75C or is it 95C? Or something completely different?


----------



## chew*

They hard lock/BSOD rather consistently around 90-95c.

I have pushed the board extremely hard, hard enough to hand a 5690x it's azz @4600 on hwbot....

Consider this is a Fury X @ 1205/600......its pulling some juice then add in the cpu is doing cpu tests at over 4250.....

The board will be fine for 24/7 users with decent case airflow.

The K7 imo is gonna need to be a tad better under the hood though if the extreme guys are going to take it seriously.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> I'll ask as I can't find a straight answer.
> 
> What is the temperature limits of these Ryzen processors? I should have checked that more before I started doing this. I heard some high number and didn't think much of it.
> 
> What temperature does Ryzen 7 1700 start to throttle? Is it 75C or is it 95C? Or something completely different?


75C is the throttle temp, but i'm not sure if that is core temp or Tcase temp where throttling kicked in. Also that temp is assuming that temperature measurements are even accurate at this point. I'm not sure if monitoring tools read the sensors correctly.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The hard lock/BSOD rather consistently around 90-95c


But where does it throttle and clock down. I was noticing some software reporting conflicting cpu speeds.

Windows task manager was giving 3.55ghz. cpu-z 3.7Ghz. Gigabyte software wild swings between 3.2-3.5Ghz.

This was at around core temp 77C before suddenly cpu hit 83C when a more heavy prime test came along. (cpu bios heat warning started to sound at 80C as I had set) I stopped the test there.

edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> 75C is the throttle temp, but i'm not sure if that is core temp or Tcase temp where throttling kicked in. Also that temp is assuming that temperature measurements are even accurate at this point. I'm not sure if monitoring tools read the sensors correctly.


Ok!, so I was going to hot with the stock cooler. Explains kinda the software discrepancies.
And why cpu package power was lower.
Well well. was kinda rushing this after all.


----------



## bardacuda

Question: Is it worth pulling the heatsink off the VRMs and re-applying thermal paste on the X370 Prime Pro? I've had some boards where they had a crappy rubber thermal pad and doing this helped dramatically.


----------



## Artikbot

Use a better thermal pad (usually a thinner one along with shimming the screws goes a long way), don't use thermal paste.


----------



## ChronoBodi

Tech of Tomorrow's test bench using MSI Titanium. Um.....

I kinda want to see what happens if he OCs it far on that VRM on that mobo. lol.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tech of Tomorrow's test bench using MSI Titanium. Um.....
> 
> I kinda want to see what happens if he OCs it far on that VRM on that mobo. lol.


If he has any airflow over them at all it will be fine. I'm getting 4025 mhz out of my 1800X on stock cpu voltage and LLC settings on the Titanium.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If he has any airflow over them at all it will be fine. I'm getting 4025 mhz out of my 1800X on stock cpu voltage and LLC settings on the Titanium.


Measure voltage at caps directly behind socket. Stock is like 1.200-1.250 vid for 1800x before turbo or boost. Doubt 4gig at that voltage measured behind socket.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If he has any airflow over them at all it will be fine. I'm getting 4025 mhz out of my 1800X on stock cpu voltage and LLC settings on the Titanium.
> 
> 
> 
> Measure voltage at caps directly behind socket. Stock is like 1.200-1.250 vid for 1800x before turbo or boost. Doubt 4gig at that voltage measured behind socket.
Click to expand...

I left both cpu voltage and llc in auto for this IBT AVX run under load it was at 1.36 volts



If anyone else with a different board that can do the same on similar cooling ( h-100 ) , please post the results in a screenshot.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> 75C is the throttle temp,


Guys , isnt the tjmax 95c ??


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I left both cpu voltage and llc in auto for this IBT AVX run under load it was at 1.36 volts
> 
> 
> 
> If anyone else with a different board that can do the same on similar cooling ( h-100 ) , please post the results in a screenshot.





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Both cpu voltage and llc in auto.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I left both cpu voltage and llc in auto for this IBT AVX run under load it was at 1.36 volts
> 
> 
> 
> If anyone else with a different board that can do the same on similar cooling ( h-100 ) , please post the results in a screenshot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both cpu voltage and llc in auto.
Click to expand...

Thank you. + 1 rep
I think that is a different version of IBT though the flops seem too low.

Maybe try the version in the OP here
http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club#post_18427668

Careful though - it makes a lot of heat.


----------



## bardacuda

It probably has to do with the northbridge speed.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/
Quote:


> The data fabric
> 
> The northbridge of Zeppelin is officially called as the data fabric (DF). The DF frequency is always linked to the operating frequency of the memory controller with a ratio of 1:2 (e.g. DDR4-2667 MEMCLK = 1333MHz DFICLK). This means that the memory speed will directly affect the data fabric performance as well. In some cases, it may appear that the performance of Zeppelin scales extremely well with the increased memory speed, however that is necessarily not the case.
> 
> In many of these cases the abnormally good scaling is caused by the higher data fabric clock (DFICLK) resulting from the higher memory speed, rather than the increased performance of the memory itself.


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Thank you. + 1 rep
> I think that is a different version of IBT though the flops seem too low.
> 
> Maybe try the version in the OP here
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club#post_18427668
> 
> Careful though - it makes a lot of heat.





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## bardacuda

Hahah nvm!









VRM temps seem to be very well behaved on both of those boards. Are either of you using active cooling?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Thank you. + 1 rep
> I think that is a different version of IBT though the flops seem too low.
> 
> Maybe try the version in the OP here
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club#post_18427668
> 
> Careful though - it makes a lot of heat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Click to expand...

Very nice!

Steady voltage on that board, how are you liking it so far?


----------



## chew*

Software reports off sensors and bios right?


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Very nice!
> 
> Steady voltage on that board, how are you liking it so far?


No major complaints although I do wish it had a clear cmos switch.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Very nice!
> 
> Steady voltage on that board, how are you liking it so far?
> 
> 
> 
> No major complaints although I do wish it had a clear cmos switch.
Click to expand...

I sure miss that on the boards that don't have it.

I like to see the underdogs do well, Biostar had a 790 board that was a real sleeper when it came to overclocking . The guys I knew that had them thought very highly of them.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I sure miss that on the boards that don't have it.
> 
> I like to see the underdogs do well, Biostar had a 790 board that was a real sleeper when it came to overclocking . The guys I knew that had them thought very highly of them.


That series and a few others I'd had before that were what prompted me to give Biostar a try again. None of the other boards were really grabbing me and Biostar's Z170 and Z270 boards were reviewed quite well. I'm very pleased with mine and glad to see they can still put out a solid overclocking board.


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Hahah nvm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VRM temps seem to be very well behaved on both of those boards. Are either of you using active cooling?


Yes, i keep a fan over the socket area during stress testing. Temps will increase 15c+ without.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I sure miss that on the boards that don't have it.
> 
> I like to see the underdogs do well, Biostar had a 790 board that was a real sleeper when it came to overclocking . The guys I knew that had them thought very highly of them.


----------



## cssorkinman

I had a fan blowing on the socket area during that run - here is an earlier one without a fan , but at lower clocks.


----------



## Nighthog

Just testing for fun. still stock cooler.

If all goes well my Am4 bracket should arrive with UPS later today.... and it right now arrived









Will take time rebuilding that thing. I wonder if I have enough coolant.

update:

Just now dissembled the main parts and emptied the CKC water into a glass jar. Damn the dust and the hassle to empty the kit.(no drain valve)

I'll have to reuse my water, don't have enough. The hose has gotten all yellow and stiff in the round 4-5 months.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> 
> 
> Just testing for fun. still stock cooler.
> 
> If all goes well my Am4 bracket should arrive with UPS later today.... and it right now arrived
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will take time rebuilding that thing. I wonder if I have enough coolant.
> 
> update:
> 
> Just now dissembled the main parts and emptied the CKC water into a glass jar. Damn the dust and the hassle to empty the kit.(no drain valve)
> 
> I'll have to reuse my water, don't have enough. The hose has gotten all yellow and stiff in the round 4-5 months.


Your temps got less ridiculous , ~70°C VRM under stress testing @ 1.3V. I have a feeling that the VRM is best for ~3.8GHz (~1.25V) due to this.


----------



## btupsx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josephimports*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Thanks for the info. Biostar is really impressing me with the GT7, good for them, reminds me of older days. Definitely in my top 5 list of possible platform considerations.









It's going to be a really great year all around for the tech space.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Well I was testing 16threads prime95 "SMALL FFT" for 3+ hours.
> 
> HWiNFO was reporting 10watts per core...
> CPU Package Power: 110watts
> 
> I'm right now testing 3700Mhz with ~1.284-1.304 Volts (jumps around alot) Dynamic vcore +0.108V
> 
> Only using "BLEND" in prime95 and cpu package power hasn't reached 100watts yet. Each core reach about 9watt max on occasion.
> VRM MOS: 74C
> CPU: 72C
> *
> BLACKSCREEN* in writing (thank the gods Firefox recovered)
> 
> Ok upped the voltage to +0.144... Gives 1.320V in cpu-z and other software.


Nighthog. While blend will not create as much heat thats not the purpose. It will crash though where small fft did not realbench did not and of all things ibt...("intel"burn test) so increasing heat does not = stable. Thats like using amd overdrive stress test on an intel chip...ooooh must be stable it passed.

Stressing imc on AMD = stable without bsod or prime crashing on desktop. Want more heat toss wprime 1024 at it over and over while running blend. That bench has claimed cpu's and boards. Want more run cinebench with the other two running. Prime 95blend once updated wont need "kickers"


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Well I was testing 16threads prime95 "SMALL FFT" for 3+ hours.
> 
> HWiNFO was reporting 10watts per core...
> CPU Package Power: 110watts
> 
> I'm right now testing 3700Mhz with ~1.284-1.304 Volts (jumps around alot) Dynamic vcore +0.108V
> 
> Only using "BLEND" in prime95 and cpu package power hasn't reached 100watts yet. Each core reach about 9watt max on occasion.
> VRM MOS: 74C
> CPU: 72C
> *
> BLACKSCREEN* in writing (thank the gods Firefox recovered)
> 
> Ok upped the voltage to +0.144... Gives 1.320V in cpu-z and other software.
> 
> 
> 
> Nighthog. While blend will not create as much heat thats not the purpose. It will crash though where small fft did not realbench did not and of all things ibt...("intel"burn test) so increasing heat does not = stable. Thats like using amd overdrive stress test on an intel chip...ooooh must be stable it passed.
> 
> Stressing imc on AMD = stable without bsod or prime crashing on desktop. Want more heat toss wprime 1024 at it over and over while running blend. That bench has claimed cpu's and boards. Want more run cinebench with the other two running. Prime 95blend once updated wont need "kickers"
Click to expand...

I don't recall ever having crashed during normal use on settings that had passed IBT AVX on the Vishera platform - but my normal use is different from others.

So far, the 1800X is very much the same - If it passes IBT AVX - it hasn't crashed during anything else I've done at those clocks and settings.

I'd like to see a standard develop for good comparisons regarding motherboards, Ryzen SKU's/Batches and cooling, but that will take some time. If someone posts screenshots during IBT and once complete, I am resonably confident that they are stable enough to do anything I normally do at those clocks/settings.

Comparing AMD's Overdrive to IBT AVX is just plain silly however.


----------



## chew*

I was responding to nighthog and his comment on small fft 3 hours fine yet crashing blend.

As for what you do? That's great for you. If your happy with your methods of monitoring temps,voltage and testing stability for your use only then i'm happy for you









I review products and write reviews/reports for everyone else.

I don't work for or own a site yet AMD still trusts me to do accurate analysis.


----------



## 99belle99

Is the MSI gaming Titanium any good? I read they used sub par VRM's is that true?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Is the MSI gaming Titanium any good? I read they used sub par VRM's is that true?


Overblown non issue , buy with confidence.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Is the MSI gaming Titanium any good? I read they used sub par VRM's is that true?


To answer your question directly with less bias.

1. Can't comment don't have it. Priced at $260 range lacks ref clock of comparable in same price range.

2. Yes sub par brand quality fets. Time will tell if it has adverse effects.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> To answer your question directly with less bias.
> 
> 1. Can't comment don't have it. Priced at $260 range lacks ref clock of comparable in same price range.
> 
> 2. Yes sub par brand quality fets. Time will tell if it has adverse effects.


Its $299.99 on newegg, uses sub par mosfets, no bclock generator. It will probably be fine but for the cost of the Titanium(it is the most expensive AM4 platform) it should be using premium parts. Especially since the motherboards that are in the 250ish range are using premium parts.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Question: Is it worth pulling the heatsink off the VRMs and re-applying thermal paste on the X370 Prime Pro? I've had some boards where they had a crappy rubber thermal pad and doing this helped dramatically.


Better to wait for a board that comes with a hybrid air/water block and put it under water. Messing around with air cooling is lame.


----------



## Nighthog

Ok... system is back up and running again. Had some major issues with water leakage.



Cold boot issues though, reset everything.

Will try stuff tomorrow.


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Better to wait for a board that comes with a hybrid air/water block and put it under water. Messing around with air cooling is lame.


When are you going to stop beating the dead horse about the hybrid vrm cooler?


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Ok... system is back up and running again. Had some major issues with water leakage.
> 
> 
> 
> Cold boot issues though, reset everything.
> 
> Will try stuff tomorrow.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Ok... system is back up and running again. Had some major issues with water leakage.
> 
> 
> 
> Cold boot issues though, reset everything.
> 
> Will try stuff tomorrow.


Ryzen rig with a custom loop in that old case?


----------



## Nighthog

Why not? Yeah it didn't work out as I had hoped. My nice Lian-Li is only m-atx.

I'm looking for a case though I don't want anything big.

On another note I did a quick run before bed.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Better to wait for a board that comes with a hybrid air/water block and put it under water. Messing around with air cooling is lame.


I may not do anything to it depending on the temps I get, but was just curious if anyone tried that already and if it showed a significant improvement. I've never done any watercooling but I'm pretty sure that would be way more expensive and hard to justify for the limited benefits it would provide compared to a thermal pad/paste and a couple washers.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Why not? Yeah it didn't work out as I had hoped. My nice Lian-Li is only m-atx.
> 
> I'm looking for a case though I don't want anything big.
> 
> On another note I did a quick run before bed.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I was wondering how big of an effect not having the wraith cooler blowing down onto the motherboard would have. Looks like you went from 71­°C to 86°C max temp on the VRMs? Ouch!


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Its $299.99 on newegg, uses sub par mosfets, no bclock generator. It will probably be fine but for the cost of the Titanium(it is the most expensive AM4 platform) it should be using premium parts. Especially since the motherboards that are in the 250ish range are using premium parts.


I can buy in person in stock at microcenter $259.99.

Like i said im unbiased and am aware at initial launch price gouging is in full effect.

I agree on the parts concerning fets bclk(asmedia chip). The other components are actually good which is dumbfounding.


----------



## LBear

Tired of waiting on a ASUS VI. Amazon is stating possibly the 2nd week of April so going to cancel my preorder. My local store has some MB in stock. Debating between the MSI Titanium or Gigabyte K5 they have no K7's. Suggestions anyone? Are there bios bricks with these boards?


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LBear*
> 
> Tired of waiting on a ASUS VI. Amazon is stating possibly the 2nd week of April so going to cancel my preorder. My local store has some MB in stock. Debating between the MSI Titanium or Gigabyte K5 they have no K7's. Suggestions anyone? Are there bios bricks with these boards?


2nd week of April? Bleh, and I had the chance to get a K7 *sighs* oh well. The MSI Titanium is overpriced for what it is the VRM is using Nikos parts and no bclk generator


----------



## btupsx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LBear*
> 
> Tired of waiting on a ASUS VI. Amazon is stating possibly the 2nd week of April so going to cancel my preorder. My local store has some MB in stock. Debating between the MSI Titanium or Gigabyte K5 they have no K7's. Suggestions anyone? Are there bios bricks with these boards?


You've waited this long, might want to consider waiting a bit longer until stock returns to normal levels and more is known about each board's particulars.

That said, of what is readily available now, none utilize a BCLK generator, which could prove very useful once Zen's intricacies are better understood. Just something to keep in mind.

The Gigabyte K5 is an absolutely solid choice; good quality components, with a nice balance of features. It probably should be $15-25 less than the MSRP now, but that largely depends upon where the K7 ends up in comparison, in regards to components and features.

The Asus Prime X370-Pro is also a good, basic choice. Not as much feature content as the K5, but components are very decent for the price point. Asus BIOS is also generally more refined than Gigabyte BIOS, however K5 users are reporting broader RAM compatibility, as well as higher obtainable RAM frequencies.

The Biostar GT7 is back in stock at The Egg, and has good feature content, along with great components and stout build.

Last but not least, as for the MSI Ti, see below...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> 2nd week of April? Bleh, and I had the chance to get a K7 *sighs* oh well. The MSI Titanium is overpriced for what it is the VRM is using Nikos parts and no bclk generator


The Ti is regarded as far far too overpriced for what it brings to the table as a total package, and MSI's baffling choices in the VRM and power delivery system leave *much* to be desired. Nothing negative about the VRM's have been reported yet in real world usage, but time will tell if they do end up being a liability.


----------



## AlphaC

Just an FYI there is no Gigabyte X370 K5 right now. It's only the Gaming 5 and K7.








The K5 has been previewed but it is not on the market.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ANSZ*
> 
> We are also releasing a more mainstream price on our AX370-Gaming K5 at MSRP $169.99 which will have BLCK support releasing in April. Pricing might change and stabilize for the Gaming 5 but no word on that.


as per Videocardz it will have BCLK


Up on scan UK: https://www.scan.co.uk/products/gigabyte-ax370-gaming-k5-amd-ryzen-am4-atx-motherboard

Some variation of 4+3 likely


& Amazon : https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B06WWC7BFH


----------



## chew*

yep K5 will probably be designation for asmedia chip equipped (bclk) gaming 5. However until confirmation as it stands that is what K7 is.......so K5 is a mystery?

I know this is the VRM thread but bios aside there is still a lot more to a good motherboard than just the VRM.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> yep K5 will probably be designation for asmedia chip equipped (bclk) gaming 5. However until confirmation as it stands that is what K7 is.......so K5 is a mystery?
> 
> I know this is the VRM thread but bios aside there is still a lot more to a good motherboard than just the VRM.


Which ASMedia IC are you referring to?
AFAIK all AM4 motherboards featuring the external clock mode use ICS 4883 Pll.


----------



## Artikbot

At first I was like... I may return my Gaming 5 if the K5 has an external BCLK PLL... but then I saw the power delivery and went lol nah.


----------



## ChronoBodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> At first I was like... I may return my Gaming 5 if the K5 has an external BCLK PLL... but then I saw the power delivery and went lol nah.


What;s the exact VRM/mosfet power delivery on Gaming 5 compared to Taichi and Crosshair? Just curious.

wait now there's a k5? this is confusing.


----------



## Nighthog

I think the Gaming K3 and K5 use the same PCB and are similar to that with K5 has BCKL and k3 not with comparision to the 5 and K7.

There are bare PCB pictures floating around off the K3 so you could check that out for how it will look. Looks like a little better vrm than gaming 3 but as usual probably nowhere close to the tiers above.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> What;s the exact VRM/mosfet power delivery on Gaming 5 compared to Taichi and Crosshair? Just curious.
> 
> wait now there's a k5? this is confusing.


4+3 phase configuration pretty much means that it's using Intersil regulator. So far Gigabyte has only paired those PowIRStages with IR controllers, so most likely the board will be using conventional (separate) high & low-side mosfets.


----------



## bardacuda

Chew posted some pics about 50-60 posts back. 6x IR3553M for the Gaming 5. The K5 looks to have 4 phases.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/#post_25930018


----------



## br0da

Looks like the VRMs on K3 and K5 are the same, I'd expect an ISL95721 in 4+3 configuration paired with two 4C06N as the lowside and one 4C10N as the highside for CPU VCC.
SoC VCC will use the same FETs but with just one FET as lowside.

That would be the same as on the AB350-Gaming 3.


----------



## ChronoBodi

is it 4+3 doubled to make 8+6 for gigabyte?

really noob on VRM, you can tell.

Also when i looked at the mobo, it seems like it has like 16 phases, but some of the phases is smaller and in weirder places, like next to the PCIE slot, or next to the OC/CMOS button for example.

Just curious what each phase is for.

oh wait, i meant my gaming 5.

apparently there's less phases on the k5?


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> is it 4+3 doubled to make 8+6 for gigabyte?[


No afaik there is not a single Gigabyte design for AM4 that is using doublers for the CPU VCC.
AB350M-Gaming 3, AB350-Gaming 3 and AB350-Gaming have got four true phases, AX370-Gaming 5 and AX370-Gaming K7 are using six true phases for CPU VCC.
K3 and K5 do look like using four true phases either.
The only doublers Gigabyte is using are on the Gaming 5 and Gaming K7 since the controller is able to handle two phases for SoC VCC and there are four phases instead.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> Also when i looked at the mobo, it seems like it has like 16 phases, but some of the phases is smaller and in weirder places, like next to the PCIE slot, or next to the OC/CMOS button for example.


Not every choke on the board is a VRM phase for the CPU.
Keep an eye on the stuff around the CPU socket.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> is it 4+3 doubled to make 8+6 for gigabyte?
> 
> really noob on VRM, you can tell.
> 
> Also when i looked at the mobo, it seems like it has like 16 phases, but some of the phases is smaller and in weirder places, like next to the PCIE slot, or next to the OC/CMOS button for example.
> 
> Just curious what each phase is for.
> 
> oh wait, i meant my gaming 5.
> 
> apparently there's less phases on the k5?


No, just plain 4+3 phases (VDDCR_CPU : VDDCR_SoC).

The phase count doesn't really matter for Ryzen (quality does, as usual).
I'd be happy to take a board equipped with a 4+1 phase ultra-high quality VRM, over a MSI X370 Titanium for example.


----------



## ChronoBodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> No, just plain 4+3 phases (VDDCR_CPU : VDDCR_SoC).
> 
> The phase count doesn't really matter for Ryzen (quality does, as usual).
> I'd be happy to take a board equipped with a 4+1 phase ultra-high quality VRM, over a MSI X370 Titanium for example.


Yea, just saw that the gaming 5 is 6+4, and the k5 is cheaper 4+3 but still good VRM.

Although, how craptastic is the VRM on MSI Titan mobo? I mean.... $300 can get you a good x99 board, but relatively speaking, $300 is a LOT for an AM4 platform mobo.

for $300, it should be Asrock Taichi VRMs.

What the heck is a Nikos mosfet and all that for MSI?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> Yea, just saw that the gaming 5 is 6+4, and the k5 is cheaper 4+3 but still good VRM.
> 
> Although, how craptastic is the VRM on MSI Titan mobo? I mean.... $300 can get you a good x99 board, but relatively speaking, $300 is a LOT for an AM4 platform mobo.
> 
> for $300, it should be Asrock Taichi VRMs.
> 
> What the heck is a Nikos mosfet and all that for MSI?


*NIKO* *S*emiconductor is one of the more known companies that make mosfets. Their fets are relatively cheap and reliable when used within specs, and are widely used by many known companies on various applications.

The problem is that some companies, in order to save costs, sometimes implement nikos fets of specific characteristics in applications that they shouldn't. The most common way they do this, is by using high resistance fets for the regulation of high voltage range, high-power range, enthusiast oriented hardware (ie: overclockable cpus and gpus). The end result is mosfets smoking, hardware failing.

In the particular case of MSI Titan, the nikos fets used are fine. They should be able to handle any overclock of existing ryzen processors. They should also be able to handle future processors with higher tdp, although additional air flow should be used around the vrm for extreme scenarios.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Looks like the VRMs on K3 and K5 are the same, I'd expect an ISL95721 in 4+3 configuration paired with two 4C06N as the lowside and one 4C10N as the highside for CPU VCC.
> SoC VCC will use the same FETs but with just one FET as lowside.
> 
> That would be the same as on the AB350-Gaming 3.


Not entirely. while the Gmaing K3 and K5 might have 8 X 4C06N on the lowside the Gaming 3 only has 6 as far I can tell from pictures. Some odd layout with 2 of the four phases have two and the other 2 have one 4C06N

Some Cinebench results:



Need lots and lots of volts the be able to run even Cinebench with 4000Mhz.

This isn't stable though. Just enough to run Cinebench at all without lockup or blackscreen right away.

Went down on voltage and clock to see what I can get with max ~1.450 Vcore


+0.270 voltage offset.

still not stable can't do Prime95 Blend. Down to testing 3925Mhz with +0.270 voltage offset now.

3925Mhz seems stable, Blend hasn't locked up yet. VRM is Hitting 90C with core at 62C. Will need to run longer. but has gotten the farthest yet.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Still trying to pick a good Mobo, my micro center has MSI X370 XPower Gaming Titanium AM4 and MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon but no ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VI HERO X370 AM4. do you think its worth picking one of the MSI mobo's up with the 1700 or should i just wait around for the ASUS mobo?

price being

MSI titanium $260
MSI gaming pro $180
ASUS $245


----------



## The Stilt

Is Prime X370 available?


----------



## gupsterg

Here in UK, yes. An owner in Ryzen owners thread posted photo of VRM, it has same Ti NexFET as C6H.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shawn Shutt jr*
> 
> Still trying to pick a good Mobo, my micro center has MSI X370 XPower Gaming Titanium AM4 and MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon but no ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VI HERO X370 AM4. do you think its worth picking one of the MSI mobo's up with the 1700 or should i just wait around for the ASUS mobo?
> 
> price being
> 
> MSI titanium $260
> MSI gaming pro $180
> ASUS $245


Wait for the ASUS. No question here. The Ti is overpriced. If the Ti was at the price of the pro, then it would be a viable choice.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Is Prime X370 available?


yeah they have afew ASUS PRIME X370-PRO in stock.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Wait for the ASUS. No question here. The Ti is overpriced. If the Ti was at the price of the pro, then it would be a viable choice.


i was thinking the same, i wanted the MSI because i have an MSI video card so i could use the software ect ect but i might just upgrade to the ASUS 1080TI once its out.


----------



## bardacuda

I'm running MSI afterburner using Gigabyte and XFX graphics cards, on a Biostar motherboard. You should have no problems using the software on an ASUS board.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I'm running MSI afterburner using Gigabyte and XFX graphics cards, on a Biostar motherboard. You should have no problems using the software on an ASUS board.


damn! thanks for the heads up lol. i really wanted to build my new system tomorrow but i guess ill be waiting for the mobo to come in stock.


----------



## bardacuda

Didn't you say the Prime was in stock?


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Didn't you say the Prime was in stock?


not sure if youre talking to me but yes the ASUS PRIME X370-PRO is in, but i was going to get the ASUS ROG CROSSHAIR VI HERO X370 rather.


----------



## bardacuda

Heheh yeah I was talking to you. I can't comment on it yet because I don't have mine yet but it seems to be a good choice (the Prime)...and if Stilt and gupsterg are hinting at it I would take that as a pretty solid recommendation.

Honestly, these chips don't have enough headroom to take advantage of the better VRM solution of the more expensive boards. Although, if the Hero has some features you need that the Prime Pro just doesn't have, then it is worth waiting for rather than grabbing an overpriced MSI. I had an MSI blow up on me though so I might be a little biased against them lol.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Heheh yeah I was talking to you. I can't comment on it yet because I don't have mine yet but it seems to be a good choice (the Prime)...and if Stilt and gupsterg are hinting at it I would take that as a pretty solid recommendation.
> 
> Honestly, these chips don't have enough headroom to take advantage of the better VRM solution of the more expensive boards. Although, if the Hero has some features you need that the Prime Pro just doesn't have, then it is worth waiting for rather than grabbing an overpriced MSI. I had an MSI blow up on me though so I might be a little biased against them lol.


noted, iv always ran with a asus tuf sabertooth but they dont have any new ones out and idk how long that would take!


----------



## bardacuda

Even if ASUS themselves know if/when an X370 Sabertooth will be released, I don't think they've told anyone.


----------



## Shawn Shutt jr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Even if ASUS themselves know if/when an X370 Sabertooth will be released, I don't think they've told anyone.


agreed, and it could be months later and why bother at that point lol


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Not entirely. while the Gmaing K3 and K5 might have 8 X 4C06N on the lowside the Gaming 3 only has 6 as far I can tell from pictures. Some odd layout with 2 of the four phases have two and the other 2 have one 4C06N


On the Gaming 3 two more FETs are on the solderside.








DIfferent amount of lowside FETs in the phases for the same output voltage wouldn't make any sense at all.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> it seems to be a good choice (the Prime)...and if Stilt and gupsterg are hinting at it I would take that as a pretty solid recommendation.


The UEFI from what I've seen members shares has plenty enough options for me. From how much headroom Ryzen has on OC'ing the board isn't going to hold an owner back IMO. Even though Asus when I last checked don't state Ti NexFET in spec, it has been confirmed by owner. I'd be happy to get that board, in total it's only 2 phases less than C6H.

Some reasons why I went C6H was:-


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



- TR want ~£15 for an AM4 bracket for my Archon SB-E X2, as I wanted to reuse that until get £ together for WC I used that cost in evaluating which board to get.

- Wanted the WC headers, as I want SW monitoring to log WC flow, etc. To make Prime X370 Pro to have same function I'd need something like Aquaero 5 LT USB (~£50).

- Wanted the voltage read points on C6H, as wished to check actual voltages, which so far has shown large difference in what I may have thought VCORE was for an OC. This difference was not only from say error margin in SW tools, but also from how I reckon Ryzen in the AMD CBS section is not showing true VID for a chip IMO. When we OC it changes it if we don't use manual voltage from what I saw. Using manual voltage is showing down volting for me on DMM, even if monitoring SW isn't. I still use offset as want the monitoring data to be correctly logged.



Bit off topic but as related to mobo settings / Ryzen maybe pertinent for members to know.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



CPU Stock (R7 1700), so ACB is 3.2GHz = ~1.089V steady on DMM for VCORE with x264.

I set 3.7GHz ACB OC, I do no "funky" stuff else in UEFI, set only +0.01875V offset, load x264 = ~1.228V on DMM.

I set 3.8GHz ACB OC, again no "funky" stuff else in UEFI, set only +0.10625V offset, load x264 = ~1.319V on DMM.

I set 3.9GHz ACB OC, again no "funky" stuff else in UEFI, set only +0.19375V offset, load x264 = ~1.409V on DMM.

I set 3.9GHz ACB OC, with LVL 3, set only +0.19375V offset, load x264 = ~1.465V on DMM.

Next format of data:-

+18.75mV offset in bios over +0mV, created actual jump of 139mV.
+106.25mV offset in bios over +0mV, created actual jump of 230mV.
+193.75mV offset in bios over +0mV, created actual jump of 320mV.
+193.75mV offset in bios over +0mV, engage LLC LVL 3, created actual jump of 370mV.

So at stock let's say PState 0 is 1.089V with +0mV offset (R7 1700 at stock PState 0 is shown as 1.1875V, this can't be the true VID/VCORE of CPU sample as every other member I asked with same combo of HW has same).

So if I read 1.228V on 3.7GHz OC - 0.01875V = PState 0 as 1.20925V.
So if I read 1.319V on 3.8GHz OC - 0.10625V = PState 0 as 1.21275V.
So if I read 1.409V on 3.9GHz OC - 0.19375V = PState 0 as 1.21525V.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> On the Gaming 3 two more FETs are on the solderside.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DIfferent amount of lowside FETs in the phases for the same output voltage wouldn't make any sense at all.


You mean the backside of the PCB? I never did look too precisely so I don't know.

My VRM is going 93C and the heat sink is barely hot to the touch. Have a 70mm old amd cpu fan on the heat sink at the moment. Maybe the temp sensor is more accurate for the backside if they are there?


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> You mean the backside of the PCB? I never did look too precisely so I don't know.


Yes I do. E.g. take a look on the second picture in this review:
https://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-aorus-ax370-gaming-5-gigabyte-ab350-gaming-3/7


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Yes I do. E.g. take a look on the second picture in this review:
> https://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-aorus-ax370-gaming-5-gigabyte-ab350-gaming-3/7


hey thanks! I was wondering about the missing parts.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Which ASMedia IC are you referring to?
> AFAIK all AM4 motherboards featuring the external clock mode use ICS 4883 Pll.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Just an FYI there is no Gigabyte X370 K5 right now. It's only the Gaming 5 and K7.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The K5 has been previewed but it is not on the market.


I have not had one in my hand yet stilt. Best i could tell on some pics was it was labeled asmedia. Usually located near pci x 1. Taichi,fatality below slot 1. Giga above slot 1.

Im picking up the asus prime x370 today. Best quality pwm on a mobo in stock locally that i can buy in person.

Ill take some shots of pwm later. Bios i know needs work but i can help with that.


----------



## gupsterg

Another bit of info, in context of VRM, but out of context for Ryzen in away, but in context for OC'ing







.

When I went i5/Z97 my whole purpose was "bang for $". So I saw a deal at an etailer for Asus Maximus VII Ranger (note never had ROG before), so for £133 I got mobo and Asus Front base panel FOC. I sold the panel for ~£40 on ebay FVF promo. Netted mobo to ~£100, I was happy.

Get rig set up, my i5 4690K reaches 4.4GHz stable with ~1.18V, 4.6GHz needed ~1.26V without being fully stable, I was bit like what it should do more? I thought I shot myself in the foot with going a mobo that had 8 phase vrm doubled from 4 true phases







.

Several months it swirled in my head I wish I'd gone a Asus Maximus VII Hero, I kept resisting buying one. One day an etailer had promo on i5 4690K, using a cashback site it was netting down to someting nutty like £100 IIRC. So I got it, to sell on and make some £. Whilst it was in my possession and I waited for an ebay FVF promo, I started getting an urge to test the CPU I had bought.

So all same hardware except CPU sample. This reached 4.9GHz @ ~1.255V







, cache as well was way better clocking than my 1st CPU 4.4GHz @ ~1.10V.

The experience taught me it matters more what "silicon lottery" deals you as a hand than what VRM is on mobo, as long as not a badly implemented one and I'd say is decent enough.

I have had that i5/Z97 at those clocks for +1yr, no issues. I have "battered" that combo with so many hours. +100hrs was just clocked up from stability testing and OC profiling from 4.4GHz to 4.9GHz. Then as I got into Hawaii/Fiji bios mod I did countless hours of [email protected] and runs of looped CPU/GPU stress tests.


----------



## chew*

Yep chip helps in this case though being so clock limited if someone got a decent 4g chip that does so sub 1.4v (real stable ) most would try to push it to 4.1. Its the nature of the beast and thats what overclocking is.


----------



## gupsterg

Agree







.

To me Ryzen is a great "Bang for $" CPU, regardless of OC headroom







.


----------



## br0da

MSI seems to like being an exot VRM-wise on AM4 boards.
Some pictures of the X370 Gaming Pro Carbon VRMs came up on hardwareluxx:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-7.html#post25405483
Instead of using four doublers to get those eight phases powered with their 4+2 controller it looks like they're just using the same PWM signal twice so these phases aren't interleaved.

After the XPower Titanium that's the second board from MSI that doesn't seem to be able to compete with it's competitors with the same price tag VRM-wise.
Also this is screwing up my list.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Agree
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> To me Ryzen is a great "Bang for $" CPU, regardless of OC headroom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


I have always been a fan of amd, preety obvious from my past endeavors. Being an extreme overclocker like myself one would think that i would be rather dissapointed. That is not the case. This is what I had hoped BD would be. Imagine my disappointment when testing BD in AMD lab in Austin TX pre launch...Im truly happy AMD got it right this time.

This time it's more than an alternative bang for buck cpu. It's a competitive product depending on what you use it for *without ln2*

If your looking for balance this is the cpu.

In the simplest of meanings that is what the word zen means and the name is very fitting.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have always been a fan of amd, preety obvious from my past endeavors. Being an extreme overclocker like myself one would think that i would be rather dissapointed. That is not the case. This is what I had hoped BD would be. Imagine my disappointment when testing BD in AMD lab in Austin TX pre launch...Im truly happy AMD got it right this time.
> 
> This time it's more than an alternative bang for buck cpu. It's a competitive product depending on what you use it for *without ln2*
> 
> If your looking for balance this is the cpu.
> 
> In the simplest of meanings that is what the word zen means and the name is very fitting.


Personally I'm glad to be coming back to the AMD team and I'm glad to see them competitive again, when I did my first build I do admit it was Intel, however my second build was an AMD Phenom II 1100T and I had that build for 5 years and only went with my current Intel build because of the raw performance at the time. To be honest though when I first ran programs on my 6600k I was disappointed it just didn't feel like much of a performance booster over what I had with the 1100T


----------



## ChronoBodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Personally I'm glad to be coming back to the AMD team and I'm glad to see them competitive again, when I did my first build I do admit it was Intel, however my second build was an AMD Phenom II 1100T and I had that build for 5 years and only went with my current Intel build because of the raw performance at the time. To be honest though when I first ran programs on my 6600k I was disappointed it just didn't feel like much of a performance booster over what I had with the 1100T


Because overall CPU power, the 6600k is more like an overclocked 1090t packed into 4 cores and a bit faster.

If you want a real upgrade within reasonable price, ryzen 1600 would be up your alley, 6c/12t of broadwelll ipc


----------



## etre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChronoBodi*
> 
> Because overall CPU power, the 6600k is more like an overclocked 1090t packed into 4 cores and a bit faster.
> 
> If you want a real upgrade within reasonable price, ryzen 1600 would be up your alley, 6c/12t of broadwelll ipc


In reality the differences between cpus are not so easy to quantify as benchmarks make it to be. Most of the apps have a minimum requirement to run well, with no big improvements after that. VLC needs something more then a SB Celeron but after, you can't tell the difference between a pentium and a 500$ 1800X. In this context saying that 6600k is just a bit faster than a Phenom .... just lol. If you can't tell the differece between those 2, ryzen 1600 is overkill for you anyway. And btw, OC 6600k > Ryzen 1600 in games and most of the apps.
Now, can we let these guys discuss boards and vrms, because is far more interesting.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> MSI seems to like being an exot VRM-wise on AM4 boards.
> Some pictures of the X370 Gaming Pro Carbon VRMs came up on hardwareluxx:
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-7.html#post25405483
> Instead of using four doublers to get those eight phases powered with their 4+2 controller it looks like they're just using the same PWM signal twice so these phases aren't interleaved.
> 
> After the XPower Titanium that's the second board from MSI that doesn't seem to be able to compete with it's competitors with the same price tag VRM-wise.
> Also this is screwing up my list.


So the X370 Pro Carbon is not too far off from the Titanium but uses a half baked version of phase doubling? They should have just called the Xpower an "Mpower Gaming" in that case.
How's it screwing up your list by the way?









I'm not surprised the MSI B350 offerings are not great. The ASUS/Gigabyte/Asrock offerings for B350 aren't great either so it's just artificial market segmentation. The Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is marginal since one reviewer has the VRMs hit over 60°C after 20 min of AIDA64 on 3.85GHz @ merely *1.356V* . The pricing & feature set saves it right now (maybe not when the X370 Prime and Gigabyte Gaming 5 drop in price a bit ~ $20-30). The X370 Killer SLI had much potential as well but I still haven't gotten a definitive answer on whether it has USB 3.1 Gen 2 on the back panel plus people have been having less luck with it in terms of memory.

To start some thinking : what is the point of a motherboard? To provide an interface for your CPU + GPU + SSD + storage devices (USB 3.1, USB 3.0) + power delivery + fan & pump control + half decent integrated sound for non-audiophiles. RGB LED and gaming feature set with Killer LAN and other stuff is not the point of the motherboard for general usage.

Since the iGPU is non existent with Ryzen then all those X370 boards with all the display outputs are wasting space + resources.

I'm hoping a stripped down $170 board can fulfill this purpose:
* 6+ CPU phase of quality (TI NexFET / IR 3553 or better)
* USB 3.1 Gen 2
* NVMe
* heatsinks on all VRM
* 2+ memory phase (Ryzen is memory reliant for infinity fabric) of quality not merely amperage
* BCLK for memory tweaks
* 2 way Crossfire , 2 way SLI - optional
* Post Code Display
* PS/2 port for keyboard - optional
* Dual BIOS if possible

So far the closest board seems to be the Taichi. I bet if Asrock stripped down the Quad SLI to Dual SLI, got rid of the second M.2 slot, removed the 2 RGB headers, made wifi optional (see Killer SLI , this is at most a $20 add on) , dropped the 2 extra SATA3 6Gbps from ASMedia ASM1061 ($5?) , dropped one or two of the USB 2.0 or USB 3.0 headers (one of each is enough for most cases) , and dropped the ASRock SLI_HB_Bridge_2S Card (they sell this for $30 but the cheapest SLI bridge is $10) from the package they'd have a solid board that they could market as a X370 Extreme6 or non-gaming branding in between the Fatal1ty K4 and the Taichi.


Spoiler: Theoretical board B.O.M. adjustments



$210 Taichi MSRP
- $20 wifi , assume it costs Asrock $10 for antennas + M.2 wifi +BT card
- $5 ASM1061 extra SATA3 6Gbps, assume it costs Asrock $5 in bulk
- $10 remove Quad SLI traces and associated chips and the SLI bridge
- $5 remove 2nd M.2 slot & associated traces
+ $5 power+reset button from Fatal1ty Pro , assuming 100% markup (for example https://www.sparkfun.com/products/10441)
= $175 MSRP for an X370 Extreme 6 based off the Taichi

For the ASUS X370 Prime Pro I'd say it needs to add on to the Bill of Materials
+ $10-20 Post Code LED and associated traces + debug
+ $5 memory phase (https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993) ... this is super generous as one NexFET is ~$2 but there may be extra manhours to implement an additional phase
+ $20 BCLK gen option w/ associated traces although I figure the BCLK chip itself to be about $3 (as per http://www.mouser.com/Semiconductors/Integrated-Circuits-ICs/Clock-Timer-ICs/_/N-6j748/)
+ $5 power+reset button
~ $210 ,which isn't that wonderful , for a Prime "Expert" or Prime Deluxe
Keep in mind that more manhours are used to add stuff than to take away stuff

For the Gigabyte Gaming K7 I'd strip it down and change the B.O.M. for a Ultra Durable board ( I think there's no more Ultra Durable due to Aorus) or OC branding .... see Biostar GT7 pricing for what I mean
$210
- $15 RGB LED strip on the right side & RGB strip header based on pricing for 24 5050 LEDs w/ led driver (https://octopart.com/2862-adafruit+industries-71108774)
- $10 RGB Fusion elements on the heatsinks , motherboard, and memory ... based on pricing for LED
- $15 Killer Ethernet --- a guess
+ $30 change *IR3553 to IR3555 60A* phases for the CPU assuming $3 each (https://octopart.com/search?q=IR3555) ... this is generous since the price per 1000 of IR3553 and IR3555 are not much different
- $10 remove SATA Express connections
- $5 remove extra ALC 1220 chip (~$3 based off ALC 892 https://octopart.com/alc892-gr-realtek-50577570)
= $185



*Part pricing at 1000+ quantity (so about 100 motherboards if 6+4 phase count):*
On Semi 4C09N is about $0.25 each in 1000+ quantity https://octopart.com/ntmfs4c09nt1g-on+semiconductor-26105567
On Semi 4C10N is also about that amount https://octopart.com/search?q=4C10N+mosfet
On Semi 4C06N is about $0.30 each in 1000+ quantity https://octopart.com/search?q=mosfet+4C06N
NIKOS PK632BA is about $0.30 each according to a variety of Asian places (aliexpress/alibaba/ etc)
Vishay SIRA12DP (used on Gigabytes mainstream Z97 / Z170 / Z270) ~ $0.40 https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/vishay-siliconix/SIRA12DP-T1-GE3/SIRA12DP-T1-GE3CT-ND/3178384
Vishay SIRA18DP (used on Gigabytes mainstream Z97 / Z170 / Z270) ~ $0.40 https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/vishay-siliconix/SIRA12DP-T1-GE3/SIRA12DP-T1-GE3CT-ND/3178384
TI NexFET is about $2 each in 1000+ quantity https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993
IR3553 PowIRStage ~$3.50 each https://octopart.com/ir3553mtrpbf-infineon-65873046
IR3555 PowIRStage ~$3 each in 1000+ quantity https://octopart.com/search?q=IR3555
ISL95712 PWM ~ $7 https://octopart.com/search?q=ISL95712
IR35201 PWM ~ $3 https://octopart.com/ir35201mtrpbf-international+rectifier-73098642


----------



## AuraNova

At this rate, @AlphaC should design a motherboard and put it into production.









Also, thank you for this wealth of info you have been posting these past few days.


----------



## Undervolter

It's unbelievable, but in the local Amazon, the MSI X370 (now again available from 28 March) went *up* in price from 335EUR to 382EUR!


----------



## chew*

ASUS Prime X370 Pro "retail bought" just to be clear.

Sometime pictures say more than words....


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Undervolter*
> 
> It's unbelievable, but in the local Amazon, the MSI X370 (now again available from 28 March) went *up* in price from 335EUR to 382EUR!


Amazon Marketplace sellers have been marking up prices on various AM4 boards, so might be that


----------



## Undervolter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Amazon Marketplace sellers have been marking up prices on various AM4 boards, so might be that


Well, this price is for items sold directly by Amazon, but at this price i don't think they will be getting many orders and sooner or later they will be forced down.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> ASUS Prime X370 Pro "retail bought" just to be clear.
> 
> Sometime pictures say more than words....
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


How good was the stock pad/TIM solution between the VRMs and heatsink? Could you recommend a pad thickness and/or washer thickness between the screw head and springs if one was to replace this?

EDIT: On a related note...is it generally better to use a pad thicker than the gap and have some compression on it...or use one that either exactly matches or is only slightly larger than the gap with little/no compression? Sorry for all the noob questions but I've never replaced any pads before...I just use MX-4 like it's frank's red hot sauce.
But I ordered a 1.0mm and 1.5mm pad and some fans last night so I can thoroughly clean and re-mount all my video card heatsinks and replace a few fans that are on the fritz and I'll probably have some pad material left over and was thinking of re-doing the VRM heatsink too.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> How good was the stock pad/TIM solution between the VRMs and heatsink? Could you recommend a pad thickness and/or washer thickness between the screw head and springs if one was to replace this?


Really good contact with a decent pad. My only complaint is if you put a little pressure on the sinks they can be "tipped".

No springs its hard mounted with screws and washers to protect pcb. Actually had blue locktite on threads. Even so 2 screws felt a tad loose.


----------



## bardacuda

Ok, thanks for the info!


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> How good was the stock pad/TIM solution between the VRMs and heatsink? Could you recommend a pad thickness and/or washer thickness between the screw head and springs if one was to replace this?
> 
> EDIT: On a related note...is it generally better to use a pad thicker than the gap and have some compression on it...or use one that either exactly matches or is only slightly larger than the gap with little/no compression? Sorry for all the noob questions but I've never replaced any pads before...I just use MX-4 like it's frank's red hot sauce.
> But I ordered a 1.0mm and 1.5mm pad and some fans last night so I can thoroughly clean and re-mount all my video card heatsinks and replace a few fans that are on the fritz and I'll probably have some pad material left over and was thinking of re-doing the VRM heatsink too.


Thinnest is best as long as all of the VRM chip is touching the thermal pad. Air gaps are the worst but thermal pads don't have good thermal conductivity so the thicker they are the more distance is between the chip and the sink.

Thinner should have more effective compression because there's less material between the chip and the sink, unless the thinner one is denser. However, a denser pad may have better thermal transfer properties, too.


----------



## bardacuda

Ok that's what I thought but I wasn't sure.

I was thinking, say you had a 0.45mm gap, and you had a 0.5mm pad and a 0.7mm pad. Then say you used the 0.5mm pad and the force of the heatsink compressed it down to a 0.46mm gap... Then say you used the 0.7mm pad and it got compressed down to a 0.5mm gap. Even though the gap is a little bigger with the larger pad, it would make sense to me that it might have better conductivity now, because it is now effectively denser.

I have no clue if that would be the case or not but it was bothering me.


----------



## ChronoBodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> ASUS Prime X370 Pro "retail bought" just to be clear.
> 
> Sometime pictures say more than words....


is it me or is the board scuffed up, right out of the box?


----------



## chew*

It's got your typical crap on the backside of pcb.


----------



## chew*

So far my personal thoughts.

Pwm runs cooler than the gaming 5 actually very cool. I have even played with settings that should ramp heat up.

Chokes get hot fets warm.

Now set voltage and targeted voltage the gaming 5 wins.

My usual settings for a daily allows for some droop some overshoot.

With the gaming 5 i set 1.4875 llc high I peak 1.5040 and drop to approximately 1.4650 During prime 95. +/- is how i like to run...just a tad bit of droop

This imo is not optimal for ln2 use....it should do that in the middle around setting medium so the top two lvls can be reserved for (benching) but they are close.

On the asus if i want to target 1.4875 i must set 1.45 and screw with pwm settings even at lvl 1 llc just to keep from shooting over 1.52v

This is lvl 1 llc...theres 5 total.

Anyway this can be tuned so no big deal. Just annoying.

Im probably going to have to solder to back of socket on both to verify volage and voltage swing for a more accurate analysis.


----------



## bardacuda

So level 1 LLC has a 70mV range, and levels 2 - 5 will cause an even wider range of over/undershoot? I'm not too fond of that but I guess 70mV is narrow enough. Good to hear the mosfets stay cool.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> So level 1 LLC has a 70mV range, and levels 2 - 5 will cause an even wider range of over/undershoot? I'm not too fond of that but I guess 70mV is narrow enough.


0 undershoot on the asus at just llc 1. Its all overshoot right now. Its not end of world. They can tune it in bios.

Gigabyte at lvl 4 -.025/+.025 i did not test the highest setting as i prefer a little droop.


----------



## bardacuda

Ohh so it is adding at least 0.0375 and as much as 0.070? That's way better then...as long as you know in advance you can set lower than your target and still have a small range of variance.


----------



## cssorkinman

1800X on theTitanium prime 95 blend at 4.1ghz. 1.432 volts in bios LLC 4 allowing for a little droop ( 1.424 V most of the run)

4150 mhz takes about 1.45 volts under load , which I'm not comfortable with and it also shows core temps above 80 - ( probably 60 but I don't want to burn $500







)
Only running 2 120's on the radiator at the moment...need to get that fixed up.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## chew*

I dont even have a fan on PWM or blowing on back of board. This can be used in a closed case real world with horrible airflow. Nor do I need be afraid of voltage I use









The money i saved bought a 32g kit of memory









Anyway BETA bios which has some serious USB flakiness.

But just to show that some of the ram issues can be tuned via bios.

Current Bios on site 16-16-16 best I can post at.

Ignore the 32m I use it to make sure that the gains are not just visual and compare vs previous tests I have done.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> How's it screwing up your list by the way?


I had to fill in that "4 x 2" figure in the "true phases"-column which I don't really like because it doesn't really clear up what's actually on the board - but seems to be the best way do describe the VRM with a list formatted that way.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> ISL95712 PWM ~ $7 https://octopart.com/search?q=ISL95712
> IR35201 PWM ~ $3 https://octopart.com/ir35201mtrpbf-international+rectifier-73098642


I'm supprised by that.
One can get a highend digital controller cheaper than an analog ISL chip?
Even with the need of buying more external drivers with the IR controller there would be no reason to use the ISL controller if pricing is nearly the same for the board manufactures.

Talking about controllers: The digital Richtek one MSI is using (RT8894A) looks pretty interesting to me.
I'm really curious how it actually performs but some users already told me about plenty of good OC-Features and messurements in the MSI BIOS.
And e.g. the load line configuration the controller is able to set looks awesome (Register 1-9):

And they are really implementing that in the UEFI:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-6.html#post25400919

I think I have to take a closer look at that one...


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 0 undershoot on the asus at just llc 1. Its all overshoot right now. Its not end of world. They can tune it in bios.
> 
> Gigabyte at lvl 4 -.025/+.025 i did not test the highest setting as i prefer a little droop.


Lol typical Asus.

LLC to low on my AM3 (M4A89GTD Pro) meant if I set the vcore target to 1.38V I'd get 1.45V under load, just because.

No LLC and it'd droop to 1.35V.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I dont even have a fan on PWM or blowing on back of board. This can be used in a closed case real world with horrible airflow. Nor do I need be afraid of voltage I use
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The money i saved bought a 32g kit of memory
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway BETA bios which has some serious USB flakiness.
> 
> But just to show that some of the ram issues can be tuned via bios.
> 
> Current Bios on site 16-16-16 best I can post at.
> 
> Ignore the 32m I use it to make sure that the gains are not just visual and compare vs previous tests I have done.


I'm more concerned about damaging the cpu than the board as far as voltages.

Nice job getting that ram frequency at those timings with 16 gb modules.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Nighthog

One of my sticks of Corsair Ram stopped working, no longer found and refuses to boot with it when I did some quick troubleshooting.

Was running stock ram speed and XMP. Did a reboot and it was no longer there. It didn't give me any errors or such with the tests I had run before.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Lol typical Asus.
> 
> LLC to low on my AM3 (M4A89GTD Pro) meant if I set the vcore target to 1.38V I'd get 1.45V under load, just because.
> 
> No LLC and it'd droop to 1.35V.


Seriously it reminds me of my old m4a79T. That board was notoriously hard to get prime stable with the swing....it appears this one is going to be difficult as well in its current state.

For comparisons sake i got my 1700 and 1700x 48 hours before review deadline i tested both and had prime stability dialed in and ran 18 hours did review tests and wrote review. If i had this board during review..i would not have met deadline...

There is no off just auto. Off might help since you got a few pwm tuning options. I've mentioned it to them already.

16g DS is preety hard even if you try a single stick..

I'm not going to clutter up thread with my 2x8 gig tests but 14-11-11-11 was possible on a b350 @ 3200. Same on this board. Auto Rule is screwing 3200 divider and lower cas latencies. No ref clock = can not trick autorule


----------



## bardacuda

A user on the 'AMD Ryzen Motherboard Thread' has confirmed 6x IR3553M for the Gaming K7
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GamerDork*
> 
> Here's a few pictures of the motherboard with CPU/Wraith Cooler/M.2 SSD/16GB's Ram installed:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards
> 
> Please confirm whether it is IR3553M as suspected & help out br0da on https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GamerDork*
> 
> I can confirm that is in fact the IR3553M VRM's. Here's a picture of my VRM's with the heatsink removed:


----------



## Artikbot

Most of the board is identical between the G5 and the K7.


----------



## br0da

Thanks @GamerDork, @bardacuda and @AlphaC for the infos about the K7!
Meanwhile a user on hardwareluxx already posted pictures of his K7 (link "B2") but I'll add this as a source too.


----------



## chew*

"Please confirm whether it is IR3553M as suspected & *help a br0da out*"

Fixxed


----------



## br0da

I didn't get it, due to language barriers I think.


----------



## bardacuda

"Help a brother out." is a saying when someone is trying to appeal for sympathy when asking for a favour. Usually brother is pronounced "brutha" or "bruddah" which sounds almost the same as someone would pronounce your name.


----------



## br0da

Ah got it, thanks! I'm not used to that someone understands where my username comes from since in german forums nearly no one sees that HIMYM reference.


----------



## Doom2pro

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> One of my sticks of Corsair Ram stopped working, no longer found and refuses to boot with it when I did some quick troubleshooting.
> 
> Was running stock ram speed and XMP. Did a reboot and it was no longer there. It didn't give me any errors or such with the tests I had run before.


Lovely that sounds like what has been happening with the G.Skill Trident Z RGB kits on AM4...


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> One of my sticks of Corsair Ram stopped working, no longer found and refuses to boot with it when I did some quick troubleshooting.
> 
> Was running stock ram speed and XMP. Did a reboot and it was no longer there. It didn't give me any errors or such with the tests I had run before.


What board?


----------



## bardacuda

He's on a Gigabyte AB350 Gaming 3. I noticed there were a few ppl (chew included) that had a Gaming 5 die on them. I think in one instance the guy brought it back to life. Still though...makes you wonder if something is up with Gigabyte boards this round.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> He's on a Gigabyte AB350 Gaming 3. I noticed there were a few ppl (chew included) that had a Gaming 5 die on them. I think in one instance the guy brought it back to life. Still though...makes you wonder if something is up with Gigabyte boards this round.


I know exactly what is wrong with mine. DMM pretty much told me a story and a possible cause. Video made to support my findings

Giving them a little time to look into it before i post my findings.

My situation may be unique to what i did with my board so no need to create a panic.


----------



## bardacuda

What did you do exactly? I watched the videos you posted but it didn't explain what you were doing when the thing happened.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> What did you do exactly? I watched the videos you posted but it didn't explain what you were doing when the thing happened.


Nothing. Stock xmp loaded. Shut down in windows to activate my smt from a coldboot. Hit power button and poof.

A few hour prior to that? Taking out an intel timespy top score with a mid range targeted market motherboard with a considerable clock disadvantage.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Nothing. Stock xmp loaded. Shut down in windows to activate my smt from a coldboot. Hit power button and poof.
> 
> A few hour prior to that? Taking out an intel timespy top score with a mid range targeted market motherboard with a considerable clock disadvantage.


It seems XMP is bugged for some reason.

Mine was boot looping after trying XMP. After inserted the same values as XMP, everything was fine.

Whats more curious about it, was that it wasnt a constant boot loop. It was diferent everytime the system failed to boot.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I know exactly what is wrong with mine. DMM pretty much told me a story and a possible cause. Video made to support my findings
> 
> Giving them a little time to look into it before i post my findings.
> 
> My situation may be unique to what i did with my board so no need to create a panic.


LOL, that old chestnut.


----------



## yendor

@chew* cpu and ram?, merely a tickle. Your stability testing now.. thorough! ?


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have always been a fan of amd, preety obvious from my past endeavors. Being an extreme overclocker like myself one would think that i would be rather dissapointed. That is not the case. This is what I had hoped BD would be. Imagine my disappointment when testing BD in AMD lab in Austin TX pre launch...Im truly happy AMD got it right this time.
> 
> This time it's more than an alternative bang for buck cpu. It's a competitive product depending on what you use it for *without ln2*
> 
> If your looking for balance this is the cpu.
> 
> In the simplest of meanings that is what the word zen means and the name is very fitting.


I agree I mega happy with Ryzen generally, just need to get my 3.8GHz OC rock stable as my i5/Z97.

I will not lie I dumped AMD on CPU side after S939, both me and my bro have been looking to be back on AMD and seems the right time








.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Doom2pro*
> 
> Lovely that sounds like what has been happening with the G.Skill Trident Z RGB kits on AM4...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> What board?


Yeah I know about the RGB modules. And As some mentioned. Sitting on a Gigabyte AB350 Gaming 3 with F6d BIOS.
I was running almost a week before the ram died. Though when I think back I had various issues with boots a little while before the ram went home to bed..

I was trying some OC and at various times I would get 3 short beeps memory error on Post at restart or coldstart. Though I was still only running XMP on memory.
I was overclocking the cpu side and was thinking I had to low volts and increased vcore and things were fine for a while or when I reset my clocks and all seemed fine. It was kinda random when it would kick and foul my day and shred any "successes" finding stable clocks...

Running only 1 stick of ram I no more got the memory error at boot up.
I found out just this morning that my 2666Mhz XMP isn't ok. Thing locks the computer up when I run a CPU-Z validation. I was high in 3.9+Ghz and increased volt, lowered multi. Tried it all and was back at stock settings and still got a lock-up running validation, until I ran memory at 2133Mhz, Then it didn't freeze...
It was passing all other things but validation.
Maybe Manual settings are better. I was doing that at first but went over to XMP as it wasn't giving me issues running the settings manually as I did in the start.

I got in contact with my place of purchase and will be sending the kit back for inspection. This might take a whole week before I get back a replacement or worse.

I'm considering ordering a new kit in the meanwhile. Will be faster back up and running.
I'll have no proper computer to run in the meanwhile. My old parts don't have a OS, Maybe Vista...

ok. cpu-z validation refuses to work properly outright. no matter the settings the computer locks up after a short moment loading the validation on the website...
version 1.78.3x64


----------



## AlphaC

https://geizhals.eu/msi-x370-krait-gaming-7a33-001r-a1591059.html
*MSI X370 Krait Gaming* € 164.90 / £155.48 also appears to be 8+2
specs https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-KRAIT-GAMING.html#productFeature-section
* Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN







, ALC892

https://geizhals.eu/msi-x370-sli-plus-7a33-003r-a1591066.html
*MSI X370 SLI Plus* priced at € 160 / £149.99, appears to be 8+2
* $140 base cost on Newegg https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144024
specs https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-SLI-PLUS.html#productFeature-section
* appears to use 5K caps instead of black 10K or 12K ones ; Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN







, ALC892

B350

*MSI B350 Tomahawk Arctic* € 124.90 / £115.49 = 4+2 (white Tomahawk for people thinking of an Xpower)
https://geizhals.eu/msi-b350-tomahawk-arctic-7a36-004r-a1589800.html
$120 base cost on Newegg https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144028
specs https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B350-TOMAHAWK-ARCTIC.html
* black caps used , Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN , ALC892 , appears to lack USB 3.1 gen 2

https://geizhals.eu/msi-b350m-mortar-arctic-7a37-001r-a1584707.html
*MSI B350M Mortar Arctic* = 4+2 mATX (white version of Mortar)
specs https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B350M-MORTAR-ARCTIC.html

*B350M BAZOOKA* = 4+2 mATX (white LED version of mortar?) https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B350M-BAZOOKA.html

*B350 PC MATE* £95.48 = 4+2
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B350-PC-MATE.html
$100 base cost https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144029

Quote:


> The VRM on the motherboard is very strong, after doubling we get 12+4 phases for the core voltage and SOC voltage. The International Rectifier (now Infineon) IR35201 fully digital PWM is being used in 6+2 phase mode instead of 7+1 or 8+0 phase mode. It is one of the best digital PWMs on the market.
> 
> Each of its PWM channels is sent to an IR3598, doubler and dual driver chip, which then outputs to two Texas Instruments CSD87350Q5D NexFETs. The NexFETs are rated 25A at 90% efficiency and 40A maximum. The inductors are high-quality 60A parts, and the capacitors are 12K FP Japanese capacitors.


http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8099/asrock-x370-taichi-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html
Taichi leading the thermals


----------



## chew*

Just a heads up. New x370 Pro bios is an improvement but I did not get my voltage fix.....I would highly recommend 1.40 max set voltage......and do not touch LLC for now.

I leaned on them again tonight. Hopefully be sorted soon.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Just a heads up. New x370 Pro bios is an improvement but I did not get my voltage fix.....I would highly recommend 1.40 max set voltage......and do not touch LLC for now.
> 
> I leaned on them again tonight. Hopefully be sorted soon.


Which voltage fix?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Which voltage fix?


vcore and toning down LLC.

Its crazy aggressive. Lvl 3 set at 1.475 is seeing 1.588 loaded.

Auto overshoots .050, lvl .060, lvl 2 .080 lvl, 3 over .100

Im going to hard wire in measure points behind socket to verify.


----------



## bardacuda

What is the minimum overshoot on auto? Also are there any measure points on the top of the PCB near the edge similar to this? Also how close is CPU-Z or HWiNFO compared to true readings?


----------



## chew*

Not that im aware of its a mainstream x370 pro. .025 min .050 max on auto.

Software should not be trusted but in this case so far off i need to hardwire measure points. I dont bother installing hw info ever just because software monitoring compared to real is meh...

Once i verify or its fixxed this board imo is ready for ln2....i trust its reliabilty enough which is more than i can say for other boards.


----------



## bardacuda

Okay, so say you are targeting 1.40V....If you set LLC auto and vcore to 1.375, then under load it will only fluctuate between 1.40 - 1.425 right?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Okay, so say you are targeting 1.40V....If you set LLC auto and vcore to 1.375, then under load it will only fluctuate between 1.40 - 1.425 right?


Yep but what i want it to do is fluctuate from 1.35 to 1.40 under the above settings. Actually preferably around llc 1 or 2 not auto.

Basically i want some droop at lowest settings.


----------



## bardacuda

Okay thanks for info. I'm no pro overclocker so I don't necessarily need that level of control. I just don't want to have tons more voltage thrown at my CPU under load than what I specify. As long as I know to set my vcore lower than my target by 25mV, and vcore will only fluctuate between target+0 to target+25 I am cool with that.

In your case though, couldn't you just set vcore to 1.300 and LLC level 3 to have actual vcore end up at 1.35-1.40?

btw I'm not saying ASUS shouldn't fix this...just saying as long as you know exactly what each level of LLC is doing, it should be possible to compensate by setting vcore lower shouldn't it? I am guessing there is some nuanced reason why this sort of kludgey workaround would impact stability in a negative way that I just don't understand.


----------



## chew*

That could work but....say i boot at 4.0 and for boot the voltage is not enough?

I would much rather just work the way i suggested. I can get my gaming 5 prime stable at 4.0 with the +/- .025 droop with little to no effort. It requires lvl 4 (high) iirc. Touch higher than it should imo. Should do that at middle setting. On ln2 at high clocks its going to droop quite a bit at highest for sure...

Best ive gotten on this x370 pro is 3.9 in prime 95 trying to counter overshoot. Easier on my 1800x...my 1700 is flaky and even harder.

LLC is actually not spec for amd or intel. I have always found just a tad droop is the sweet spot air/water.

One more coffee then i whip out the iron and dmm. It's really annoying me.

Bye bye warranty.


----------



## bardacuda

Ah! So the problem is setting a low vcore impacts idle or non-0-pstate stability, and LLC only affects loaded vcore. Is that an accurate statement?


----------



## chew*

Yes


----------



## bardacuda

Ok thanks!







No more noob questions for now. Carry on, sir!


----------



## chew*

Its not noob questions.









I much rather prefer you being curious and asking then just trusting software.


----------



## bardacuda

The sad part is I will have to trust software because I'm not willing to trust my shaky hands or void my warranty with soldered test leads to get readings. If they were along the edge of the top of the pcb I'd do it even if it's not the absolutely most optimal place to. If you can report how your actual readings differ from CPU-Z or HWiNFO that would be helpful.


----------



## chew*

Thats ok....trust me to do it and find settings that equal the target voltage you desire providing your using board/bios i am on..


----------



## bardacuda

lol 100mV difference? software is useless


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> lol 100mV difference? software is useless


Pretty much. Always has been...working out stable settings then i will work out pwm settings that give you close as possible target to set vcore for my board and bios...

Looks like i am going to have to do this on a few boards....

Mind giving me a hand stilt?

I am in no position financially to buy them all and my connections from past are shaky at best right now...so for now self funded.


----------



## bardacuda

I will have the same board whenever it actually ships...

If there's no reason to use a later BIOS I'll use whichever one you're using because I def want to know what my actual vcore is. Maybe I will actually rig up some platform to set the board on with a hole underneath the caps and get an accurate DMM. The one I have is made for electricians so it's more for testing 120-600V AC circuits and only gives 'good enough' readings for 12V DC circuits but only has 0.1V resolution. Does Fluke make good electronics-oriented meters or is there a better brand for that stuff?


----------



## PsyM4n

It's probably not the board that is wrong, and in the unlikely scenario that it's wrong, it's intentional.

I suggest to test with a fluke, a properly calibrated one, not with a 10$ multi-meter.


----------



## chew*

I guarantee the fluke is not going to be .100 different. But ill go buy one just to make you happy. I have one. Can't find it. Ive compared this to it or i wouldn't use it. Seriously why not just say your dumb..

Oh btw. This is not a cheap $10 dmm. Just some fyi.

Who said board is wrong? Have i said that once yet? Or have i said software is wrong?

Fluke may give me higher resolution so 1.4xx instead of 1.4x which i mean seriously means nothing.


----------



## PsyM4n

If the board is wrong it won't be the first time a board was released miscalibrated. The related circuits are meant to be very accurate by design, yet here we are with boards like this, again.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> If the board is wrong it won't be the first time a board was released miscalibrated. The related circuits are meant to be very accurate by design, yet here we are with boards like this, again.


It's not the board that should be calibrated for software.....


----------



## chew*

Ok just left johnstone supply after comparing my meter to a $300 fluke.

Guess what other than higher resolution voltage in range 1.5 to 12v accurate...

Salesman "waste of money to prove a point"


----------



## chew*

Solder pads. Left SOC +/- Right VCORE +/-










Grounds on right side of pads. Positive on left sides of pads.


Soldered to a spare molex extender for ease of use. YMMV.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Solder pads. Left SOC +/- Right VCORE +/-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grounds on right side of pads. Positive on left sides of pads.
> 
> 
> Soldered to a spare molex extender for ease of use. YMMV.


I saw you mention in your video you used the Asus b350... do you know if it had vrm temp sensors? I have no idea what my vrm temps are. Also, did it have the ability to overclock p-states instead of being locked at max clock all the time?


----------



## chew*

B350 I was running voltage up and using ryzen master. I don't recall vrm temps but I need to swap back to test a couple bios on it so will check then.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> B350 I was running voltage up and using ryzen master. I don't recall vrm temps but I need to swap back to test a couple bios on it so will check then.


Ok, thanks. There is really only two temps i have: one is cpu temp, and the other is motherboard temp. The motherboard temp is generally around the cpu temp, but just lags behind a few degrees, so it makes me feel like it's not anything to do with the vrms.


----------



## chew*

I have an infrared here I use to check temps with. like I said in video I don't use software









I do however monitor temps and voltages via other methods. I will check temps on it when i test it.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have an infrared here I use to check temps with. like I said in video I don't use software
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do however monitor temps and voltages via other methods. I will check temps on it when i test it.


Did your board have heatsinks on the VRMs? and yea i was looking at getting an ir gun, do the cheap ones work ok?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Did your board have heatsinks on the VRMs? and yea i was looking at getting an ir gun, do the cheap ones work ok?


My prime b350 plus has vrm sinks yes, fets not impressed but for $80 on clearance fun to play with.

So/so. Around $79-$99 is accurate enough. Avoid the harbor freight stuff.


----------



## bardacuda

Curious why you use the 9V battery tester instead of the 2VDC setting on the DMM?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Curious why you use the 9V battery tester instead of the 2VDC setting on the DMM?


Thats just some dumb setting on this dmm. The power supply is 12v. It measures 12v fine. In a 12v power environment you use 12v setting.

The 1.5v is inaccurate for this type of testing especially if i go on ln2 and use the full 2.0v this board is capable of.

The fact that my SOC is nearly spot on shows its pretty damn accurate at this setting.

Fwiw at that setting my soc voltage is inaccurate and it reads .100 lower for vcore as well. That setting is for like chargers, and 1.5v batteries and little power packs thar run @ 1.5v

Fwiw even on a cheap $10. Dmm .100 mv is way out of tolerance. They would not be able to sell it to public.

Most important part of all is proof is in results...now that i know what was happening i dialed in stability pretty damn quick...past 3 hours prime 95 np...prior dead in less than 1...

Which tells me gaming 5 at 1.475 llc high probably was not real 1.475 v either


----------



## bardacuda

Ok cool. Thanks for the vid...it was enlightening. So level 5 LLC isn't actually adding 100mV then..that was just CPU-Z shenanigans?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Ok cool. Thanks for the vid...it was enlightening. So level 5 LLC isn't actually adding 100mV then..that was just CPU-Z shenanigans?


Software shenanigans as usual. 5 years retired...more things change...the more they stay the same.


----------



## chew*

The outcome of knowing your voltage vs guessing. 1.39-1.41 measured vcore, 1.0 SOC



Now I need to test some other chips to see what they changed memory wise in 0511 or if this IMC is a dud as I can not get 3200 to not toss errors.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

MSI Titanium X370 thermals:

http://www.legitreviews.com/thermal-image-testing-on-amd-x370-motherboards-by-asus-gigabyte-and-msi_193006/5

Looks pretty good. I wish they would have included the MOSFETs even though those weren't the hottest points, but showing what *is* the hottest is helpful.


----------



## chew*

All at stock so that does not tell us much.

The quality of parts, ability to dissipate heat will be greatly impacated with an overclock and voltage...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Stock gives us a valid starting reference. My opinion is that the design of the VRM cooling on the Titanium is superior to any other board I have seen. Deep fins with significant surface area and much better airflow characteristics than any other board, combined with a heat pipe. This will excel with air cooling and I would expect even more so with water cooling where passive heat dissipation will be critical...but we'll see.


----------



## chew*

I will give it that.

Asus stole a wing from wing commander and shoved it over heatsink i guess because they thought it looked cool?

Gigabyte went and stole 4c/8t socket max heatsinks off there z270 gaming line up and did not use the heat pipe because well simple...it was not designed for AM4 so did not fit by the 8 pin.

There is no perfect board unfortunately they all have a few flaws.

Kudos to Asrock for not sticking a shroud over there vrm heatsink on taichi.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Stock gives us a valid starting reference. My opinion is that the design of the VRM cooling on the Titanium is superior to any other board I have seen. Deep fins with significant surface area and much better airflow characteristics than any other board, combined with a heat pipe. This will excel with air cooling and I would expect even more so with water cooling where passive heat dissipation will be critical...but we'll see.


Your thoughts?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## beers

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> Pretty much. As you can see from every datasheet out there, vrms are rated for current, not power


wattage and current are synonymous at the same voltage


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

That looks pretty good. I found my "sweet spot" with my 1700x to be 3.85Ghz at 1.30v. Rock solid. I didn't find it worth pushing the extra voltage for the marginal increase (I got to 3.9Ghz at about 1.375v stable and stopped testing there). I'm running a Noctua 12S cooler with a single fan in an older Cooler Master tower case....

I try to tell anyone who will listen that the power delivery on the Titanium is steady and solid. With 1.30v set in the BIOS and default (Auto) LLC settings, my voltage varies from 1.304 to 1.320 under load. VRM temps remain cool.

(Memory is only running @2400 because I am running 4 sticks. I figured I would wait for updates to support higher speeds. I know it can run @3200 if I pulled 2, but I like having 32GB...)


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *beers*
> 
> wattage and current are synonymous at the same voltage


But they're not when the voltage drop or heat induced resistance fluctuate. Which, correct me if I'm wrong, happens all the time in VRM mosfets.


----------



## br0da

I found out some things about the low-cost VRMs on AM4 boards that could be interesting for some of you guys:

It all started when I was looking at the drivers of the MSI designs with the RT8894A controller which are named "4P=". Since the controller already has got some integrated drivers, using RT external drivers too would be a good idea. So I found out that these "4P=" drivers are RT9624F Richtek drivers.

Afterwards I also saw "4J=" drivers on the ASUS B350-Plus with are most likely RT9624As. Isn't using a Richtek controller with them a good idea?
But in their lists on their website Richtek hasn't got a single controller with 52 pins but the ASP-labeled controller on the B350-Plus has got 52 pins.

So I started some google research for a RT88xx controller with WQFN-52L package and found the datasheet of the RT8877C.
This controller is able to handle 4+2 phases, hasn't got any integrated drivers, is SVI2 compatible and comes in a WQFN-52L package - I think we found the controller under the ASP1106GGQW label?


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> I found out some things about the low-cost VRMs on AM4 boards that could be interesting for some of you guys:
> 
> It all started when I was looking at the drivers of the MSI designs with the RT8894A controller which are named "4P=". Since the controller already has got some integrated drivers, using RT external drivers too would be a good idea. So I found out that these "4P=" drivers are RT9624F Richtek drivers.
> 
> Afterwards I also saw "4J=" drivers on the ASUS B350-Plus with are most likely RT9624As. Isn't using a Richtek controller with them a good idea?
> In their lists on their website Richtek hasn't got a single controller with 52 pins but the ASP-labeled controller on the B350-Plus has got 52 pins.
> 
> So I started some google research for a RT88xx controller with WQFN-52L package and found the datasheet of the RT8877C.
> This controller is able to handle 4+2 phases, hasn't got any integrated drivers, is SVI2 compatible and comes in a WQFN-52L package - I think we found the controller under the ASP1106GGQW label?


We speak English around here.


----------



## br0da

Sorry, it's already evening in germany so I'm lacking in concentration.








Hopefully you're able to understand what I was trying to point out.


----------



## yendor

@br0da
They've used the ASP1106GGQW controller on their rx470 strixx. I'm not sure if you will make better heads out of it's configuration here or can make use of the nice pictures here. Good to know.


----------



## Zhany

Figured I would post my temperatures on my Crosshair VI Hero I have an ambient temperature currently of 26C and my VRMs are sitting at 32c at idle. Under P95 Small FFT temperature stabilized at 47C

These values were on a Ryzen 7 1800x currently running at stock.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> @br0da
> They've used the ASP1106GGQW controller on their rx470 strixx. I'm not sure if you will make better heads out of it's configuration here or can make use of the nice pictures here. Good to know.


That's quite interesting, thanks! I thought they've used this controller the first time on the AM4 boards.
From what I was able to see so far it's again a 4+2 setup without any integrated driver in the controller.
But the external drivers don't seem to be labeled the same as the RT9624 ones from the B350-Plus... Anyways I'd still expect a (maybe a bit modded) RT8877C under the ASP1106GGQW.


----------



## Raephen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *beers*
> 
> wattage and current are synonymous at the same voltage


I see wha you are getting at, but: P = U x I. Even at a fixed voltage (U), wattage (P) =/= amps (I)...


----------



## CrazyElf

Legit Reviews may have an explanation as to why we have motherboard issues now:

http://www.legitreviews.com/one-motherboard-maker-explains-why-amd-am4-boards-are-missing_192470

Quote:


> "It's all about the bad coordination, bad communication, bad support and bad timing to launch this platform in my opinion. With all these issues, none of us could start manufacture the boards sooner. Also, in January and February, all board vendors' production lines were occupied with Intel 200 series boards before Chinese New Year and tried to ship as much boards as we can to ensure we won't have stock issues while Asia was on New Year vacation.
> 
> In late December, AMD decided to pull in the launch date (it was scheduled to launch in late Q2) and launched it right after Chinese New Year but AMD keep the CPU supply quantity secret from us the whole time. They only shared the data 2 weeks before the launch, we didn't understand why they were doing it. Also, their BIOS team and engineers were doing terrible jobs on supporting us on the BIOS microcode updates, driver updates, CPU samples for testing. They have done nothing they should have been doing to support the launch platform partners and always delay or give no response on support requests. We were all having huge issues to debug with limited AMD resource support including validating the parts, and fixing the memory clock speed that is all limited by AMD.
> 
> In general, it's been too long for AMD to launch a new CPU, so they forgot how to do it, so they launched the CPU just like they were launching the graphics card. They didn't care about the platform eco-system, so the eco-system is suffering and stock is delayed.
> 
> We are flying in new batches every 3 days to try to fulfill the back orders ASAP, so they should be all back in stock soon. With all the board reviews released, per Newegg and Amazon, the AMD memory limitation issue is slowing down the sales though.
> 
> We need your help to feedback that to AMD as well on their supports issues." - Anonymous Motherboard Manufacture


So that's why we have shortages and immature BIOS shipped.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> That's going off what I found in the AMD CPU thread as far as the NIKOS parts go.
> 
> 185W Power_in - 150W Power_out = 35W power loss
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624139/lightbox/post/25915421/id/2982252
> 
> edit: If it's not obvious to people, that is the whole VRM including driver


Yeah that's not good. That's a lot of heat loss that would get worse with higher clocks.

Here's the FLIR testing:
ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero


RAM is hot on the Asus board, but the VRMs are running at 7 degrees cooler than the MSI.

Even the X70Gaming K5, a 200 board.


Then the MSI X370 XPower (keep in mind this 300 board loses to a 200 board):


I think that we need to test all of these under Linpak with 1 CPU to find VRM temperatures. Overkill VRM means cooler temperatures under load and any load you can get. I would like to see some VRM temperatures under a typical OC (granted that's probably 4.1 GHz tops, perhaps with some RAM overclocks).

My sinking gut feeling is that the MSI would lose even more at 4.1 GHz under Linpack. Then the $300 XPower would lose even more badly to the $200 or so X370 Taichi.


Spoiler: An example - a 5960X at 4.5 GHz (motherboard is MSI X99A Godlike)



http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7271/msi-x99a-godlike-gaming-intel-x99-motherboard-review/index10.html

The heatsinks stay cool under load, which means the VRMs are relatively cool too. I think that Sin0822 (the reviewer) uses Linpack. If so, these would be amazing temperatures. Even if it "only" normal load, it's still very cool for a VRM. Sin0822 - could you please confirm?

 

Keep in mind when looking at these results that a 5960X at 4.5 GHz has a higher current draw than the X370.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> cssorkinman and some other owners in the XPower thread (http://www.overclock.net/t/1624134/official-msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-am4-owners-club) might be able to help you with that. If anything it should have some tantalum caps and IR3555 parts similar to the Intel Xpower boards on a new revision. All of them should complain to MSI to get a revision 1.1 with proper power delivery for that price.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe it's meant as a GPU overclocking board if MSI gave up on overclocking the Ryzen CPU, it has a GPU power connector 6 pin at the bottom.
> 
> From the thread


Can confirm that it's a 6 pin for the powering the GPUs.

It can come in handy for multi-GPU:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/52871/amds-radeon-rx-480-drawing-much-power-over-pcie-slot/index.html

If you've got 2 or more GPUs that exceed the PCIe specification of 75W, it comes in handy.

That's the rationale. MSI's own Lightning cards though won't need it:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/r9-290x-lightning-performance-review,3782-5.html

You could run 2 of these GPUs on 1 PCIe slot from a power draw perspective with no issues.


The reason being how they build their custom PCBs:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> I'm bias, I won't lie (cause I bought the board) but Asus CH6 is the way to go if you're worried about VRM temperatures. The TI NexFETs they use are crazy efficient. One report was saying 46C max on their OC. That's like, ice cold for a VRM.
> 
> Anyone citing the brick bug...it's been fixed with the latest beta BIOS.


Going to disagree with this one. The Asrock X370 Taichi has more phases of the same VRM.

Analysis:






Not saying the Asus X370 Crosshair is underpowered by any means, but it is not the most overkill. We haven't seen anything like the Gigabyte Z77X-UP7, in part because we don't need to. There's not much OC headroom so to speak of.

Where does that leave us overall then?

First, I'm going to recommend for those gaming to get a clock generator board. That is because the gap between the Ryzen and Intel CPUs seems to largely go away. I think it's because of the way AMD designed the Ryzen bus, but not 100% on that. Still need more testing to see.

I think that we are looking at:

Asrock X370 Fata1ty Gaming Pro = Asrock X370 Tachi: 12 + 4 design, 480A + 160A. If you need 5 Gb/s Ethernet, get the X370 Professional Gaming.
Asus X370 Crosshair Hero: 8 + 4 design, 320A + 160A
Gigabyte K7 - no confirmation; will be tied with Asus if 60A, otherwise third place
For those who have not read my Ryzen gaming thoughts - keep in mind that having good RAM is rather important for gaming FPS. We'll need to see if any motherboard is more competent at OC-ing RAM, but for now I'd say these 4 are the ones to get.

I'd hesitate to guess that good RAM is more important for CPU bottlenecked situations (if you play CPU bottlenecked games like the Battlefield series or Cities: Skylines) than GPU limited, but it seems to help across the board.

The Tachi seems like the top recommendation, unless you need extra USB (get the Crosshair once the BIOS is fixed anyways).

Why is the X370 so underwhelming?
Terrible VRM for a flagship motherboard, from a company well known to endow their XPower line-up with overkill hardware. A flagship 300 board should be putting everything else to shame. Instead loses to a 200 board like the X370 Taichi.

Really at a loss to explain MSI though - seriously, what were they thinking?

How the mighty have fallen ...


10 + 4 design of IR3555M @ 60A (really 5 + 2 doubled), controlled by an IR35201. Seriously, and the Z270 XPower is $330 USD versus the $300 USD X370 Xpower.

How can a company that built this



... build the X370 and call it a flagship? As an owner of 2 XPower boards, I'm alarmed. This could very well end up devaluing the XPower brand the way FX did when they called Bulldozer "FX".


----------



## cssorkinman

@crazyelf I don't think you can compare the wattage values directly from board to board based on hwinfo's numbers.

The proof will be in the performance - time will tell. So far the only handicap the Titanium has shown is the lack of base clock adjustment - otherwise it's arguable that users here have had far less issues with them than the other top tier boards.

I see a few Titanium owners are stable at 4ghz on all cores at default cpu voltages / llc settings - how many other boards are doing that?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @crazyelf I don't think you can compare the wattage values directly from board to board based on hwinfo's numbers.
> 
> The proof will be in the performance - time will tell. So far the only handicap the Titanium has shown is the lack of base clock adjustment - otherwise it's arguable that users here have had far less issues with them than the other top tier boards.
> 
> I see a few Titanium owners are stable at 4ghz on all cores at default cpu voltages / llc settings - how many other boards are doing that?


Handicap 1. Price.

When an msi user solders to back of socket i will believe 4gig stock volts...till then.

Im talking a solid 1.xxx vid volt on a 1700 or a solid 1.3xx on an 1800x

Oh an fwiw stock can be 1.50 vcore chip dependant with turbo xfr kicking in.

I have used msi. I have soldered read points in the past. I know better.

I have also had the mosfets pop on the bench on ln2 at rather low clocks 5.5 on deneb 790,890,990. No condensation was not an issue not the way i do things.

When the msi's died...they took prisoners.

@ $500 a wack for 1800x?

You first.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Right, a 0.5c difference *at the caps* is a loser.

Again, I will let real world results speak for themselves. Quality and performance. I have been looking for ANY reports of MSI titanium failures or QC issues and have not been able to find any (I have started *asking* since searches turn up nothing). It's the only X370 board I can say this for. EVERY other one has reports of *failures*, and not simply incompatibility issues.

Every MB manufacturer has built some duds. Referring to prior generation boards is great for story telling but says nothing about current boards. Just ask all those ASUS owners with bricked MBs.

Every time someone reports success with the Titanium, all I hear are excuses from the critics. My first MSI board over a half dozen years ago was crap. I am by no means an MSI fanboy. Historically, I put much more faith in Gigabyte, but the Titanium is a *solid*, well-built board. I took care to consider the design of the VRM *cooling* knowing that a well-designed heat sink system would be critical to keeping thermals low. The MSI Titanium arguably has the best design out there. Not just the heat pipes, which others have, but consideration of surface area and air flow to provide adequate cooling even for systems that use water cooling and will more heavily rely on passive heat radiation. Most X370 VRM heat sink designs are crap, opting for looks over performance.


----------



## chew*

Yes agreed but then you need to consider other parts of the equasion.

Necessity.

Sub par parts possibly running hotter needs better cooling.

I will wait for someone brave to run ln2 and high clocks...

That will tell us way more than air/water.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @crazyelf I don't think you can compare the wattage values directly from board to board based on hwinfo's numbers.
> 
> The proof will be in the performance - time will tell. So far the only handicap the Titanium has shown is the lack of base clock adjustment - otherwise it's arguable that users here have had far less issues with them than the other top tier boards.
> 
> I see a few Titanium owners are stable at 4ghz on all cores at default cpu voltages / llc settings - how many other boards are doing that?
> 
> 
> 
> Handicap 1. Price.
> 
> When an msi user solders to back of socket i will believe 4gig stock volts...till then.
> 
> Im talking a solid 1.xxx vid volt on a 1700 or a solid 1.3xx on an 1800x
> 
> Oh an fwiw stock can be 1.50 vcore chip dependant with turbo xfr kicking in.
> 
> I have used msi. I have soldered read points in the past. I know better.
> 
> I have also had the mosfets pop on the bench on ln2 at rather low clocks 5.5 on deneb 790,890,990. No condensation was not an issue not the way i do things.
> 
> When the msi's died...they took prisoners.
> 
> @ $500 a wack for 1800x?
> 
> You first.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting to see what the chip can take , let someone else establish a voltage/heat breaking point before I push the chip too hard. $500 is a bit hard to swallow. As for the Titanium - I have no worries whatsoever.


----------



## chew*

Chips are resilient to vcore. Heat is the enemy. I used cold air ran up to 4.250 ish @ 40c idle 1.576 set voltage np...heat just impairs the ability to go higher. Ive run 1.6 on air testing get temps down scales. Dont get temps down clocks worse.

Soc not so sure. I would go easy on it.

Internal sources of mine are extremely reliable reported no cpu deaths. Plenty of board deaths.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

So there is my beef. There is no evidence the specific NIKO parts used are "sub par". Not being the absolute best doesn't make something sub-par. Again, this date back to improper NIKO parts being used on earlier MB's. That wasn't the fault of NIKO that their parts were used incorrectly and failed as a result of stresses outside of their specification.

Now if proper parts had been used and had above normal failure rates when used within spec, THEN I would be concerned. To date, nobody has demonstrated that was actually the case. I researched the hell out of this whole NIKO controversy and would have returned the board if I could have found any reason to be concerned. NIKO's got a bad wrap for being improperly used.

Again, I agree they aren't the absolute best mosfet available. My car doesn't have the absolute best or most efficient engine either. That said, it drives great, gets very good mileage, is extremely safe, and extremely reliable. Guess what I am not at all concerned about? That it's engine isn't the absolute most efficient. Too much emphasis can be put on any single component and you end up loosing sight of the forest for the trees...

As for LN2 cooling - that is great for extreme benchmarking but is also an extremely limited niche and nobody actually RUNS their system on LN2 full time (although MSI claims the Titanium is designed to support it for BOTH the CPU and Memory modules...)


----------



## chew*

I know this and only this.

Components certified for transportation are tested in the worst possible conditions.

If they get certified for that its a pretty big deal.

If they can not be certified there is a reason for it.

While ln2 is not real world use it can show you whats what in power delivery.

We found out quick MSi 790, 890 pwm was trash...took end users considerably longer to find out what we found out in 30 minutes.

You can choose to learn from that or you can choose not to.

Change your investigation to board deaths on ln2 and then see if user is good enough to pull board apart to see what died. We will find out which pwm designs kinda suck for all brands.


----------



## Despoiler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> So there is my beef. There is no evidence the specific NIKO parts used are "sub par". Not being the absolute best doesn't make something sub-par. Again, this date back to improper NIKO parts being used on earlier MB's. That wasn't the fault of NIKO that their parts were used incorrectly and failed as a result of stresses outside of their specification.
> 
> Now if proper parts had been used and had above normal failure rates when used within spec, THEN I would be concerned. To date, nobody has demonstrated that was actually the case. I researched the hell out of this whole NIKO controversy and would have returned the board if I could have found any reason to be concerned. NIKO's got a bad wrap for being improperly used.
> 
> Again, I agree they aren't the absolute best mosfet available. My car doesn't have the absolute best or most efficient engine either. That said, it drives great, gets very good mileage, is extremely safe, and extremely reliable. Guess what I am not at all concerned about? That it's engine isn't the absolute most efficient. Too much emphasis can be put on any single component and you end up loosing sight of the forest for the trees...
> 
> As for LN2 cooling - that is great for extreme benchmarking but is also an extremely limited niche and nobody actually RUNS their system on LN2 full time (although MSI claims the Titanium is designed to support it for BOTH the CPU and Memory modules...)


What modifications have you done to your car in the attempt to increase HP? If you say none then bad analogy is bad.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Despoiler*
> 
> What modifications have you done to your car in the attempt to increase HP? If you say none then bad analogy is bad.


On modern cars, nothing. The systems are too complex and that is not how I use my car. I am familiar with the possible modifications including custom EPROMS, but smog restrictions can make those tricky.

Going back, I have assisted with partial rebuilds of V8's with custom camshafts to modify lift/duration, custom intakes (high rise Edelbrocks manifolds), custom carbs, custom exhausts and mufflers for reduced backpressure, and aftermarket flywheels for better off-the-line launches. We would use a remanufactured short block since porting and polishing and setting the pistons and such was rather a PITA.


----------



## chew*

All i can say is this...

In 790 days this was the most reliable pwm design. It was not the best...it was just the most reliable....you could get it hot you could freeze the chokes and caps (albeit it would eventually oc less as any pwm frozen will be victim to ) but it just kept ticking...










That was around 10 hours straight @1.9+ vcore.

They tried getting fancy with 890 me and mad22 ( another big ln2 amd guy ) started popping boards pwm left and right.


----------



## cssorkinman

Kinda pointless going back and forth about it at this time - either a board will earn respect or it won't , just don't let prejudices cloud your judgement.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Kinda pointless going back and forth about it at this time - either a board will earn respect or it won't , just don't let prejudices cloud your judgement.


I never do.

890 we went to asus. Was more reliable.

990 i did a vcore test on all 3 top tier 990 fx.

We ended up using asus again.

I'm a fan of what works reliably and nothing more


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I never do.
> 
> 890 we went to asus. Was more reliable.
> 
> 990 i did a vcore test on all 3 top tier 990 fx.
> 
> We ended up using asus again.
> 
> I'm a fan of what works reliably and nothing more


Fair enough. I have seen *every* MB manufacturer release a crap MB so I have no brand-specific trust. I also purchased my components with an AMEX to get their automatic extended warranty for electronics to hedge my bet because even a great board can fail prematurely (or just after the warranty would expire - which has happened more than once to me). It used to be that users were expected to properly break in their components before stressing them. I am still of that old-school mindset and want to ease my system into it as I do feel that helps with longevity, but even the highest MTBF component will occasionally crap out prematurely...that's how averages work.

I am eager to see more reporting on all the top MB's comparing OC performance - top speed achieved, voltage regulation, and thermal performance. I think THAT would be quite helpful for many people debating on which way to go. Other than actual longevity reporting, it's the best we can hope for this early in a platforms lifecycle...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Fair enough. I have seen *every* MB manufacturer release a crap MB so I have no brand-specific trust.


That my friend is the gods honest truth. Could not have said it better myself.


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Fair enough. I have seen *every* MB manufacturer release a crap MB so I have no brand-specific trust.


Same.

I've had issues with every brand I have tried. Some massive. Some minor. Same with brands. I've had issues with some brands more than others, but I just tend to go with whatever works.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

For those interested and paying attention, the latest 1.41 BIOS for the Titanium (just released) adds BCLK support (so it has been there, just inaccessible) as well as a number of additional settings and memory profile/preset options.

It honestly now looks a lot closer to what one would expect, so far as options, from a top-tier X370 board.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> For those interested and paying attention, the latest 1.41 BIOS for the Titanium (just released) adds BCLK support (so it has been there, just inaccessible) as well as a number of additional settings and memory profile/preset options.
> 
> It honestly now looks a lot closer to what one would expect, so far as options, from a top-tier X370 board.


Is it fine grain control?

The cpu itself supports blck changes so fine grain tells us if via a chip or via cpu.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

I haven't played with it (I'll let others be the guinea pigs), but it's a free form entry and not limited to selected values (if that answers your question). I don't have a way to screenshot (might try a cell phone pic). I'll boot back into the BIOS and take some notes and report back as they also added other controls that I am completely unfamiliar with...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

First off, my apologies for the poor image quality. Here are some pics of the latest BIOS options on the MSI X370 titanium...

This shows the BCLK control (I set it to 101 just to show granularity):


This shows memory overclock presets available:


This shows an additional new memory setting (ProcODT?):


And these are the advanced voltage control options (not really changed):


They also added an IOMMU option and multiple A-XMP profile support.


----------



## chew*

Certainly has the options as expected of top tier.

Any tab in there that shows microcode version?

Also click help you can screenshot in bios with uefi









Usually f12.


----------



## The L33t

The B350 Tomahawk also got the BCLK adjustment in the latest BETA. Dunno about the remanding stuff.









Since the Tomahawk also had the AGESA updated to *1.0.0.4 RC1* I suspect the Titanium did also!


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> The B350 Tomahawk also got the BCLK adjustment in the latest BETA. Dunno about the remanding stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since the Tomahawk also had the AGESA updated to *1.0.0.4 RC1* I suspect the Titanium did also!


Ahh so its not fine grain as in 100.20.

New agesa unlocks the bclk of the cpu.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ahh so its not fine grain as in 100.20.
> 
> New agesa unlocks the bclk of the cpu.


I can now confirm the AGESA update on the titanium: http://imgur.com/a/JDnFU (From reddit user)

Previous version of microcode was: 8001105

Now:800111C


----------



## chew*

Thats the info i was looking for









Still going to want a board with chip to help unlink devices or will be pretty limited.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ahh so its not fine grain as in 100.20.
> 
> New agesa unlocks the bclk of the cpu.


Not sure what that means as the CPU doesn't have an internal clock generator that I am aware of. This setting changes the base bus speed and I have confirmed it applies to both CPU and RAM clocks, so this isn't from the AGESA code but simply a BIOS update revealing a MB capability.


----------



## chew*

The Stilt claims it does. Since he is privvy to more info than 99% of us i would believe what he says.

He said it was not as fine grain.

101*40 =4040.

Currently we have .25x multis so 40.25x 100 = 4025.

I would say fine grain would be 99.80 to 100.00.

You think they chipped a little b350 to?

AMD even stated bclk would be unlocked in newer agesa.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Interesting. Found some of his discussions regarding this on Anandtech. I don't see the point of an external clock generator if the chip has one. That would seem to conflict. The chips clock definitely changes the memory clock and PCIe clock, and the chip has most system functions on it as well. This would explain the lack of an *external* clock generator on these boards. Why bother? Who would really tweak 104.7Mhz vs 104.75 =Mhz versus just going from 104 to 105? :-/


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Interesting. Found some of his discussions regarding this on Anandtech. I don't see the point of an external clock generator if the chip has one. That would seem to conflict. The chips clock definitely changes the memory clock and PCIe clock, and the chip has most system functions on it as well. This would explain the lack of an *external* clock generator on these boards. Why bother? Who would really tweak 104.7Mhz vs 104.75 =Mhz versus just going from 104 to 105? :-/


Well if i am right somehow ASUS may be seperating the bus via there chip...hard to explain how guys are doing 145 pci without killing components unless somehow they managed to seperate at least some of them.

I have found .25 is difference between stable and not to so fine grain i guess could help.

I don't have the technical background or knowledge stilt has. He would be able to explain it far better.

I just have a gift and i feel some internal knowledge hinders me even though i have access if i asked most likely.

I have a there is no spoon approach with some technical useful procedures applied.

Between the two drastically different approaches alot can be learned.


----------



## Trender07

So Im between the ASRock X370 Killer and the MSI B350 Tomahawk Arctic. I've read the topic and looks like the MSI doesn't have very good VRMs so I'd should go for the Killer, but the thing is MSI is trying hard on BIOS updates, I've tested my RAMs on my friends setups and it can run 3200 MHz on the MSI Tomahawk with 1.32 beta bios, and only 2933 on the ASRock so thats the problem. For the VRM problem yes Im going to OC my Ryzen 1700, but I rather get the 3200 MHz motherboard with worse VRMs(well im not going to 4.1 nor my 1700 can reach it) or 2933 motherboard... I don't really know and been reading several forums and threads


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> So Im between the ASRock X370 Killer and the MSI B350 Tomahawk Arctic. I've read the topic and looks like the MSI doesn't have very good VRMs so I'd should go for the Killer, but the thing is MSI is trying hard on BIOS updates, I've tested my RAMs on my friends setups and it can run 3200 MHz on the MSI Tomahawk with 1.32 beta bios, and only 2933 on the ASRock so thats the problem. For the VRM problem yes Im going to OC my Ryzen 1700, but I rather get the 3200 MHz motherboard with worse VRMs(well im not going to 4.1 nor my 1700 can reach it) or 2933 motherboard... I don't really know and been reading several forums and threads


I'm in the same sinking boat as you. I've had to make a snap decision on a board and not second guess myself. Because I know that if I do, I'll still be looking at 5 or 6 different boards. I have one on preorder, hoping a different one comes in stock. If it does, I get that one. Otherwise, wait for the preorder to fulfill.

By the way, that Killer is a nice board.


----------



## Trender07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> I'm in the same sinking boat as you. I've had to make a snap decision on a board and not second guess myself. Because I know that if I do, I'll still be looking at 5 or 6 different boards. I have one on preorder, hoping a different one comes in stock. If it does, I get that one. Otherwise, wait for the preorder to fulfill.
> 
> By the way, that Killer is a nice board.


Ye ikr Im getting sick looking motherboards literally, ik the Killer is nice but it doesn't works for me If I can't reach 3200 MHz with my RAM, thing the Tomahawk does but that one is worse , I want to buy the tomahawk cos of my 3200 Mhz but then get gimped at year or so or can't overclock to 3.8 or whatever because of crap VRMs would be awful


----------



## chew*

ch6 under the knife soon,

just need to wrap up some stuff on the x370 pro.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

I helped my two friends with Ryzen builds. One went with the Titanium, the other the Tomahawk. Both are running their 1700x at 3.8Ghz and 1.30 volts with zero issues.


----------



## Trender07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I helped my two friends with Ryzen builds. One went with the Titanium, the other the Tomahawk. Both are running their 1700x at 3.8Ghz and 1.30 volts with zero issues.


But how much time 3.8 GHz was tested? Im between (from what I've test):

- ASRock X370 Killer: 2933 MHz
- Tomahawk B350 Arctic: 3200 MHz

But everyones saying how bad VRMs are for the MSI and maybe some other manufactures B350 motherboards, like this one i.e: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/61xvp1/b350_vrm_temps/


----------



## The L33t

If anything can be said about the AM4 MSI offerings is their UEFI is probably amongst the most stable and less bugged, specially the voltage control/LLC. If only they had stepped up a bit on the component side they would undeniably be the standard recommendation AFAIC. UEFI can allways be improved, unfortunately the components and features (hardware wise) cannot.

As for the B350, most if not all are lacking on the VRM department. Even if 4.0 can be achieved (and it certainly is with ease on some models/cpu dependent) with decent voltage, maintaining that 24/7 will be a challenge, one does have to consider summer temps with high ambient temperatures etc. The VRM on the B350's (all brands) will be inadequate.

I find it a bit sad since the VRM components are quite cheap considering they are purchased in the millions of units... most if not all of us would be willing to pay 15/20 more USD/EUR on the B350's and have a decent VRM, future proofed, and really overclocking friendly, a VRM on par with the x370 models.

I do not run dual cards, never will, so the B350 makes sense, but the VRM's are not up the task I want them to be, and this is not a limitation on the B350 side or AMD, the motherboard manufactures are just trying to drive us to the X370 side and leave the B350's to the Ryzen 5's and folks not overclocking much... and that does not make sense! Every chip is unlocked for a reason.


----------



## Trender07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> If anything can be said about the AM4 MSI offerings is their UEFI is probably amongst the most stable and less bugged, specially the voltage control/LLC. If only they had stepped up a bit on the component side they would undeniably be the standard recommendation AFAIC. UEFI can allways be improved, unfortunately the components and features (hardware wise) cannot.
> 
> As for the B350, most if not all are lacking on the VRM department. Even if 4.0 can be achieved (and it certainly is with ease on some models/cpu dependent) with decent voltage, maintaining that 24/7 will be a challenge, one does have to consider summer temps with high ambient temperatures etc. The VRM on the B350's (all brands) will be inadequate.
> 
> I find it a bit sad since the VRM components are quite cheap considering they are purchased in the millions of units... most if not all of us would be willing to pay 15/20 more USD/EUR on the B350's and have a decent VRM, future proofed, and really overclocking friendly, a VRM on par with the x370 models.
> 
> I do not run dual cards, never will, so the B350 makes sense, but the VRM's are not up the task I want them to be, and this is not a limitation on the B350 side or AMD, the motherboard manufactures are just trying to drive us to the X370 side and leave the B350's to the Ryzen 5's and folks not overclocking much... and that does not make sense! Every chip is unlocked for a reason.


Yeah I can understand that 4.0 24/7 are overkill for B350s VRMs, but what for, like idk 3.8? MSI have the best BIOS atm with their beta I can get 3200 MHz, thing I can't on the better VRM motherboard X370 Killer so its so damn hard to choose the right motherboard


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> Yeah I can understand that 4.0 24/7 are overkill for B350s VRMs, but what for, like idk 3.8? MSI have the best BIOS atm with their beta I can get 3200 MHz, thing I can't on the better VRM motherboard X370 Killer so its so damn hard to choose the right motherboard


As long as you guarantee a good air flow on the VRM and keep the voltages in check the B350's Tomahawk will be just fine even on 3.8. Unless your CPU happens to be **** and requires more than 1.35+ to get you there. Make sure you have decent cpu cooling too, will get you there with less volts.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> But how much time 3.8 GHz was tested? Im between (from what I've test):
> 
> - ASRock X370 Killer: 2933 MHz
> - Tomahawk B350 Arctic: 3200 MHz
> 
> But everyones saying how bad VRMs are for the MSI and maybe some other manufactures B350 motherboards, like this one i.e: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/61xvp1/b350_vrm_temps/


MSI's design is ok, nikos have a bad rep and only time could change that. 3.6 with just about all of them and stock cooler . Or consider e ring the cost of the cpu you could step up 50 USD and get x370 with more features as well as, hopefully, better vrm...


----------



## h2323

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> Legit Reviews may have an explanation as to why we have motherboard issues now:
> 
> http://www.legitreviews.com/one-motherboard-maker-explains-why-amd-am4-boards-are-missing_192470
> So that's why we have shortages and immature BIOS shipped.
> Yeah that's not good. That's a lot of heat loss that would get worse with higher clocks.


Except AMD's financial road map called for Q1 for 6 straight Quarters, as did their official road map. AMD showed working benchmarks and boards in November. AMD showed all boards available at launch plus a few in at Jan CES. I call bull.


----------



## Trender07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> As long as you guarantee a good air flow on the VRM and keep the voltages in check the B350's Tomahawk will be just fine even on 3.8. Unless your CPU happens to be **** and requires more than 1.35+ to get you there. Make sure you have decent cpu cooling too, will get you there with less volts.


Well my case have really good airflow but Im going to keep the Wraith Spire, so I guess it'll be 3.7 Ghz for B350? So whats going to give more performance in gaming? 3200 MHz RAM, 3.7 GHz CPU with Tomahawk or 2933 Mhz RAM, 3.8 GHz CPu with X370 Killer?


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> Well my case have really good airflow but Im going to keep the Wraith Spire, so I guess it'll be 3.7 Ghz for B350? So whats going to give more performance in gaming? 3200 MHz RAM, 3.7 GHz CPU with Tomahawk or 2933 Mhz RAM, 3.8 GHz CPu with X370 Killer?


Splitting hairs but memory frequency should be more relevant as far as performance goes in this new AMD architecture than a 100mhz on the CPU side...

I would go for the MSI personally. I like the warranty on them better than ASRock, and the bios development is quite decent on the MSI side too, updated AGESA code and all... even BLCK adjustment added in the latest bios.

IMMV


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> Well my case have really good airflow but Im going to keep the Wraith Spire, so I guess it'll be 3.7 Ghz for B350? So whats going to give more performance in gaming? 3200 MHz RAM, 3.7 GHz CPU with Tomahawk or 2933 Mhz RAM, 3.8 GHz CPu with X370 Killer?


Judging how this new architecture works, my guess would be the memory frequency being more relevant to performance than a 100mhz bump on the cpu side.

I also happen to like the warranty and support on MSI better than ASRock. But that's just me.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2323*
> 
> Except AMD's financial road map called for Q1 for 6 straight Quarters, as did their official road map. AMD showed working benchmarks and boards in November. AMD showed all boards available at launch plus a few in at Jan CES. I call bull.


I liked the Chinese New year story. I'm entirely willing to buy it.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

I helped my two friends with Ryzen builds..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> But how much time 3.8 GHz was tested? Im between (from what I've test):
> 
> - ASRock X370 Killer: 2933 MHz
> - Tomahawk B350 Arctic: 3200 MHz
> 
> But everyones saying how bad VRMs are for the MSI and maybe some other manufactures B350 motherboards, like this one i.e: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/61xvp1/b350_vrm_temps/


He's been running 3.8 at 1.30v full time for just under 2 weeks. He primarily games, and has had zero issues.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> lol 100mV difference? software is useless


It begs the question on why the readings are so wrong.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Stock gives us a valid starting reference. My opinion is that the design of the VRM cooling on the Titanium is superior to any other board I have seen. Deep fins with significant surface area and much better airflow characteristics than any other board, combined with a heat pipe. This will excel with air cooling and I would expect even more so with water cooling where passive heat dissipation will be critical...but we'll see.


It's easier to get a heatsink added or add airflow than to redo power circuitry on a motherboard.









I like the design of Asus X370 Prime Pro boards that appear to put functionality of the heatsink over aesthetic. It's a shame that so much money is invested into LEDs and shrouds for overclocking boards but that is what sells I guess.

The Xpower is not a bad board, just priced way too high unless you are overclocking GPUs on LN2 & it's lacking external clock gen. It's simply unworthy of the Xpower name. Microcenter discounted it to $250 a few times already, which is still high but more in line with Mpower pricing. The board is at best on Intel Mpower / Gaming M5 levels of featureset. It is also a problem with the MSI SLI Plus if you do a side by side comparison of the ICs with Intel Z series , let alone VRM. (When even B350 board has ALC1220 with audio enhancements such as audio caps /amp then you have a problem selling X370 boards with ALC892.)

Xpower would only put out 20A at 2.6W power dissipation from the PK632BA low-side MOSFET & 13A at 2.2W at the high side mosfet _per [email protected] for other motherboards from MSI ,_ so having double the low side mosfets is a bandaid solution. Having a massive heatsink is another bandaid solution. I can't believe people are defending the pricing on it as a top end board when those mosfets are about $0.40 each vs $2 or $3 each on the ASUS CH VI Hero , Asus x370 Prime Pro, or Gigabyte x370 Gaming K7. It's similar to Gigabyte dropping IR3553M for Vishay SiRa12 & SiRa18 after Haswell & Asrock doing the same going from TI NexFETs to Sinopower & some other random Chinese brand mosfets unless you bought a OC board. It's not an MSI problem , it's a motherboard manufacturer problem of them milking repeat customers that just want the same thing as a reputable they have used.

specsheet for PK632BA : http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
specsheet for PK618BA: http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/138874237504741113.pdf
specsheet for PK616BA: http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
^ yes unikc is the same company, see Mail: [email protected] ( http://www.unikc.com.cn/En/Contact.aspx?BaseInfoCateId=43&ProductsCateId=43&CateId=43 )

It's undeniable fact that the VRM is far cheaper than MSI's Intel-based Xpower variants. The Z170 / Z270 variant uses 14 of the IR3555 (~ $3 per), tantalum capacitors, & comes with an external clock generator. So regardless of whether it is any good at overclocking, MSI is profiteering based on ignorance of IC costs and people that took a leap of faith without reviews containing disclosure on the board ICs.

Just CPU+SOC mosfets alone : 6x PK616BA + 12x PK632BA + 2 x PK616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 22 x $0.40 = $8.80 *vs 14 x $2.35 in bulk quantities of 1000 which is $32.90 or more at $3.10 per consumer cost as per Octopart which is $43.40*

In addition to add perspective the X370 Pro Carbon which costs a full $120 less has 8x PK616BA + 8x PK632BA + 2x PK 616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 20 x $0.40 = $8.00 *which is less than a dollar difference*
Is there $120 (an entire extra B350) worth of added features?

Also AFAIK the X370 Taichi & Fatal1ty Pro both use NexFETs for the memory phases which would be much stronger than what others are using. Those two boards are analogous to Z270 Taichi / Fatal1ty Gaming i7 so the pricing is rather fair unless you live in a country where a Taichi costs more than a ASUS CH VI Hero.

For example in Poland, MSI X370 Xpower = 1319 zł to 1339,00 zł , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro = 1319 zł to 1327,43 zł , ASUS CH VI Hero = 1179,00 zł , Asrock x370 Taichi = 1129 zł, Biostar X370GT7 = 1043,95 zł, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 949 zł, MSI x370 Pro carbon = 819,00 zł, ASRock X370 GAMING K4 = 739 zł to 769,00 zł, ASUS X370 Prime Pro = 699 zł to 759,00 zł

In Australia: MSI X370 Xpower = 469AUS, ASUS CH VI Hero = 369AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 = 349AUS, Asrock X370 Taichi = 329AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 315AUS to 319AUS, MSI X370 Pro Carbon = 289AUS, ASUS Prime X370 Pro= 239AUS , AsRock X370 fatal1ty Gaming K4 = 219AUS
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> But how much time 3.8 GHz was tested? Im between (from what I've test):
> 
> - ASRock X370 Killer: 2933 MHz
> - Tomahawk B350 Arctic: 3200 MHz
> 
> But everyones saying how bad VRMs are for the MSI and maybe some other manufactures B350 motherboards, like this one i.e: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/61xvp1/b350_vrm_temps/


I'd invest a bit more for the X370 Killer but both lack USB 3.1 Gen2. The B350 Tomahawk Arctic has almost the same amount of current capability as the X370 Killer due to the B350 Tomahawk doubling the low side mosfet , if the PK618BA is used on the Asrock X370 Killer board as suggested by nl.hardware.info.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> If anything can be said about the AM4 MSI offerings is their UEFI is probably amongst the most stable and less bugged, specially the voltage control/LLC. If only they had stepped up a bit on the component side they would undeniably be the standard recommendation AFAIC. UEFI can allways be improved, unfortunately the components and features (hardware wise) cannot.
> 
> As for the B350, most if not all are lacking on the VRM department. Even if 4.0 can be achieved (and it certainly is with ease on some models/cpu dependent) with decent voltage, maintaining that 24/7 will be a challenge, one does have to consider summer temps with high ambient temperatures etc. The VRM on the B350's (all brands) will be inadequate.
> 
> I find it a bit sad since the VRM components are quite cheap considering they are purchased in the millions of units... most if not all of us would be willing to pay 15/20 more USD/EUR on the B350's and have a decent VRM, future proofed, and really overclocking friendly, a VRM on par with the x370 models.
> 
> I do not run dual cards, never will, so the B350 makes sense, but the VRM's are not up the task I want them to be, and this is not a limitation on the B350 side or AMD, the motherboard manufactures are just trying to drive us to the X370 side and leave the B350's to the Ryzen 5's and folks not overclocking much... and that does not make sense! Every chip is unlocked for a reason.


If you want a half decent overclock you need X370 in this current lineup. If the PK618BA instead of SM4336 is truly the mosfets on the Killer SLI and Fatal1ty K4 , shame on Asrock. I've seen people stating they cannot top out over 3.8GHz 24/7 under load on the stock cooler so that means the B350 boards are aligned for people using stock coolers.
We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> So there is my beef. There is no evidence the specific NIKO parts used are "sub par". Not being the absolute best doesn't make something sub-par. Again, this date back to improper NIKO parts being used on earlier MB's. That wasn't the fault of NIKO that their parts were used incorrectly and failed as a result of stresses outside of their specification.
> 
> Now if proper parts had been used and had above normal failure rates when used within spec, THEN I would be concerned. To date, nobody has demonstrated that was actually the case. I researched the hell out of this whole NIKO controversy and would have returned the board if I could have found any reason to be concerned. NIKO's got a bad wrap for being improperly used.
> 
> Again, I agree they aren't the absolute best mosfet available. My car doesn't have the absolute best or most efficient engine either. That said, it drives great, gets very good mileage, is extremely safe, and extremely reliable. Guess what I am not at all concerned about? That it's engine isn't the absolute most efficient. Too much emphasis can be put on any single component and you end up loosing sight of the forest for the trees...
> 
> As for LN2 cooling - that is great for extreme benchmarking but is also an extremely limited niche and nobody actually RUNS their system on LN2 full time (although MSI claims the Titanium is designed to support it for BOTH the CPU and Memory modules...)


If the MSI X370 XPower and the Gigabyte X370 K5 had the same cost, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The thing is the Gigabyte performs a bit better (uses PowIRStages) and costs 200 USD, versus the 300 USD MSI XPower.

Compounding the problem, the X370 Taichi is also 200, and it will run even cooler than the Asus X370 Crosshair. It has more of the same phases.

I'm not against paying more for quality. I'm against paying more for an inferior performing motherboard though. Oh, and it's a huge oversight not to have a clock generator when boards 100 less have one.

The HWInfo also shows this to be a pretty inefficient Mosfet, as defined by power loss. Unless there is something very wrong with the Taichi, a 300 dollar board will lose to a 200 board.

If the MSI X370 XPower had say, IR6811/IR6894 DirectFET and a clock generator, along a few more features, we would not be having this conversation. I'd say, well, it is a more expensive board, but it is also a more powerful VRM, so you get what you pay for. But in this case, you don't get what you pay for. You get less than what you pay for had you gone with the Asrock X370 Taichi.

I've bought MSI before. I bought a Z87 Xpower and later an X99 Xpower. I also own many MSI GPUs. MSI markets their board as the ultimate overclocking motherboard. Even if you don't use LN2, I want it to be able to take the worse possible loads ... and more importantly it needs to be able to stand up to the competition. If it's not meant for LN2, it should not be marketed as the top overclocking board and priced accordingly.

The Z270 XPower fits the bill if I were to buy Z270 on Intel. No point now because for the cost of a 7700k and a Z270 Xpower, that's almost as much as a 1800X and a X270 Taichi. 7700k may do better at a few single threaded tasks, but the 1800X will shred it at multithreaded tasks. We'll have to wait and see how much better it gets once the RAM is unlocked. I expect huge gains at file compression especially.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Kinda pointless going back and forth about it at this time - either a board will earn respect or it won't , just don't let prejudices cloud your judgement.


The problem is that it's hardware issue. Nothing except a new revision will add better Mosfets and a clock generator

It's possible for a board with good Mosfets to underwhelm. It's not possible for an expensive motherboard with subpar Mosfets to impress. Especially not when the competition is offering boards with better Mosfets for a cheaper price with a Base clock generator.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Fair enough. I have seen *every* MB manufacturer release a crap MB so I have no brand-specific trust. I also purchased my components with an AMEX to get their automatic extended warranty for electronics to hedge my bet because even a great board can fail prematurely (or just after the warranty would expire - which has happened more than once to me). It used to be that users were expected to properly break in their components before stressing them. I am still of that old-school mindset and want to ease my system into it as I do feel that helps with longevity, but even the highest MTBF component will occasionally crap out prematurely...that's how averages work.
> 
> I am eager to see more reporting on all the top MB's comparing OC performance - top speed achieved, voltage regulation, and thermal performance. I think THAT would be quite helpful for many people debating on which way to go. Other than actual longevity reporting, it's the best we can hope for this early in a platforms lifecycle...


Barring bugs, this generation, it may well be MSI's turn, so to speak, not so much due to BIOS bugs, but hardware.

On X99, Asus for example did not do very well. ON some boards, they were known to randomly fry CPUs even if the user did not OC them:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1561131/5960x-dead/0_100

Turns out the BIOS would randomly send high voltage to the CPU, frying it. One of the techs I spoke with at a PC store said that the majority of dead X99 systems were Asus. No idea if this is a large enough sample size though, but I avoided them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> It begs the question on why the readings are so wrong.
> It's easier to get a heatsink added or add airflow than to redo power circuitry on a motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the design of Asus X370 Prime Pro boards that appear to put functionality of the heatsink over aesthetic. It's a shame that so much money is invested into LEDs and shrouds for overclocking boards but that is what sells I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> The Xpower is not a bad board, just priced way too high unless you are overclocking GPUs on LN2 & it's lacking external clock gen. It's simply unworthy of the Xpower name. Microcenter discounted it to $250 a few times already, which is still high but more in line with Mpower pricing. The board is at best on Intel Mpower / Gaming M5 levels of featureset. It is also a problem with the MSI SLI Plus if you do a side by side comparison of the ICs with Intel Z series , let alone VRM. (When even B350 board has ALC1220 with audio enhancements such as audio caps /amp then you have a problem selling X370 boards with ALC892.)
> 
> Xpower would only put out 20A at 2.6W power dissipation from the PK632BA low-side MOSFET & 13A at 2.2W at the high side mosfet _per [email protected] for other motherboards from MSI ,_ so having double the low side mosfets is a bandaid solution. Having a massive heatsink is another bandaid solution. I can't believe people are defending the pricing on it as a top end board when those mosfets are about $0.40 each vs $2 or $3 each on the ASUS CH VI Hero , Asus x370 Prime Pro, or Gigabyte x370 Gaming K7. It's similar to Gigabyte dropping IR3553M for Vishay SiRa12 & SiRa18 after Haswell & Asrock doing the same going from TI NexFETs to Sinopower & some other random Chinese brand mosfets unless you bought a OC board. It's not an MSI problem , it's a motherboard manufacturer problem of them milking repeat customers that just want the same thing as a reputable they have used.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> specsheet for PK632BA : http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> specsheet for PK618BA: http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/138874237504741113.pdf
> specsheet for PK616BA: http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> ^ yes unikc is the same company, see Mail: [email protected] ( http://www.unikc.com.cn/En/Contact.aspx?BaseInfoCateId=43&ProductsCateId=43&CateId=43 )
> 
> 
> 
> It's undeniable fact that the VRM is far cheaper than MSI's Intel-based Xpower variants. The Z170 / Z270 variant uses 14 of the IR3555 (~ $3 per), tantalum capacitors, & comes with an external clock generator. So regardless of whether it is any good at overclocking, MSI is profiteering based on ignorance of IC costs and people that took a leap of faith without reviews containing disclosure on the board ICs.
> 
> Just CPU+SOC mosfets alone : 6x PK616BA + 12x PK632BA + 2 x PK616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 22 x $0.40 = $8.80 *vs 14 x $2.35 in bulk quantities of 1000 which is $32.90 or more at $3.10 per consumer cost as per Octopart which is $43.40*
> 
> In addition to add perspective the X370 Pro Carbon which costs a full $120 less has 8x PK616BA + 8x PK632BA + 2x PK 616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 20 x $0.40 = $8.00 *which is less than a dollar difference*
> Is there $120 (an entire extra B350) worth of added features?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Also AFAIK the X370 Taichi & Fatal1ty Pro both use NexFETs for the memory phases which would be much stronger than what others are using. Those two boards are analogous to Z270 Taichi / Fatal1ty Gaming i7 so the pricing is rather fair unless you live in a country where a Taichi costs more than a ASUS CH VI Hero.
> 
> For example in Poland, MSI X370 Xpower = 1319 zł to 1339,00 zł , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro = 1319 zł to 1327,43 zł , ASUS CH VI Hero = 1179,00 zł , Asrock x370 Taichi = 1129 zł, Biostar X370GT7 = 1043,95 zł, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 949 zł, MSI x370 Pro carbon = 819,00 zł, ASRock X370 GAMING K4 = 739 zł to 769,00 zł, ASUS X370 Prime Pro = 699 zł to 759,00 zł
> 
> In Australia: MSI X370 Xpower = 469AUS, ASUS CH VI Hero = 369AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 = 349AUS, Asrock X370 Taichi = 329AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 315AUS to 319AUS, MSI X370 Pro Carbon = 289AUS, ASUS Prime X370 Pro= 239AUS , AsRock X370 fatal1ty Gaming K4 = 219AUS
> 
> 
> 
> I'd invest a bit more for the X370 Killer but both lack USB 3.1 Gen2. The B350 Tomahawk Arctic has almost the same amount of current capability as the X370 Killer due to the B350 Tomahawk doubling the low side mosfet , if the PK618BA is used on the Asrock X370 Killer board as suggested by nl.hardware.info.
> If you want a half decent overclock you need X370 in this current lineup. If the PK618BA instead of SM4336 is truly the mosfets on the Killer SLI and Fatal1ty K4 , shame on Asrock. I've seen people stating they cannot top out over 3.8GHz 24/7 under load on the stock cooler so that means the B350 boards are aligned for people using stock coolers.
> We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.


Pretty much captured what I wanted to say. +Rep

The big problem we are seeing is that VRMs are going down across the board in favor of flashy features like LEDs. We are seeing flash take precedence over substance.

Granted, it's not 100% all worthless - I found the addition of strengthened PCIe slots to be a good idea. We are seeing GPUs in excess of 1.5kg, which is in excess of PCIe spec come out, especially triple slot coolers. With full sized waterblocks, GPUs are also very heavy as they contain quite a bit of water in them. It reduces the risk of a broken PCIe slot:

 

I would like to know how many PCB layers are on the low end Asrocks too - they have a history of cutting those too. I expect that the Taichi should have at least 6, but the others I'm not as confident about.

For those buy X390 and X399, assuming they exist, we'll have to look very carefully at the VRMs. With double the load per clock, and half the board space due to the extra RAM channels, having VRM quality becomes extremely important. Even more so with the 32 cores, but I don't think we are going to be able to reach 4.1 GHz with 32 cores. I would love to overclock just 1 CCX though. I don't get why motherboard makers don't just pair up a IR IR6811/IR6894 DirectFET combination with a really good choke (at least >75A).



The big problem is that the overwhelming majority of the public doesn't realize having good quality VRMs play a huge role in performance. I think that if it exists, X390 will have VRMs comparable to X99, although I'd like to see the absolute best for X399. Wouldn't say no to a 12 layer PCB. It will have to be thick anyways to get the power delivery, the traces for 8 channels of RAM, the 128 PCIe lanes, and Infinity Fabric connection between the CPUs.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> Judging how this new architecture works, my guess would be the memory frequency being more relevant to performance than a 100mhz bump on the cpu side.
> 
> I also happen to like the warranty and support on MSI better than ASRock. But that's just me.


Agree that MSI has good support.

On the RAM, yeah I would agree on that too. It may make more sense to bin on the RAM overclockability of Ryzen than anything else ironically.


----------



## cssorkinman

@crazyelf

For comparison's sake

Prime 95 temps ( C ) @ 70 F ambient 1800X MSI Titanium - as measured by hwinfo Heatsinks have direct air flow and they were cool to the touch.

Stock low 30's

4 ghz 1.36 volts under load ( all auto cpu voltage and llc settings) 46 average 49 maximum - Stopped test
4.1 ghz 1.424 volts 48 average 51 maximum 1 Hr+ - Stopped test
4.125 ghz 1.432 volts 50 average 54 maximum * 30 mins* stopped test
4.150 ghz 1.440 volts 48 with 52 maximum - chickened out for fear of damaging the cpu ( voltage) after a 5 minute run.( i mean that darn thing is $500 lol ) tongue.gif

All on the original 1.1 bios running AXMP settings on the Gskills 2x8gb cl14 1T

I'd invite others to run the same tests and see what they get for VRM temps.

The latest bios offers base clock overclocking for the Titanium.

I do agree it's $50 to high, but the thing sells out almost instantly at the egg , can you really blame MSI?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @crazyelf
> 
> For comparison's sake
> 
> Prime 95 temps ( C ) @ 70 F ambient 1800X MSI Titanium - as measured by hwinfo Heatsinks have direct air flow and they were cool to the touch.
> 
> Stock low 30's
> 
> 4 ghz 1.36 volts under load ( all auto cpu voltage and llc settings) 46 average 49 maximum - Stopped test
> 4.1 ghz 1.424 volts 48 average 51 maximum 1 Hr+ - Stopped test
> 4.125 ghz 1.432 volts 50 average 54 maximum * 30 mins* stopped test
> 4.150 ghz 1.440 volts 48 with 52 maximum - chickened out for fear of damaging the cpu ( voltage) after a 5 minute run.( i mean that darn thing is $500 lol ) tongue.gif
> 
> All on the original 1.1 bios running AXMP settings on the Gskills 2x8gb cl14 1T
> 
> I'd invite others to run the same tests and see what they get for VRM temps.
> 
> The latest bios offers base clock overclocking for the Titanium.
> 
> I do agree it's $50 to high, but the thing sells out almost instantly at the egg , can you really blame MSI?


This is a serious question - what do you think of the *build* quality.

Mind you, I normally go more "budget" as I am not a heavy overclocker, but between all the reinforced/shielded slots with reinforced welds, 7-layer PCB, weight, stiffness and overall feel, the Titanium really seems to be extremely *well made*. I agree it would be more competitive at $25-50 less, but I didn't feel ripped off when I inspected it and it's actual performance has matched expectations.

I intend to wait for the BIOS and AGESA code to stablize before I bother pushing beyond my 3.85Ghz "sweet spot" - but voltage delta from idle to full load is only 0.06v and VRMs stay between 37c idle and 47-53c (two temp zones) under sustained load (CPU fan was probably at 80% - I could set that more aggressive) I'm adding a second fan to my Noctua which will drop those lower.

I suspecy the Taichi will have lower temps. I do not believe the temp differences will make ANY difference in lognevity given the headroom and I do believe the MSI is simply a better built board.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @crazyelf
> 
> For comparison's sake
> 
> Prime 95 temps ( C ) @ 70 F ambient 1800X MSI Titanium - as measured by hwinfo Heatsinks have direct air flow and they were cool to the touch.
> 
> Stock low 30's
> 
> 4 ghz 1.36 volts under load ( all auto cpu voltage and llc settings) 46 average 49 maximum - Stopped test
> 4.1 ghz 1.424 volts 48 average 51 maximum 1 Hr+ - Stopped test
> 4.125 ghz 1.432 volts 50 average 54 maximum * 30 mins* stopped test
> 4.150 ghz 1.440 volts 48 with 52 maximum - chickened out for fear of damaging the cpu ( voltage) after a 5 minute run.( i mean that darn thing is $500 lol ) tongue.gif
> 
> All on the original 1.1 bios running AXMP settings on the Gskills 2x8gb cl14 1T
> 
> I'd invite others to run the same tests and see what they get for VRM temps.
> 
> The latest bios offers base clock overclocking for the Titanium.
> 
> I do agree it's $50 to high, but the thing sells out almost instantly at the egg , can you really blame MSI?
> 
> 
> 
> This is a serious question - what do you think of the *build* quality.
> 
> Mind you, I normally go more "budget" as I am not a heavy overclocker, but between all the reinforced/shielded slots with reinforced welds, 7-layer PCB, weight, stiffness and overall feel, the Titanium really seems to be extremely *well made*. I agree it would be more competitive at $25-50 less, but I didn't feel ripped off when I inspected it and it's actual performance has matched expectations.
> 
> I intend to wait for the BIOS and AGESA code to stablize before I bother pushing beyond my 3.85Ghz "sweet spot" - but voltage delta from idle to full load is only 0.06v and VRMs stay between 37c idle and 47-53c (two temp zones) under sustained load (CPU fan was probably at 80% - I could set that more aggressive) I'm adding a second fan to my Noctua which will drop those lower.
> 
> I suspecy the Taichi will have lower temps. I do not believe the temp differences will make ANY difference in lognevity given the headroom and I do believe the MSI is simply a better built board.
Click to expand...

Fit and finish are good as any boards I have. Heatsinks , heat pipe seem top-notch.
Steel re-enforced ram and especially pci-e slots are an idea that is long overdue and should be a standard going forward on top tier boards. Great to see my Sapphire Nitro Fury sitting perfectly square with the board - no sagging.
Sound quality is as good as any board I have maybe better.
Network chip - good, when utilities and windows 10 actually let it do it's thing.
The same niko's parts people seem to be in a panic over pushed almost 2X as many watts/amps to my FX 8 cores with lesser supporting components on my MSI 990 and 970 gaming boards - I'm not worried in the least about them.

As for temps on the Taichi - well it's going to have to earn my respect.


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> ...
> Steel re-enforced ram and especially pci-e slots are an idea that is long overdue and should be a standard going forward on top tier boards. Great to see my Sapphire Nitro Fury sitting perfectly square with the board - no sagging.


Speaking of reinforced PCIe, this caught my attention with the Titanium. The steel is further reinforced by these black exterior prongs. Something the Taichi and C6H does not have. I just appreciate this little addition to the PCIe slot quality.



vs



vs


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> ...
> Steel re-enforced ram and especially pci-e slots are an idea that is long overdue and should be a standard going forward on top tier boards. Great to see my Sapphire Nitro Fury sitting perfectly square with the board - no sagging.
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of reinforced PCIe, this caught my attention with the Titanium. The steel is further reinforced by these black exterior prongs. Something the Taichi and C6H does not have. I just appreciate this little addition to the PCIe slot quality.
> 
> 
> 
> vs
> 
> 
> 
> vs
Click to expand...

are they prongs, or protrusions of the plastic where there is no metal? (as in - I cannot see proof that the metal goes BEHIND the "prongs" - it really looks like they are just slots in the metal)

EDIT : I googled, and there are better pictures, just none of them REALLY show. we'd have to ask an owner.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> are they prongs, or protrusions of the plastic where there is no metal? (as in - I cannot see proof that the metal goes BEHIND the "prongs" - it really looks like they are just slots in the metal)
> 
> EDIT : I googled, and there are better pictures, just none of them REALLY show. we'd have to ask an owner.


Before I upgraded to my Ryzen 7 rig I was using a MSI Z170 SLI Plus board and I just took a look at it and it has the same plastic prongs and they are on outside of the metal, as best as I can tell without destroying the slot its a solid piece of metal with the prongs sitting on top for extra bracing. Ill see if I can get a good picture of it.


----------



## Trender07

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It begs the question on why the readings are so wrong.
> It's easier to get a heatsink added or add airflow than to redo power circuitry on a motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the design of Asus X370 Prime Pro boards that appear to put functionality of the heatsink over aesthetic. It's a shame that so much money is invested into LEDs and shrouds for overclocking boards but that is what sells I guess.
> 
> The Xpower is not a bad board, just priced way too high unless you are overclocking GPUs on LN2 & it's lacking external clock gen. It's simply unworthy of the Xpower name. Microcenter discounted it to $250 a few times already, which is still high but more in line with Mpower pricing. The board is at best on Intel Mpower / Gaming M5 levels of featureset. It is also a problem with the MSI SLI Plus if you do a side by side comparison of the ICs with Intel Z series , let alone VRM. (When even B350 board has ALC1220 with audio enhancements such as audio caps /amp then you have a problem selling X370 boards with ALC892.)
> 
> Xpower would only put out 20A at 2.6W power dissipation from the PK632BA low-side MOSFET & 13A at 2.2W at the high side mosfet _per [email protected] for other motherboards from MSI ,_ so having double the low side mosfets is a bandaid solution. Having a massive heatsink is another bandaid solution. I can't believe people are defending the pricing on it as a top end board when those mosfets are about $0.40 each vs $2 or $3 each on the ASUS CH VI Hero , Asus x370 Prime Pro, or Gigabyte x370 Gaming K7. It's similar to Gigabyte dropping IR3553M for Vishay SiRa12 & SiRa18 after Haswell & Asrock doing the same going from TI NexFETs to Sinopower & some other random Chinese brand mosfets unless you bought a OC board. It's not an MSI problem , it's a motherboard manufacturer problem of them milking repeat customers that just want the same thing as a reputable they have used.
> 
> specsheet for PK632BA : http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> specsheet for PK618BA: http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/138874237504741113.pdf
> specsheet for PK616BA: http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> ^ yes unikc is the same company, see Mail: [email protected] ( http://www.unikc.com.cn/En/Contact.aspx?BaseInfoCateId=43&ProductsCateId=43&CateId=43 )
> 
> It's undeniable fact that the VRM is far cheaper than MSI's Intel-based Xpower variants. The Z170 / Z270 variant uses 14 of the IR3555 (~ $3 per), tantalum capacitors, & comes with an external clock generator. So regardless of whether it is any good at overclocking, MSI is profiteering based on ignorance of IC costs and people that took a leap of faith without reviews containing disclosure on the board ICs.
> 
> Just CPU+SOC mosfets alone : 6x PK616BA + 12x PK632BA + 2 x PK616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 22 x $0.40 = $8.80 *vs 14 x $2.35 in bulk quantities of 1000 which is $32.90 or more at $3.10 per consumer cost as per Octopart which is $43.40*
> 
> In addition to add perspective the X370 Pro Carbon which costs a full $120 less has 8x PK616BA + 8x PK632BA + 2x PK 616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 20 x $0.40 = $8.00 *which is less than a dollar difference*
> Is there $120 (an entire extra B350) worth of added features?
> 
> Also AFAIK the X370 Taichi & Fatal1ty Pro both use NexFETs for the memory phases which would be much stronger than what others are using. Those two boards are analogous to Z270 Taichi / Fatal1ty Gaming i7 so the pricing is rather fair unless you live in a country where a Taichi costs more than a ASUS CH VI Hero.
> 
> For example in Poland, MSI X370 Xpower = 1319 zł to 1339,00 zł , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro = 1319 zł to 1327,43 zł , ASUS CH VI Hero = 1179,00 zł , Asrock x370 Taichi = 1129 zł, Biostar X370GT7 = 1043,95 zł, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 949 zł, MSI x370 Pro carbon = 819,00 zł, ASRock X370 GAMING K4 = 739 zł to 769,00 zł, ASUS X370 Prime Pro = 699 zł to 759,00 zł
> 
> In Australia: MSI X370 Xpower = 469AUS, ASUS CH VI Hero = 369AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 = 349AUS, Asrock X370 Taichi = 329AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 315AUS to 319AUS, MSI X370 Pro Carbon = 289AUS, ASUS Prime X370 Pro= 239AUS , AsRock X370 fatal1ty Gaming K4 = 219AUS
> I'd invest a bit more for the X370 Killer but both lack USB 3.1 Gen2. The B350 Tomahawk Arctic has almost the same amount of current capability as the X370 Killer due to the B350 Tomahawk doubling the low side mosfet , if the PK618BA is used on the Asrock X370 Killer board as suggested by nl.hardware.info.
> If you want a half decent overclock you need X370 in this current lineup. If the PK618BA instead of SM4336 is truly the mosfets on the Killer SLI and Fatal1ty K4 , shame on Asrock. I've seen people stating they cannot top out over 3.8GHz 24/7 under load on the stock cooler so that means the B350 boards are aligned for people using stock coolers.
> We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.


Well I don't want to get stuck on 2933 MHz as ASRock says on their official website: http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X370%20Killer%20SLIac/

They say 2933 MHz when they says 3200 on Taicho or Pro Gaming, the MSI Tomahawks site also says 3200. And from my friends tests I can reach 3200 on Tomahawks B350 and 2933 on the Killer so I don't know if they can fix that with updates


----------



## Zhany

Here are the pictures from my MSI Z170 SLI Plus board that has the PCIe Armor


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Before I upgraded to my Ryzen 7 rig I was using a MSI Z170 SLI Plus board and I just took a look at it and it has the same plastic prongs and they are on outside of the metal, as best as I can tell without destroying the slot its a solid piece of metal with the prongs sitting on top for extra bracing. Ill see if I can get a good picture of it.


The are *metal* tabs/prongs outside of the metal shielding/reinforcements (I just opened my system and checked - definitely outside and definitely metal).

If you look at this picture of the back, you can see larger solder points in the middle of the reinforced PCIe slots which would appear to be where/how this additional reinforcement is anchored to the board.


----------



## mortre

You guys are way out of my league, but if I could ask for a recommendation.

I understand that the VRM's are not as good on the B350's as the X370's, I'm looking for an overclockable Micro-ATX board for multimedia work (Handbrake), router emulation (GNS3/Qemu) and as a VM Host (VirtualBox).

Of the Micro-ATX boards out there, I've noticed a lot do not have heatsinks on the VRM's and I'm afraid that will cause me issue. I intend to put an open-loop cooler on the CPU and Video card, with limited airflow. 240mm in through a radiator, 120mm exhaust as the only fans, and the case has soundproofing, so the ambient instide will likely be pretty high.

Right now I am looking at the Asus has a Prime B350M-A, ASRock has a AB350M-Pro4 (If it is available in the US?), and the Gigabyte AB350M-Gaming 3. Or should I be looking at something else?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mortre*
> 
> You guys are way out of my league, but if I could ask for a recommendation.
> 
> I understand that the VRM's are not as good on the B350's as the X370's, I'm looking for an overclockable Micro-ATX board for multimedia work (Handbrake), router emulation (GNS3/Qemu) and as a VM Host (VirtualBox).
> 
> Of the Micro-ATX boards out there, I've noticed a lot do not have heatsinks on the VRM's and I'm afraid that will cause me issue. I intend to put an open-loop cooler on the CPU and Video card, with limited airflow. 240mm in through a radiator, 120mm exhaust as the only fans, and the case has soundproofing, so the ambient instide will likely be pretty high.


If it's an enclosed space as you describe, you do NOT want to overclock. If anything you need to under-clock. Heat sinks will simple accelerate thermal saturation inside of the case as there is nowhere for the heat to escape to. So unless you use at least 1 fan, I don't see how heat sinks can help.


----------



## mortre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mortre*
> 
> You guys are way out of my league, but if I could ask for a recommendation.
> 
> I understand that the VRM's are not as good on the B350's as the X370's, I'm looking for an overclockable Micro-ATX board for multimedia work (Handbrake), router emulation (GNS3/Qemu) and as a VM Host (VirtualBox).
> 
> Of the Micro-ATX boards out there, I've noticed a lot do not have heatsinks on the VRM's and I'm afraid that will cause me issue. I intend to put an open-loop cooler on the CPU and Video card, with limited airflow. 240mm in through a radiator, 120mm exhaust as the only fans, and the case has soundproofing, so the ambient instide will likely be pretty high.
> 
> 
> 
> If it's an enclosed space as you describe, you do NOT want to overclock. If anything you need to under-clock. Heat sinks will simple accelerate thermal saturation inside of the case as there is nowhere for the heat to escape to. So unless you use at least 1 fan, I don't see how heat sinks can help.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the mis-communication, there are 3 fans. 2x 120mm in and 1x 120mm out. I'm planning to add a radiator to the intake fans for the loop and replace the CPU fans with a quieter pump.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

No problem. If the system is horizontal I would be fine with picking up some heat sinks off of ebay and applying them (I wouldn't trust them from not sliding off if vertical).

That said, my preference would always be to select a board with VRM heat sinks. If you don't see one you like, I would be patient. It's a new market. I am sure new/better options will be showing up fairly shortly. Especially with the release of the R5 and upcoming R3, which would be likely candidates for HTPC micro-builds and the like...


----------



## chew*

K7 has pci x reinforcements soldered through board $209.

Only interjecting that as alone does not justify cost still.

Btw dont be surprised if you see a respin of the x power.

Will be interesting to see what they change.

If its vrm...well


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> K7 has pci x reinforcements soldered through board $209.
> 
> Only interjecting that as alone does not justify cost still.


Silly me. I should realize all reinforced slots are the same...

Try actually taking a closer look and comparing them. The MSI has significantly improved reinforcement beyond any other board. You can argue whether or not it is necessary, but the quality is there on the MSI. The K7 is a perfectly fine board. More so if you love the LEDs and don't care about decent VRM cooling...

K7:


MSI:


As already covered, those black tabs are not plastic, they are *additional* steel reinforcements. Both anchor the shielding, only MSI adds an additional relatively thick steel brace with heavy anchoring to the MB (compare the solder joints on the back to the K7).

So yeah, the K7 reinforcement is just like the Titanium, if you stripped out the enhanced reinforcements from the Titanium's build.

EDIT: to be clear, the K7 looks to be a fine board (although I really don't care for a tone of LEDs...). I have generally liked Gigabyte...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Silly me. I should realize all reinforced slots are the same...
> 
> Try actually taking a closer look and comparing them. The MSI has significantly improved reinforcement beyond any other board. You can argue whether or not it is necessary, but the quality is there on the MSI. The K7 is a perfectly fine board. More so if you love the LEDs and don't care about decent VRM cooling...
> 
> K7:
> 
> 
> MSI:
> 
> 
> As already covered, those black tabs are not plastic, they are *additional* steel reinforcements. Both anchor the shielding, only MSI adds an additional relatively thick steel brace with heavy anchoring to the MB (compare the solder joints on the back to the K7).
> 
> So yeah, the K7 reinforcement is just like the Titanium, if you stripped out the enhanced reinforcements from the Titanium's build.


I do like the additional reinforcement that they put on the Titanium, I'm just still baffled as to why they didn't put a clock generator and the decision to use Nikos for the VRM. Especially at the 300 dollar US price point.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

The CPU has a built-in clock generator, so why bother. It's only not available yet due to immature AGESA code. The next major BIOS release will enable it. So why incur the cost and added complexity of an external clock gen? It's just more items that can fail.

As for the NIKOs, kind of tired beating that dead horse. If we can hit 4.1Ghz on this with VRM temps in the 50's and ~1.45v CPU voltage steady within +/- 0.04 volts...who cares? That is a well designed circuit that will do all we need and not burn itself out. Other VRM's may be a bit cooler, but the *total package* of the Titanium is excellent.

as for why NIKOs - I am sure the bean counters asked the designers if anything more than that was *necessary*, and were told the NIKO's would work perfectly well for the design perameters. That being the case, they went with what they knew and what would cost less. I have been in discussions like that. I really suspect prodcution costs and not components drive the price to where it is at. I would like to see it at 260-275, but really can't complain as long as it performs (it does) and lasts (only time will tell, but the prior Titaniums with similar *build* quality bode well...).


----------



## chew*

Yah thats overkill and tbh for hardware swapping sux...

I already shorted a little throw away card out on one.

As far as bclk goes? There are holes that single 1.00 mhz can not hit so far in my testing...

.20 allows me target my 3950 clock within 10 mhz no matter the speed and bclk i choose.

1.0 which i can change to does not.

If msi keeps same vrm i will gladly say maybe i was wrong...

If they change it though...why change something if it works so good?

Maybe they will add a chip for bclk?

Who knows. Wait and see.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> The CPU has a built-in clock generator, so why bother. It's only not available yet due to immature AGESA code. The next major BIOS release will enable it. So why incur the cost and added complexity of an external clock gen? It's just more items that can fail.
> 
> As for the NIKOs, kind of tired beating that dead horse. If we can hit 4.1Ghz on this with VRM temps in the 50's and ~1.45v CPU voltage steady within +/- 0.04 volts...who cares? That is a well designed circuit that will do all we need and not burn itself out. Other VRM's may be a bit cooler, but the *total package* of the Titanium is excellent.


You make a good point, is the titanium looking coating just a different color to the PCB or is it something more?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

As bests I can tell it is a metallic "silk screen" print on both the front and the back, but the PCB layers also use a light color PCB to maintain the effect as well as possible where the silk screen cannot be applied due to soldering/components.

The actual heat sinks are made of plated Titanium (hence the name), with the board colored to match the theme.


----------



## The L33t

Once the CPU blck adjustment is added (again) like it was on the MSI betas, the clock chip is, in my opinion, a complete non issue.

Some argue it wont have the same granularity, so you can adjust to 100.1 100.2 instead of 101 102 etc, but that will only be relevant to the ones squeegeeing every ounce of performance. I do understand the argument that for the money they could or should have added the damn chip but really... one less thing to go bad..... that is my argument.

If you go on the gigabyte topic you will find that many cant get pass 107 adjustment even with the chip, the board goes bonkers. The Asus hero seams to be better in this regard (wink wink LN2 ppl)

And the chip does not, on any board, have the ability to separate the blck from the lanes in a way that SATA/pci would not be affected.... so the utility is once again doubtful and certainty has its negatives when you consider you can have data corruption due to it's use.

No one that wants to use his PC for day to day operation (and not breaking WW records) wants to have data corruption, no one, that is a major issue for most of us who do care about our data.

I know the LN2 folks will want to have it. Sure by all means, I guess MSI is not developing boards geared towards you. Just accept it.


----------



## Zhany

In your opinions what makes it a good board at the 300 price point? The reason I'm asking is I buggered my current board a bit and might have to replace it and looking at all my options


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> In your opinions what makes it a good board at the 300 price point? The reason I'm asking is I buggered my current board a bit and might have to replace it and looking at all my options


Personally I look for:
Stable bios
Build quality
Good support
Flashback or dual bios setup (mostly because of flash fail, not for dual settings)
And sure, stable overclock withing reason 24/7, AIO WC / AIR.

All ryzen CPU's are getting the same OC's, more or less 100mhz, board independent! Even the B350's can get those clock's (4,0 4.1...) but the B350s at this time DO NOT have VRM's capable of sustaining that without hitting very uncomfortable temps. If you are looking to Overclock, go with a X370, not because of the chip, but because the VRM's are not up to par.

I could purchase the Taichi or fatality pro at less or the same cost of the MSI Titanium, and I know the components on those are better (as far as VRM goes, that and only that). But I do not like their support one bit. And I am doubtful of the quality control at this stage.

I had problems with Asus support so that was out of the question. I do like their TUF lineup, but that is not available for AM4 at this stage so...

So I had two options, Gigabyte (Gaming 5/k7) or the Titanium. I went with the titanium for two reasons, it was in stock, and, quite a few gigabyte reports of board just dying without reason. The bios development on the Gigabyte is not quite up-to the standards I would hope for(performance wise and bugs). Even on the Intel side they had quite a few issues with overvoltage... was fixed, but it did take them a long time to do it.


----------



## chew*

Im going to take an educated guess since 5/7 are same vrm.

Llc high 1.475v set bios and loaded = 1.4 real at socket.

I will confirm it later when either i can buy a k7 in person or get my 5 back from gigabyte.

I will pick up an msi to when i can find another clearance sub $240...im pretty sure your not going to like my findings.

Educated guess over volting and your 1.3 is actually 1.4v at socket.

This based on my knowledge of chips and
my own use of gaming 5 and my dmm measurements on x370 pro and ch6...

My cpus do not change that much per board....they need x to do y. Simple math.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> Personally I look for:
> Stable bios
> Build quality
> Good support
> Flashback or dual bios setup (mostly because of flash fail, not for dual settings)
> And sure, stable overclock withing reason 24/7, AIO WC / AIR.
> 
> All ryzen CPU's are getting the same OC's, more or less 100mhz, board independent! Even the B350's can get those clock's (4,0 4.1...) but the B350s at this time DO NOT have VRM's capable of sustaining that without hitting very uncomfortable temps. If you are looking to Overclock, go with a X370, not because of the chip, but because the VRM's are not up to par.
> 
> I could purchase the Taichi or fatality pro at less or the same cost of the MSI Titanium, and I know the components on those are better (as far as VRM goes, that and only that). But I do not like their support one bit. And I am doubtful of the quality control at this stage.
> 
> I had problems with Asus support so that was out of the question. I do like their TUF lineup, but that is not available for AM4 at this stage so...
> 
> So I had two options, Gigabyte (Gaming 5/k7) or the Titanium. I went with the titanium for two reasons, it was in stock, and, quite a few gigabyte reports of board just dying without reason. The bios development on the Gigabyte is not quite up-to the standards I would hope for(performance wise and bugs). Even on the Intel side they had quite a few issues with overvoltage... was fixed, but it did take them a long time to do it.


Thank you for your insight, I have to wait until the 7th before I can make any final decision, Ironically the MSI Titanium was my initial go to choice, I should have listened to my gut. For some reason of the last 3 Asus boards I've owned I've managed to damage two of them in some way, back in the AM3 days I had a Crosshair IV and managed to scratch the PCB when installing my video card just barley brushed it and exposed the traces. Got another one and immediately coated the area with liquid electrical tape to prevent that problem from happening again.Now that I have the Crosshair VI, i was fiddling around and needed to remove the USB 3.0 cable from the header and the header came off the board with the cable, while also somehow scratching the board in the process as well =/. It's Same cable that I was using with my MSI Z170 board and that connector never had an issue. I don't get why the ASUS boards seem to damage more easily, I'm not at all rough with motherboards, to be honest I'm probably over cautions even though my experience may seem to indicate otherwise.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Im going to take an educated guess since 5/7 are same vrm.
> 
> Llc high 1.475v set bios and loaded = 1.4 real at socket.
> 
> I will confirm it later when either i can buy a k7 in person or get my 5 back from gigabyte.
> 
> I will pick up an msi to when i can find another clearance sub $240...im pretty sure your not going to like my findings.
> 
> Educated guess over volting and your 1.3 is actually 1.4v at socket.
> 
> This based on my knowledge of chips and
> my own use of gaming 5 and my dmm measurements on x370 pro and ch6...
> 
> My cpus do not change that much per board....they need x to do y. Simple math.


Yep, that is true and it's been plotted already for the Zen core:



So it would appear 1.30v is perfectly reasonable to achieve 3.8Ghz


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Im going to take an educated guess since 5/7 are same vrm.
> 
> Llc high 1.475v set bios and loaded = 1.4 real at socket.
> 
> I will confirm it later when either i can buy a k7 in person or get my 5 back from gigabyte.
> 
> I will pick up an msi to when i can find another clearance sub $240...im pretty sure your not going to like my findings.
> 
> Educated guess over volting and your 1.3 is actually 1.4v at socket.
> 
> This based on my knowledge of chips and
> my own use of gaming 5 and my dmm measurements on x370 pro and ch6...
> 
> My cpus do not change that much per board....they need x to do y. Simple math.


What do you expect to see?


----------



## The L33t

I guess what @chew* is trying to say is he does not believe the settings and reporting on the titanium match to what can be measured directly on the board, he believes MSI is actually applying more voltage than what is reported and configured.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> I guess what @chew* is trying to say is he does not believe the settings and reporting on the titanium match to what can be measured directly on the board, he believes MSI is actually applying more voltage than what is reported and configured.


If that's the case and the VRMS are as awful as some like to say they are, the VRM temps should be considerably higher than other boards.

At any rate there's such an anti MSI bias around here that if the volts read low it will omg the vrms are awful - if they read high it will be omg they are "cheatin" lol

In the end , the proof is in the performance. Time will tell.


----------



## The L33t

One can certainly go as far as to say MSI "is" applying a global offset then, plus on the voltage and minus on the voltage/temperature reporting.

The plot thickens.......









Or not. The bias is strong indeed.


----------



## chew*

But not the 4.0 that has been claimed at least not in any stressed environment unless over volting. Btw tested them many times...they have and do in the past.

I expect to see if 4gig @ 1.30v set in bios 1.4 at the socket csorkin









3.8 is very realistic @ 1.30 however

The chips are not that good and the boards do not make them miraculously better nor require less volts at the chip.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> But not the 4.0 that has been claimed at least not in any stressed environment unless over volting. Btw tested them many times...they have and do in the past.
> 
> I expect to see if 4gig @ 1.30v set in bios 1.4 at the socket csorkin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3.8 is very realistic @ 1.30 however
> 
> The chips are not that good and the boards do not make them miraculously better nor require less volts at the chip.


Who is claiming 4.0Ghhz at only 1.30V?

cssorkinman reported:

4 ghz 1.36 volts under load ( all auto cpu voltage and llc settings) 46 average 49 maximum - Stopped test
4.1 ghz 1.424 volts 48 average 51 maximum 1 Hr+ - Stopped test
4.125 ghz 1.432 volts 50 average 54 maximum * 30 mins* stopped test
4.150 ghz 1.440 volts 48 with 52 maximum - chickened out for fear of damaging the cpu ( voltage) after a 5 minute run.( i mean that darn thing is $500 lol ) tongue.gif

1.360v could very well be in the actual 1.40-1.42v range given fluctuations I have seen, if those are his BIOS settings. Both the setting and those "actuals" seem reasonable even if better than average. It doesn't mean everyone will hit those numbers.

When HWinfo64 pulls values for VDDCR_CPU, isn't it pulling from the CPU itself (that is what I have read - that MB won't impact those readings)? Shouldn't those values be comparable across all boards? (vs VCORE values pulled from the VRM circuitry)


----------



## PsyM4n

Remember that the processor itself has some integrated capacitors and such. It could be possible for it to have some sort of integrated voltage regulation, making it work at different voltages than what the vrm supplies. You only need two capacitors for something like that. You never know without the processor spec sheet.

OK, it's far more likely that the pwm is either purposely or accidentally configured to either set or report wrong inaccurate voltages.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> But not the 4.0 that has been claimed at least not in any stressed environment unless over volting. Btw tested them many times...they have and do in the past.
> 
> I expect to see if 4gig @ 1.30v set in bios 1.4 at the socket csorkin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3.8 is very realistic @ 1.30 however
> 
> The chips are not that good and the boards do not make them miraculously better nor require less volts at the chip.
> 
> 
> 
> Who is claiming 4.0Ghhz at only 1.30V?
> 
> cssorkinman reported:
> 
> 4 ghz 1.36 volts under load ( all auto cpu voltage and llc settings) 46 average 49 maximum - Stopped test
> 4.1 ghz 1.424 volts 48 average 51 maximum 1 Hr+ - Stopped test
> 4.125 ghz 1.432 volts 50 average 54 maximum * 30 mins* stopped test
> 4.150 ghz 1.440 volts 48 with 52 maximum - chickened out for fear of damaging the cpu ( voltage) after a 5 minute run.( i mean that darn thing is $500 lol ) tongue.gif
> 
> 1.360v could very well be in the actual 1.40-1.42v range given fluctuations I have seen, if those are his BIOS settings. Both the setting and those "actuals" seem reasonable even if better than average. It doesn't mean everyone will hit those numbers.
> 
> When HWinfo64 pulls values for VDDCR_CPU, isn't it pulling from the CPU itself (that is what I have read - that MB won't impact those readings)? Shouldn't those values be comparable across all boards? (vs VCORE values pulled from the VRM circuitry)
Click to expand...


----------



## Almost Heathen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> (Snip) We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.


Thats very disappointing, though not surprising. Sounds like no budget boards with solid power delivery at all (say under ~$150)?

Id rather see better quality and less LEDs...maybe better off waiting until Zen+.


----------



## Krautmaster

hi guys. Hanging around here with an Ryzen 1700 @ 3.7 @ 1.27V with an MSI Mortar B350.

VRM Temp feels hot but feels hot means im able to tough them a while = less than 70°C on cooler surface.

My big issue is memory. My Trident Z 3400 CL16 is not able to run >2667, same for my Kingston Fury dimms. No matter what I do... i cant get 2933 to boot. That really sucks as it a gig less than ton the other testset with an i7 7700k here.

The Prime + ASUS btw clocks better than the Mortar as far as i can tell. With an tower cooler i could run prime on 3.9 @ 1.32 V for hours. In the MSI im using the stock right now.

But memory is my mayor issu as the cpu scales pretty well with it.

Wondering if anybody has a beta bios. Mine is from 24th but the memory still sucks. 2133 -> 2666 Mhz boosts my Handbrake around 15%


----------



## Mortusqz

it is because tridentz 3400cl16 are dual rank modules that might cause you trouble,and as I recall they are not in qvl from msi , for better compatibility i would seek memory based on single sided Samsung b-die chips


----------



## AuraNova

Random questions: How are the VRMs of the MSI Carbon Pro compared to the XPOWER? Do they use the same kind?

I swear there was some information in here about it, but I can't remember where in this thread. Unless I was imagining it.


----------



## realtomatoes

@auranova here's something from Br0da and AlphaC http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/340#post_25936418


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> @auranova here's something from Br0da and AlphaC http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/340#post_25936418


Ah, perfect. Thank you very much.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> So the X370 Pro Carbon is not too far off from the Titanium but uses a half baked version of phase doubling? They should have just called the Xpower an "Mpower Gaming" in that case.
> How's it screwing up your list by the way?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised the MSI B350 offerings are not great. The ASUS/Gigabyte/Asrock offerings for B350 aren't great either so it's just artificial market segmentation. *The Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is marginal since one reviewer has the VRMs hit over 60°C after 20 min of AIDA64 on 3.85GHz @ merely 1.356V* . The pricing & feature set saves it right now (maybe not when the X370 Prime and Gigabyte Gaming 5 drop in price a bit ~ $20-30). The X370 Killer SLI had much potential as well but I still haven't gotten a definitive answer on whether it has USB 3.1 Gen 2 on the back panel plus people have been having less luck with it in terms of memory.


I had missed this previously. So much for the highly touted ASRock VRM implementation. I decided to compare that to my MSI Titanium's poor VRMs...interesting:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







CPU @ 3.8Ghz (3.85 won't keep a steady clock with this BIOS release for some reason)

VRM temps *peak* at 53c

VDDR_CPU steady with voltages between 1.269 - 1.287 (0.018v delta)

So once again, how is this design *inferior*?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

-posted to wrong thread - can't delete.


----------



## CrazyElf

I feel like there is a tendency to disregard value.

Ok, let's work backwards here. Why is my 5960X obsolete? Because it costs more than a 1700X or 1700, while not offering much more in terms of IPC.

It's only advantages are:


Quad channel memory
40 PCIe lanes
It can clock a bit higher than Ryzen (typical OCs on a 5960X are at 4.4 to 4.6 GHz, with a few golden chips even doing 4.7 GHz; Ryzen won't go above 4.1 GHz)
But for a lot more money, the 5960X does not represent good value. While it may have justified its cost when Ryzen was not out in 2014 (debatable too though versus the 5820K which had 2 fewer cores and 12 fewer PCIe lanes), it's tough to justify in 2017 with Ryzen. The same analogy could be applied on the X370 XPower compared to the competition.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I had missed this previously. So much for the highly touted ASRock VRM implementation. I decided to compare that to my MSI Titanium's poor VRMs...interesting:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU @ 3.8Ghz (3.85 won't keep a steady clock with this BIOS release for some reason)
> 
> VRM temps *peak* at 53c
> 
> VDDR_CPU steady with voltages between 1.269 - 1.287 (0.018v delta)
> 
> So once again, how is this design *inferior*?


Because you are ignoring price. The Asrock X370 K4 Fata1ty Gaming costs 150 USD. The MSI X370 XPower costs double at 300.

The Asrock X370 K4 Fata1ty doesn't have a great VRM either. The difference is that it's cheap and bad. That's more forgivable than it's an expensive flagship and bad.

For 200, you could probably get the X370 Taichi, which would be a better board.

For the record, the Asrock K4 Fatal1ty Gaming was criticized already:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> If you want a half decent overclock you need X370 in this current lineup. *If the PK618BA instead of SM4336 is truly the mosfets on the Killer SLI and Fatal1ty K4 , shame on Asrock.* I've seen people stating they cannot top out over 3.8GHz 24/7 under load on the stock cooler so that means the B350 boards are aligned for people using stock coolers.
> We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'm not surprised the MSI B350 offerings are not great. The ASUS/Gigabyte/Asrock offerings for B350 aren't great either so it's just artificial market segmentation. T*he Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is marginal* since one reviewer has the VRMs hit over 60°C after 20 min of AIDA64 on 3.85GHz @ merely *1.356V* . *The pricing & feature set saves it right now* (maybe not when the X370 Prime and Gigabyte Gaming 5 drop in price a bit ~ $20-30). The X370 Killer SLI had much potential as well but I still haven't gotten a definitive answer on whether it has USB 3.1 Gen 2 on the back panel plus people have been having less luck with it in terms of memory.


I've highlighted in bold the areas that I want to draw your attention to: the X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 has a bad VRM, but it's cheap. I personally feel that if the Gigabyte Gaming 5 and X370 Prime drop in price, the Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is also going to have to drop, but otherwise I agree. In other words, AlphaC is pretty objective. _On one hand, we praise the Asrock X370 Taichi for providing a decent quality VRM, on the other, we criticize Asrock for the poor Nikos on their lower end Ryzen boards._ Everyone here seems to think we have an anti=MSI agenda. That's ironic if you look at my sig rig (an X99 XPower and 2 MSI 290X Lightning GPUs as of March 2017).

*
We have anti-bad VRM bias and anti-bad value bias. I"m not against paying more for superior products. I'm against paying more when the extra money does not yield a superior product.
*

I've already contacted MSI and advised them to release a revision 2 of their X370 XPower. They've done it before - the X99 XPower saw 3 revisions - X99S XPower, X99A XPower (added OC socket and 2 USB 3.1 ports), X99A XPower Titanium (added PCIe slot reinforcements, U.2 slot, white theme aesthetically if you like it, and native broadwell support, although it took away the second LAN and a few USB 3.0 ports at the back).

The MSI Z270 XPower, Z170 XPower, and X99 XPower, although expensive justified their price. This board does not.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If that's the case and the VRMS are as awful as some like to say they are, the VRM temps should be considerably higher than other boards.
> 
> At any rate there's such an anti MSI bias around here that if the volts read low it will omg the vrms are awful - if they read high it will be omg they are "cheatin" lol
> 
> In the end , the proof is in the performance. Time will tell.


Again this ignores price. If a 300 board doesn't whip a 200 Taichi (or 210 USD on Newegg - I think I saw the Taichi for 200 somewhere), that's a problem. It's not that it is worse that's the only problem, it's that it is expensive and runs hotter that is the problem. If it were cheaper and running hotter, that would be tolerable.

It's a disaster when a 300 board has inferior VRMs to a 200 board.

Also, keep in mind that it's already lost. See below:

The Asus X370 Crosshair has the same VRMs as the Taichi, only fewer phases:


For a comparison, the MSI X370 XPower


A $300 XPower has lost to a $255 Crosshair. Do you see the problem in terms of _value_ that the XPower has? Oh and the XPower looks like a better heatsink than the Crosshair, which means with the same heatsink as the Crosshair the Nikos Mosfets would run even hotter.

Considering the X370 Taichi has the same Mosfets, only more doubled phases, it is reasonable to assume that it would be even cooler than the Crosshair. Hence my assertion that the $200 X370 Taichi has the $300 X370 XPower beat. The people paying for the MSI are doing so mostly for the "silver-white looks" rather than a superior product compared to the cheaper boards.

Now you might say that the Crosshair doesn't have as good a BIOS because of its immaturity. I'd agree. The problem is that the BIOS is software. The bad VRM on the XPower is a hardware problem. If you buy the board, you're stuck with it. No updates can fix that, unlike an immature BIOS.

For the record, Asus X370 Crosshair Hero: 8 + 4 design 320A + 160A, the X370 Taichi has 12 + 4 design of 480A + 160A; same TI NextFET 40A Mosfets. While a case could be made that PowIRstages would be preferable due to the faster switching speeds, the Taichi, thus far, unless someone else releases a new X370 board (probable since we are very early into X370's lifecycle), it remain the top for VRMs. While VRMs are not the only reason to buy, a flagship having bad VRMs should not be worthy of consideration, barring a second revision or major price discounts.

Thus far, what is really disappointing is that there has been no outstanding value board. The closest thing we have to it is the X370 Taichi, which admittedly does have very good VRM.


----------



## Obvcop

Ek are only making blocks for the gigabyte K7,asus ch6 and the msi xpower unfortunately. I can't buy the Taichi because of this, what do you guys reccomend instead? It's going under custom loop with a mobo monoblock and I plan on ocing heavy


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Meh, Still ranting over perception versus performance. Look at my actual results from my testing and tell me what there is to complain about? If it was a blind test, I doubt anyone would *criticize* it based on *results*.

And those temps aren't even the mosfets, those are the capacitors. NONE of the boards had mosfets hotter than the caps. So we don't have FLIR numbers for the actual mosfets. Or can you not read? And guess what, cooling is as much of the design as the VRM circuits...If the ASRock came without any heat sinks would it *sill* be better in your book solely because of the mosfets? I sure hope not.

And once again, someone is trying to distill the entire motherboard down to a single value - VRM temps, where absolute lowest temp makes the best overall board regardless of the practical difference. Sounds vaguely similar to the argument Intel fanboys are making as to why the 7700k is absolutely the best CPU for gaming - solely due to max FPS...and yet now we are seeing more and more reports of a better gaming *experience* with Ryzen despite not having the absolute top numbers.

I certainly wouldn't give up the build quality and 2 years of warranty support to buy the Taichi based on a couple of degrees difference at the VRMs. Good component on a lesser quality board is still a lesser *quality* board. It's quality is good relative to it's price, no doubt.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Obvcop*
> 
> Ek are only making blocks for the gigabyte K7,asus ch6 and the msi xpower unfortunately. I can't buy the Taichi because of this, what do you guys reccomend instead? It's going under custom loop with a mobo monoblock and I plan on ocing heavy


Unless you don't give a damned about longevity, you're likely going to be stuck around 4.1Ghz due to the shear amount of voltage required to go much higher. It's not so much a thermal issue as over-driving the CPU. AMD suggest a 1.45v limit. You really don't even need water cooling for that. If you are throwing caution to the wind, I really don't think it will matter which board you pick. Despite arguments to the contrary, any of those boards are perfectly capable. I strongly believe the MSI has the best build quality and very capable VRM based on actual tests, Asus probably has the best VRM's of the three but I am not a fan of their heat sink design. Gigabyte seems about on par with the Asus, but people complain about their BIOS implementation. I really believe it's a matter of personal preference, but again you'll get a lot of arguments against the MSI - but only from those who don't actually have one.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Unless you don't give a damned about longevity, you're likely going to be stuck around 4.1Ghz due to the shear amount of voltage required to go much higher. It's not so much a thermal issue as over-driving the CPU. AMD suggest a 1.45v limit. You really don't even need water cooling for that. If you are throwing caution to the wind, I really don't think it will matter which board you pick. Despite arguments to the contrary, any of those boards are perfectly capable. I strongly believe the MSI has the best build quality and very capable VRM based on actual tests, Asus probably has the best VRM's of the three but I am not a fan of their heat sink design. Gigabyte seems about on par with the Asus, but people complain about their BIOS implementation. I really believe it's a matter of personal preference, but again you'll get a lot of arguments against the MSI - but only from those who don't actually have one.


Just because you were ripped off, doesnt mean others have to be.

Titanium is no match for Taichi / Crosshair. Period.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Meh, Still ranting over perception versus performance. Look at my actual results from my testing and tell me what there is to complain about? If it was a blind test, I doubt anyone would *criticize* it based on *results*.
> 
> And those temps aren't even the mosfets, those are the capacitors. NONE of the boards had mosfets hotter than the caps. So we don't have FLIR numbers for the actual mosfets. Or can you not read? And guess what, cooling is as much of the design as the VRM circuits...If the ASRock came without any heat sinks would it *sill* be better in your book solely because of the mosfets? I sure hope not.
> 
> And once again, someone is trying to distill the entire motherboard down to a single value - VRM temps, where absolute lowest temp makes the best overall board regardless of the practical difference. Sounds vaguely similar to the argument Intel fanboys are making as to why the 7700k is absolutely the best CPU for gaming - solely due to max FPS...and yet now we are seeing more and more reports of a better gaming *experience* with Ryzen despite not having the absolute top numbers.
> 
> I certainly wouldn't give up the build quality and 2 years of warranty support to buy the Taichi based on a couple of degrees difference at the VRMs. Good component on a lesser quality board is still a lesser *quality* board. It's quality is good relative to it's price, no doubt.


Taichi has a 3 year warranty like the others, at least in the U.S. According to newegg.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Taichi has a 3 year warranty like the others, at least in the U.S. According to newegg.


Not according to their website:

http://www.asrock.com/support/index.asp?cat=RMA

"ASRock provide 1 year warranty service to Authorized Distributor, users should refer to the retailer or original vender RMA & Refund policy"


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> Just because you were ripped off, doesnt mean others have to be.
> 
> Titanium is no match for Taichi / Crosshair. Period.


For all the talk about the Taichi, why is it so hard to find people posting stress test results showing temps/voltages at overclock? I'd really like to see them...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Not according to their website:
> 
> http://www.asrock.com/support/index.asp?cat=RMA
> 
> "ASRock provide 1 year warranty service to Authorized Distributor, users should refer to the retailer or original vender RMA & Refund policy"


I stand corrected, yeah giving up two years of a warranty would be a deal breaker for me.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> I stand corrected, yeah giving up two years of a warranty would be a deal breaker for me.


and so I go back to a much earlier comment of people not seeing the forest for the trees. How many posts here recommended the Taichi blindly, solely because of the VRMs without taking *everything* into consideration?

Meh.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> For all the talk about the Taichi, why is it so hard to find people posting stress test results showing temps/voltages at overclock? I'd really like to see them...


Because its not widely available. But since it uses the exact same parts as Crosshair, i am not expecting anything else that very good results.


----------



## Vesku

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *h2323*
> 
> Except AMD's financial road map called for Q1 for 6 straight Quarters, as did their official road map. AMD showed working benchmarks and boards in November. AMD showed all boards available at launch plus a few in at Jan CES. I call bull.


I think there is a kernel of truth, note the "we were all rushing to get as many Intel 200 series out before Lunar New Year".


----------



## Despoiler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> I stand corrected, yeah giving up two years of a warranty would be a deal breaker for me.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> and so I go back to a much earlier comment of people not seeing the forest for the trees. How many posts here recommended the Taichi blindly, solely because of the VRMs without taking *everything* into consideration?
> 
> Meh.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I feel like there is a tendency to disregard value.
> 
> Ok, let's work backwards here. Why is my 5960X obsolete? Because it costs more than a 1700X or 1700, while not offering much more in terms of IPC.
> 
> It's only advantages are:
> 
> 
> Quad channel memory
> 40 PCIe lanes
> It can clock a bit higher than Ryzen (typical OCs on a 5960X are at 4.4 to 4.6 GHz, with a few golden chips even doing 4.7 GHz; Ryzen won't go above 4.1 GHz)
> But for a lot more money, the 5960X does not represent good value. While it may have justified its cost when Ryzen was not out in 2014 (debatable too though versus the 5820K which had 2 fewer cores and 12 fewer PCIe lanes), it's tough to justify in 2017 with Ryzen. The same analogy could be applied on the X370 XPower compared to the competition.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I had missed this previously. So much for the highly touted ASRock VRM implementation. I decided to compare that to my MSI Titanium's poor VRMs...interesting:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU @ 3.8Ghz (3.85 won't keep a steady clock with this BIOS release for some reason)
> 
> VRM temps *peak* at 53c
> 
> VDDR_CPU steady with voltages between 1.269 - 1.287 (0.018v delta)
> 
> So once again, how is this design *inferior*?
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are ignoring price. The Asrock X370 K4 Fata1ty Gaming costs 150 USD. The MSI X370 XPower costs double at 300.
> 
> The Asrock X370 K4 Fata1ty doesn't have a great VRM either. The difference is that it's cheap and bad. That's more forgivable than it's an expensive flagship and bad.
> 
> For 200, you could probably get the X370 Taichi, which would be a better board.
> 
> For the record, the Asrock K4 Fatal1ty Gaming was criticized already:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> If you want a half decent overclock you need X370 in this current lineup. *If the PK618BA instead of SM4336 is truly the mosfets on the Killer SLI and Fatal1ty K4 , shame on Asrock.* I've seen people stating they cannot top out over 3.8GHz 24/7 under load on the stock cooler so that means the B350 boards are aligned for people using stock coolers.
> We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I'm not surprised the MSI B350 offerings are not great. The ASUS/Gigabyte/Asrock offerings for B350 aren't great either so it's just artificial market segmentation. T*he Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is marginal* since one reviewer has the VRMs hit over 60°C after 20 min of AIDA64 on 3.85GHz @ merely *1.356V* . *The pricing & feature set saves it right now* (maybe not when the X370 Prime and Gigabyte Gaming 5 drop in price a bit ~ $20-30). The X370 Killer SLI had much potential as well but I still haven't gotten a definitive answer on whether it has USB 3.1 Gen 2 on the back panel plus people have been having less luck with it in terms of memory.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've highlighted in bold the areas that I want to draw your attention to: the X370 Fatal1ty Gaming K4 has a bad VRM, but it's cheap. I personally feel that if the Gigabyte Gaming 5 and X370 Prime drop in price, the Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is also going to have to drop, but otherwise I agree. In other words, AlphaC is pretty objective. _On one hand, we praise the Asrock X370 Taichi for providing a decent quality VRM, on the other, we criticize Asrock for the poor Nikos on their lower end Ryzen boards._ Everyone here seems to think we have an anti=MSI agenda. That's ironic if you look at my sig rig (an X99 XPower and 2 MSI 290X Lightning GPUs as of March 2017).
> 
> *
> We have anti-bad VRM bias and anti-bad value bias. I"m not against paying more for superior products. I'm against paying more when the extra money does not yield a superior product.
> *
> 
> I've already contacted MSI and advised them to release a revision 2 of their X370 XPower. They've done it before - the X99 XPower saw 3 revisions - X99S XPower, X99A XPower (added OC socket and 2 USB 3.1 ports), X99A XPower Titanium (added PCIe slot reinforcements, U.2 slot, white theme aesthetically if you like it, and native broadwell support, although it took away the second LAN and a few USB 3.0 ports at the back).
> 
> The MSI Z270 XPower, Z170 XPower, and X99 XPower, although expensive justified their price. This board does not.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If that's the case and the VRMS are as awful as some like to say they are, the VRM temps should be considerably higher than other boards.
> 
> At any rate there's such an anti MSI bias around here that if the volts read low it will omg the vrms are awful - if they read high it will be omg they are "cheatin" lol
> 
> In the end , the proof is in the performance. Time will tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again this ignores price. If a 300 board doesn't whip a 200 Taichi (or 210 USD on Newegg - I think I saw the Taichi for 200 somewhere), that's a problem. It's not that it is worse that's the only problem, it's that it is expensive and runs hotter that is the problem. If it were cheaper and running hotter, that would be tolerable.
> 
> It's a disaster when a 300 board has inferior VRMs to a 200 board.
> 
> Also, keep in mind that it's already lost. See below:
> 
> The Asus X370 Crosshair has the same VRMs as the Taichi, only fewer phases:
> 
> 
> For a comparison, the MSI X370 XPower
> 
> 
> A $300 XPower has lost to a $255 Crosshair. Do you see the problem in terms of _value_ that the XPower has? Oh and the XPower looks like a better heatsink than the Crosshair, which means with the same heatsink as the Crosshair the Nikos Mosfets would run even hotter.
> 
> Considering the X370 Taichi has the same Mosfets, only more doubled phases, it is reasonable to assume that it would be even cooler than the Crosshair. Hence my assertion that the $200 X370 Taichi has the $300 X370 XPower beat. The people paying for the MSI are doing so mostly for the "silver-white looks" rather than a superior product compared to the cheaper boards.
> 
> Now you might say that the Crosshair doesn't have as good a BIOS because of its immaturity. I'd agree. The problem is that the BIOS is software. The bad VRM on the XPower is a hardware problem. If you buy the board, you're stuck with it. No updates can fix that, unlike an immature BIOS.
> 
> For the record, Asus X370 Crosshair Hero: 8 + 4 design 320A + 160A, the X370 Taichi has 12 + 4 design of 480A + 160A; same TI NextFET 40A Mosfets. While a case could be made that PowIRstages would be preferable due to the faster switching speeds, the Taichi, thus far, unless someone else releases a new X370 board (probable since we are very early into X370's lifecycle), it remain the top for VRMs. While VRMs are not the only reason to buy, a flagship having bad VRMs should not be worthy of consideration, barring a second revision or major price discounts.
> 
> Thus far, what is really disappointing is that there has been no outstanding value board. The closest thing we have to it is the X370 Taichi, which admittedly does have very good VRM.
Click to expand...

I think you need to stop looking for what you want to see and see what is actually there.

The flir image shows the Titanium to be a superior board and not just by a small margin. Take another look maybe you'll see the whole picture.


----------



## Nighthog

Alright who likes something cooked. 3.9Ghz +0.246v offset.

Passed a IBT Maximum 10x pass on dual channel configuration.

2 weeks back I did single channel, the temperatures can't compare.

check the maximum temperatures, that was the standard under load.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think you need to stop looking for what you want to see and see what is actually there.
> 
> The flir image shows the Titanium to be a superior board and not just by a small margin. Take another look maybe you'll see the whole picture.


Hmm I think I see what you're saying the MSI Titanium looks to be overall cooler running than the comparison board, with the heat-sinks taking up much more of the heat. Better overall thermal design?


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> 
> 
> Alright who likes something cooked. 3.9Ghz +0.246v offset.
> 
> Passed a IBT Maximum 10x pass on dual channel configuration.
> 
> 2 weeks back I did single channel, the temperatures can't compare.
> 
> check the maximum temperatures, that was the standard under load.


Let me get some marshmallows to roast over that VRM


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think you need to stop looking for what you want to see and see what is actually there.
> 
> The flir image shows the Titanium to be a superior board and not just by a small margin. Take another look maybe you'll see the whole picture.
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm I think I see what you're saying the MSI Titanium looks to be overall cooler running than the comparison board, with the heat-sinks taking up much more of the heat. Better overall thermal design?
Click to expand...

Darn it! No help from the studio audience!

That is indeed what I am looking at .

To be perfectly honest - there could be many reasons for this , but if all things are equal and I were to look at nothing but those images with no idea what board was what , I'd pick the one with the cooler socket area.

The placement of the temperature target reticle troubles me a bit also .


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Darn it! No help from the studio audience!
> 
> That is indeed what I am looking at .
> 
> To be perfectly honest - there could be many reasons for this , but if all things are equal and I were to look at nothing but those images with no idea what board was what , I'd pick the one with the cooler socket area.
> 
> The placement of the temperature target reticle troubles me a bit also .


I see what you mean by the reticle, the MSI one almost looks more "zoomed in" than the comparison board and the positioning isn't quite the same. Now that I really look at it the comparison board is a Crosshair VI Hero right? I can't tell the difference between what is a capacitor and what is a choke on the FLIR image. On the MSI you can clearly see the capacitors are running much cooler.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Darn it! No help from the studio audience!
> 
> That is indeed what I am looking at .
> 
> To be perfectly honest - there could be many reasons for this , but if all things are equal and I were to look at nothing but those images with no idea what board was what , I'd pick the one with the cooler socket area.
> 
> The placement of the temperature target reticle troubles me a bit also .
> 
> 
> 
> I see what you mean by the reticle, the MSI one almost looks more "zoomed in" than the comparison board and the positioning isn't quite the same.
Click to expand...











You have to be careful when using a flir too, it's not easy to be completely accurate with temps - in order to operate the Fluke we have here at the plant, we are required to take 40 hrs of classroom/hands on training before field use. I haven't taken those classes yet, but I have been around it enough to see things like reflective surfaces skew the reading it shows.

I don't my any means want to belittle the Crosshair - I'm certain it is a fantastic board - but I think the Titanium may be right there with it.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be careful when using a flir too, it's not easy to be completely accurate with temps - in order to operate the Fluke we have here at the plant, we are required to take 40 hrs of classroom/hands on training before field use. I haven't taken those classes yet, but I have been around it enough to see things like reflective surfaces skew the reading it shows.
> 
> I don't my any means want to belittle the Crosshair - I'm certain it is a fantastic board - but I think the Titanium may be right there with it.


You have a point, The Titanium has Nikos VRMs but the thermal design keeps them nice and chilly with sufficient phases to not overload them especially with the limited overclocks we are seeing with the R7 lineup before hitting a voltage wall.

Really seems it can left up to personal preference for the most part on the Top boards at least, the Crosshair, Titanium, Auroras, and Tachi seem to be all good choices and it just depends on what exactly you are looking for feature wise and warranty wise in the case of the Tach having a shorter one than the other 3.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be careful when using a flir too, it's not easy to be completely accurate with temps - in order to operate the Fluke we have here at the plant, we are required to take 40 hrs of classroom/hands on training before field use. I haven't taken those classes yet, but I have been around it enough to see things like reflective surfaces skew the reading it shows.
> 
> I don't my any means want to belittle the Crosshair - I'm certain it is a fantastic board - but I think the Titanium may be right there with it.


I hadn't even noticed that point before. I assumed the writers had paid attention but they seem to be pointing at a location *between* the caps on the Titanium. Also, yes, the *overall* thermal performance does look better. I have argued the thermal cooling design on the Titanium is superior to any other board if you actually take a moment to look at the details.

I have been looking on the CH6 overclocking thread and their HWinfo64 temp measurements seem suspect to me. I don't see how ANY VRM pushing the voltages they are showing could be only 10c above ambient and only 1-2c above MB temp. Something is odd. On the UK overclocking forum users were reporting 60-70c but no details on where they got the measurement from (70c seems high for that board, but under an extended stress test who knows?) .

Regardless, I am sticking to my claim (based on measured results with available tools) that the actual performance of the MSI is easily on par with any of the top boards and the build quality is superior.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I hadn't even noticed that point before. I assumed the writers had paid attention but they seem to be pointing at a location *between* the caps on the Titanium. Also, yes, the *overall* thermal performance does look better. I have argued the thermal cooling design on the Titanium is superior to any other board if you actually take a moment to look at the details.
> 
> I have been looking on the CH6 overclocking thread and their HWinfo64 temp measurements seem suspect to me. I don't see how ANY VRM pushing the voltages they are showing could be only 10c above ambient and only 1-2c above MB temp. Something is odd. On the UK overclocking forum users were reporting 70c but no details on where they got the measurement from.
> 
> Regardless, I am sticking to my claim (based on measured results with available tools) that the actual performance of the MSI is easily on par with any of the top boards and the build quality is superior.


My VRM temps are 20-25C above motherboard temp when I'm under load at stock settings on my C6 Hero I think I hit 54c at one point with [email protected] running with 22c room ambient

VRM is reading 37C at idle


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I hadn't even noticed that point before. I assumed the writers had paid attention but they seem to be pointing at a location *between* the caps on the Titanium. Also, yes, the *overall* thermal performance does look better. I have argued the thermal cooling design on the Titanium is superior to any other board if you actually take a moment to look at the details.
> 
> I have been looking on the CH6 overclocking thread and their HWinfo64 temp measurements seem suspect to me. I don't see how ANY VRM pushing the voltages they are showing could be only 10c above ambient and only 1-2c above MB temp. Something is odd. On the UK overclocking forum users were reporting 70c but no details on where they got the measurement from.
> 
> Regardless, I am sticking to my claim (based on measured results with available tools) that the actual performance of the MSI is easily on par with any of the top boards and the build quality is superior.
> 
> 
> 
> My VRM temps are 20-25C above motherboard temp when I'm under load at stock settings on my C6 Hero I think I hit 54c at one point with [email protected] running with 22c room ambient
Click to expand...

is HWinfo64 measurements even accurate? or this a IR thermometer job?


----------



## Zhany

I'm using HWinfo I don't have a IR probe unfortunately, not that I could get the VRM anyway as they are under the heat-sinks


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have to be careful when using a flir too, it's not easy to be completely accurate with temps - in order to operate the Fluke we have here at the plant, we are required to take 40 hrs of classroom/hands on training before field use. I haven't taken those classes yet, but I have been around it enough to see things like reflective surfaces skew the reading it shows.
> 
> I don't my any means want to belittle the Crosshair - I'm certain it is a fantastic board - but I think the Titanium may be right there with it.
> 
> 
> 
> I hadn't even noticed that point before. I assumed the writers had paid attention but they seem to be pointing at a location *between* the caps on the Titanium. Also, yes, the *overall* thermal performance does look better. I have argued the thermal cooling design on the Titanium is superior to any other board if you actually take a moment to look at the details.
> 
> I have been looking on the CH6 overclocking thread and their HWinfo64 temp measurements seem suspect to me. I don't see how ANY VRM pushing the voltages they are showing could be only 10c above ambient and only 1-2c above MB temp. Something is odd. On the UK overclocking forum users were reporting 60-70c but no details on where they got the measurement from (70c seems high for that board, but under an extended stress test who knows?) .
> 
> Regardless, I am sticking to my claim (based on measured results with available tools) that the actual performance of the MSI is easily on par with any of the top boards and the build quality is superior.
Click to expand...

Pssst..... did you notice the temps on the traces for cpu power?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> My VRM temps are 20-25C above motherboard temp when I'm under load at stock settings on my C6 Hero I think I hit 54c at one point with [email protected] running with 22c room ambient
> 
> VRM is reading 37C at idle


Those seem reasonable...and a few degrees higher than what I see on my MSI. I don't consider a few degrees significant, but others seem to jump on such a minor difference. :-/

Edit: I missed stock settings". I see 53c VRM's at my 3.8Ghz OC.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Pssst..... did you notice the temps on the traces for cpu power?


Id say they are a bit warmer on the Crosshair 6 given the nice white line on the temps where the Titanium has a nice dull orange as if the traces aren't even phased at all by the power running through them.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Id say they are a bit warmer on the Crosshair 6 given the nice white line on the temps where the Titanium has a nice dull orange as if the traces aren't even phased at all by the power running through them.


It's possible this is an intentional design choice. Asus may have designed the circuitry such that much of the MB itself is a heatsink. I honestly don't know if that would even be practical to do intentionally. I also cannot say if that dispersed heat impacts other components. It's an interesting observation that had been hiding in plain sight.

I really have no interest in critiquing the CH6, just in stopping the unsubstantiated bashing of the Titanium. All the focus on one limited aspect of the board being "sub par", when it practice it does in fact appear to be superior to, if not at *least* on par with, the best boards out there - in this aspect at least. Many simply refuse to accept the evidence. Even Chew is making baseless claims of significantly inaccurate voltage readings...from the CPU no less. I guess some just cannot believe MSI might actually know what they are doing with this design...

As for BLCK, which I am sure some will move on to next. People claim no impact dropping PCIE from 3.0 to 2.0 speeds based solely on the GFX card. Bandwidth is cut in half dropping to 2.0, which may not matter with 16 lanes, but what about in SLI/Crossfire when you drop to 8 lanes? Now how about your NMVe drive which only has 4 lanes? Don't think that will take a hit? Lets also not forget that the X370 chip relies on the remaining 4 lanes, so all of those high-speed USB 3.1 devices, SATA devices, network, etc are now relying on half the bandwidth. Still think BLCK overclocking is a smart move? If you still do, the CPU BLCK will be made available soon enough, but you're just making a deal with the devil...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> It's possible this is an intentional design choice. Asus may have designed the circuitry such that much of the MB itself is a heatsink. I honestly don't know if that would even be practical to do intentionally. I also cannot say if that dispersed heat impacts other components. It's an interesting observation that had been hiding in plain sight.
> 
> I really have no interest in critiquing the CH6, just in stopping the unsubstantiated bashing of the Titanium. All the focus on one limited aspect of the board being "sub par", when it practice it does in fact appear to be superior to, if not at *least* on par with, the best boards out there - in this aspect at least. Many simply refuse to accept the evidence. Even Chew is making baseless claims of significantly inaccurate voltage readings...from the CPU no less. I guess some just cannot believe MSI might actually know what they are doing with this design...
> 
> As for BLCK, which I am sure some will move on to next. People claim no impact dropping PCIE from 3.0 to 2.0 speeds based solely on the GFX card. Bandwidth is cut in half dropping to 2.0, which may not matter with 16 lanes, but what about in SLI/Crossfire when you drop to 8 lanes? Now how about your NMVe drive which only has 4 lanes? Don't think that will take a hit? Lets also not forget that the X370 chip relies on the remaining 4 lanes, so all of those high-speed USB 3.1 devices, SATA devices, network, etc are now relying on half the bandwidth. Still think BLCK overclocking is a smart move? If you still do, the CPU BLCK will be made available soon enough, but you're just making a deal with the devil...


All good points, yeah that is the reason I really wouldn't want to touch BLCK overclocking sure you get raw CPU power or memory speeds but you may lose out on every other area that relies on the PCI-E lanes.

Also I noticed that the memory VRM on the Crosshair 6 is using Nikos and that hasn't really been mentioned.

I kinda regret canceling my original pre-order for the Titanium, it fit with my case color scheme better too.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> All good points, yeah that is the reason I really wouldn't want to touch BLCK overclocking sure you get raw CPU power or memory speeds but you may lose out on every other area that relies on the PCI-E lanes.
> 
> Also I noticed that the memory VRM on the Crosshair 6 is using Nikos and that hasn't really been mentioned.
> 
> I kinda regret canceling my original pre-order for the Titanium, it fit with my case color scheme better too.


Interesting about the memory VRM. I guess most don't care about that design. That said, I am not going to fault them. If anything it shows they have no concerns about the reliability of NIKOs either.

It's really difficult picking a board before they are out in the wild. I changed my mind at least three times and even then I questioned whether I was falling for the trap of picking the most expensive board because of the presumption that price=quality. I could only judge based on the reputation of the most recent prior versions of these boards.

The top Asus and Gigabyte boards are both very good. I am sure the Taichi is very good as well (it was my other finalist prior to settling on the MSI). I just thought the design of Asus and Gigabyte seemed too much like reference board layout and lacked consideration (it's a very subjective thing). As for the Taichi, I am just not a fan of it's warranty otherwise I may very well have went with it. Even though at that point I suspected the MSI might be better built, the price difference was leaning me towards the Taichi. The warranty killed that. Even the best components can suffer the odd premature failure and I intend to have this MB 3-4 years. So it was the MSI...


----------



## The L33t

This is a quote from a Gigabyte x370 k7 owner on the newegg page/product review: And let us remember what has been said here about it's VRM design, by all accounts, it is more than suficient, has true 6 phase design with GOOD components (not that niko stuff.... those bad nikos...).
Quote:


> By Newegg client, GIGABYTE AORUS GA-AX370-Gaming K7 product revirew
> ]On a side note, the vrm cooling seems like it could use a heat pipe to aid with cooling at this price point. I often see my vrm reach temperatures in the upper 90's during stress tests(cpu is overclocked to *1.32v*). When I upped the BCLK to 105 and vsoc to 1.0v, *the vrm reached 98c after 50 minutes of stress testing*.


Unfortunately I am out of country so I cannot repeat this on my titanium, but if someone can... please do. I would like to see the results.

I have a feeling this motherboard should be black not white, accounting for all the niko profiling stuff LOL...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> All good points, yeah that is the reason I really wouldn't want to touch BLCK overclocking sure you get raw CPU power or memory speeds but you may lose out on every other area that relies on the PCI-E lanes.
> 
> Also I noticed that the memory VRM on the Crosshair 6 is using Nikos and that hasn't really been mentioned.
> 
> I kinda regret canceling my original pre-order for the Titanium, it fit with my case color scheme better too.


Bclk is being used, I'm sure hard numbers will surface. Happy to let someone else guinea pig their equipment.

Spec sheets on mosfets for every manufacturer's motherboard are available, less capable isn't going to magically perform better with the wave of an rgb wand...

Crosshair's using csd 87350 not Nikos as far as I can tell. Unless they've moved to texas...


----------



## cssorkinman

@L33tBastard

Just an example - I forget what fan settings I was on etc.

1.36 volts prime 95 - 75 minutes 4 ghz - all auto voltage/llc settings


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> This is a quote from a Gigabyte x370 k7 owner on the newegg page/product review: And let us remember what has been said here about it's VRM design, by all accounts, it is more than suficient, has true 6 phase design with GOOD components (not that niko stuff.... those bad nikos...).
> Unfortunately I am out of country so I cannot repeat this on my titanium, but if someone can... please do. I would like to see the results.
> 
> I have a feeling this motherboard should be black not white, account for all the niko profiling stuff LOL...


I've already essentially done the same thing. It's in one of my posts from this morning. Minor differences. My BIOS is set for the CPU at 3.8Ghz and 1.312v. LLC is at defaults. I ran the AIDA64 stress test for 25 minutes and my VRM's were stable at 53c (highest of the two readings) from the 5 minute mark through the end. Actual VDDR_CPU voltage was ~1.275 +/- 0.008v...

Given there was *zero* change for 20 minutes, I doubt there would be any changes letting run for hours longer. My office is cool (~68 F), and I have decent airflow in my case but nothing special (air cooled in a Cooler Master full-size tower).


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Bclk is being used, I'm sure hard numbers will surface. Happy to let someone else guinea pig their equipment.
> 
> Spec sheets on mosfets for every manufacturer's motherboard are available, less capable isn't going to magically perform better with the wave of an rgb wand...
> 
> Crosshair's using csd 87350 not Nikos as far as I can tell. Unless they've moved to texas...


Sorry, tired of the nonsense. If you want to make claims, put-up or shut-up. We've posted actual results with our platform. All I keep hearing is innuendo and excuses from those who don't have the board.

Again, I don't mean to be rude but what I keep seeing are rude and ignorant comments with NO basis in reality. If you want to preach *beliefs*, save it for church.

Explain how THESE result are *inferior*:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/520#post_25972452


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Bclk is being used, I'm sure hard numbers will surface. Happy to let someone else guinea pig their equipment.
> 
> Spec sheets on mosfets for every manufacturer's motherboard are available, less capable isn't going to magically perform better with the wave of an rgb wand...
> 
> Crosshair's using csd 87350 not Nikos as far as I can tell. Unless they've moved to texas...


The CPU and SOC power delivery are the csd 87350 however for ram power delivery they are NIKOs


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Sorry, tired of the nonsense. If you want to make claims, put-up or shut-up. We've posted actual results with our platform. All I keep hearing is innuendo and excuses from those who don't have the board.
> 
> Again, I don't mean to be rude but what I keep seeing are rude and ignorant comments with NO basis in reality. If you want to preach *beliefs*, save it for church.
> 
> Explain how THESE result are *inferior*:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/520#post_25972452


Your VRM temps match if not are sometimes lower than mine and you're overclocking I'm at stock, throughout the course of this thread I have been enlightened


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @L33tBastard
> 
> Just an example - I forget what fan settings I was on etc.
> 
> 1.36 volts prime 95 - 75 minutes 4 ghz - all auto voltage/llc settings


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I've already essentially done the same thing. It's in one of my posts from this morning. Minor differences. My BIOS is set for the CPU at 3.8Ghz and 1.312v. LLC is at defaults. I ran the AIDA64 stress test for 25 minutes and my VRM's were stable at 53c (highest of the two readings) from the 5 minute mark through the end. Actual VDDR_CPU voltage was ~1.275 +/- 0.008v...
> 
> Given there was *zero* change for 20 minutes, I doubt there would be any changes letting run for hours longer. My office is cool (~68 F), and I have decent airflow in my case but nothing special (air cooled in a Cooler Master full-size tower).


Just like I suspected.

The proof is in the pudding


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> lol 100mV difference? software is useless
> 
> 
> 
> It begs the question on why the readings are so wrong.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Stock gives us a valid starting reference. My opinion is that the design of the VRM cooling on the Titanium is superior to any other board I have seen. Deep fins with significant surface area and much better airflow characteristics than any other board, combined with a heat pipe. This will excel with air cooling and I would expect even more so with water cooling where passive heat dissipation will be critical...but we'll see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's easier to get a heatsink added or add airflow than to redo power circuitry on a motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the design of Asus X370 Prime Pro boards that appear to put functionality of the heatsink over aesthetic. It's a shame that so much money is invested into LEDs and shrouds for overclocking boards but that is what sells I guess.
> 
> The Xpower is not a bad board, just priced way too high unless you are overclocking GPUs on LN2 & it's lacking external clock gen. It's simply unworthy of the Xpower name. Microcenter discounted it to $250 a few times already, which is still high but more in line with Mpower pricing. The board is at best on Intel Mpower / Gaming M5 levels of featureset. It is also a problem with the MSI SLI Plus if you do a side by side comparison of the ICs with Intel Z series , let alone VRM. (When even B350 board has ALC1220 with audio enhancements such as audio caps /amp then you have a problem selling X370 boards with ALC892.)
> 
> Xpower would only put out 20A at 2.6W power dissipation from the PK632BA low-side MOSFET & 13A at 2.2W at the high side mosfet _per [email protected] for other motherboards from MSI ,_ so having double the low side mosfets is a bandaid solution. Having a massive heatsink is another bandaid solution. I can't believe people are defending the pricing on it as a top end board when those mosfets are about $0.40 each vs $2 or $3 each on the ASUS CH VI Hero , Asus x370 Prime Pro, or Gigabyte x370 Gaming K7. It's similar to Gigabyte dropping IR3553M for Vishay SiRa12 & SiRa18 after Haswell & Asrock doing the same going from TI NexFETs to Sinopower & some other random Chinese brand mosfets unless you bought a OC board. It's not an MSI problem , it's a motherboard manufacturer problem of them milking repeat customers that just want the same thing as a reputable they have used.
> 
> specsheet for PK632BA : http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> specsheet for PK618BA: http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/138874237504741113.pdf
> specsheet for PK616BA: http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> ^ yes unikc is the same company, see Mail: [email protected] ( http://www.unikc.com.cn/En/Contact.aspx?BaseInfoCateId=43&ProductsCateId=43&CateId=43 )
> 
> It's undeniable fact that the VRM is far cheaper than MSI's Intel-based Xpower variants. The Z170 / Z270 variant uses 14 of the IR3555 (~ $3 per), tantalum capacitors, & comes with an external clock generator. So regardless of whether it is any good at overclocking, MSI is profiteering based on ignorance of IC costs and people that took a leap of faith without reviews containing disclosure on the board ICs.
> 
> Just CPU+SOC mosfets alone : 6x PK616BA + 12x PK632BA + 2 x PK616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 22 x $0.40 = $8.80 *vs 14 x $2.35 in bulk quantities of 1000 which is $32.90 or more at $3.10 per consumer cost as per Octopart which is $43.40*
> 
> In addition to add perspective the X370 Pro Carbon which costs a full $120 less has 8x PK616BA + 8x PK632BA + 2x PK 616BA + 2x PK 632BA = 20 x $0.40 = $8.00 *which is less than a dollar difference*
> Is there $120 (an entire extra B350) worth of added features?
> 
> Also AFAIK the X370 Taichi & Fatal1ty Pro both use NexFETs for the memory phases which would be much stronger than what others are using. Those two boards are analogous to Z270 Taichi / Fatal1ty Gaming i7 so the pricing is rather fair unless you live in a country where a Taichi costs more than a ASUS CH VI Hero.
> 
> For example in Poland, MSI X370 Xpower = 1319 zł to 1339,00 zł , Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro = 1319 zł to 1327,43 zł , ASUS CH VI Hero = 1179,00 zł , Asrock x370 Taichi = 1129 zł, Biostar X370GT7 = 1043,95 zł, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 949 zł, MSI x370 Pro carbon = 819,00 zł, ASRock X370 GAMING K4 = 739 zł to 769,00 zł, ASUS X370 Prime Pro = 699 zł to 759,00 zł
> 
> In Australia: MSI X370 Xpower = 469AUS, ASUS CH VI Hero = 369AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 = 349AUS, Asrock X370 Taichi = 329AUS, Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 = 315AUS to 319AUS, MSI X370 Pro Carbon = 289AUS, ASUS Prime X370 Pro= 239AUS , AsRock X370 fatal1ty Gaming K4 = 219AUS
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Trender07*
> 
> But how much time 3.8 GHz was tested? Im between (from what I've test):
> 
> - ASRock X370 Killer: 2933 MHz
> - Tomahawk B350 Arctic: 3200 MHz
> 
> But everyones saying how bad VRMs are for the MSI and maybe some other manufactures B350 motherboards, like this one i.e: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/61xvp1/b350_vrm_temps/
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'd invest a bit more for the X370 Killer but both lack USB 3.1 Gen2. The B350 Tomahawk Arctic has almost the same amount of current capability as the X370 Killer due to the B350 Tomahawk doubling the low side mosfet , if the PK618BA is used on the Asrock X370 Killer board as suggested by nl.hardware.info.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> If anything can be said about the AM4 MSI offerings is their UEFI is probably amongst the most stable and less bugged, specially the voltage control/LLC. If only they had stepped up a bit on the component side they would undeniably be the standard recommendation AFAIC. UEFI can allways be improved, unfortunately the components and features (hardware wise) cannot.
> 
> As for the B350, most if not all are lacking on the VRM department. Even if 4.0 can be achieved (and it certainly is with ease on some models/cpu dependent) with decent voltage, maintaining that 24/7 will be a challenge, one does have to consider summer temps with high ambient temperatures etc. The VRM on the B350's (all brands) will be inadequate.
> 
> I find it a bit sad since the VRM components are quite cheap considering they are purchased in the millions of units... most if not all of us would be willing to pay 15/20 more USD/EUR on the B350's and have a decent VRM, future proofed, and really overclocking friendly, a VRM on par with the x370 models.
> 
> I do not run dual cards, never will, so the B350 makes sense, but the VRM's are not up the task I want them to be, and this is not a limitation on the B350 side or AMD, the motherboard manufactures are just trying to drive us to the X370 side and leave the B350's to the Ryzen 5's and folks not overclocking much... and that does not make sense! Every chip is unlocked for a reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you want a half decent overclock you need X370 in this current lineup. If the PK618BA instead of SM4336 is truly the mosfets on the Killer SLI and Fatal1ty K4 , shame on Asrock. I've seen people stating they cannot top out over 3.8GHz 24/7 under load on the stock cooler so that means the B350 boards are aligned for people using stock coolers.
> We had 6 doubled to 12 CPU phases of Low RDS(on) mosfets for 77W TDP Ivy Bridge CPUs. We don't even have that equivalent for most of the boards now (entire lineup of MSI except Xpower, Asrock except 2 boards , Gigabyte's lineup except 2 boards , ASUS non X370 lineup thus far). The fact that we have this awful lineup across all manufacturers is disappointing.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the informative and thoughtfully-constructed post. It's these kinds of posts that give consumers detailed info to allow them to make more informed purchasing decisions that makes this site great.


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think you need to stop looking for what you want to see and see what is actually there.
> 
> The flir image shows the Titanium to be a superior board and not just by a small margin. Take another look maybe you'll see the whole picture.


I'd say the hottest point is the most critical.

Outside of the VRM though, I'd agree that the Asus board is running cooler.

But the problem I have is that the VRM is the most likely to fail. Compounding the problem, MSI has had a history of their VRMs with Nikos catching fire.

In my opinion, they both suck ... but for different reasons. The MSI for the inefficient Mosfets, the Asus for the poor memory and the board seems to be a bit hotter overall. Zooming out - right side of Asus is definetely warmer.

 

It doesn't change the fact though that the MSI is a poor value. You could make a case that the Asus X370 Crosshair has some flaws too.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> All good points, yeah that is the reason I really wouldn't want to touch BLCK overclocking sure you get raw CPU power or memory speeds but you may lose out on every other area that relies on the PCI-E lanes.
> 
> Also I noticed that the memory VRM on the Crosshair 6 is using Nikos and that hasn't really been mentioned.
> 
> I kinda regret canceling my original pre-order for the Titanium, it fit with my case color scheme better too.


Agree that the memory VRM on the Crosshair is lacking for sure. Here's the image in question.



Here's the MSI one:


Does it matter? I think the Asus RAM Mosfet is definitely warmer than it should be. The MSI one isn't great either. On the other hand, RAM Mostfets are not as critical. I've never heard a RAM Mosfet exploding. CPU Mosfets however have. CPU is more critical, but yeah the RAM is not great on the Asus.

One other point is that they are using 3.0 GHz on AIDA64 for 10 minutes. We need a 4.1 GHz overclock on Linpak for at least 10 minutes. That should stress out the CPUs to their maximum possible load. Hopefully we will be able to find a review with Linpack.

Actually to be honest, there isn't a single board right now that I'm impressed by all 3 (they also did the Gigabyte). My conclusion stands. At 300, the MSI X370 XPower is overpriced for what it offers. The VRMs are lacking and would get hotter with a more demanding benchmark. You could make the case for the Asus X370 being overpriced too. Ironically at 200, the Asrock has a stronger Mosfet than the XPower, the Crosshair, and the Gigabyte X370 K7. However, testing will be needed to prove/disprove the Taichi.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I'd say the hottest point is the most critical.
> 
> Outside of the VRM though, I'd agree that the Asus board is running cooler.
> 
> But the problem I have is that the VRM is the most likely to fail. Compounding the problem, MSI has had a history of their VRMs with Nikos catching fire.
> 
> In my opinion, they both suck ... but for different reasons. The MSI for the inefficient Mosfets, the Asus for the poor memory and the board seems to be a bit hotter overall. Zooming out - right side of Asus is definetely warmer.
> 
> It doesn't change the fact though that the MSI is a poor value. You could make a case that the Asus X370 Crosshair has some flaws too.
> Agree that the memory VRM on the Crosshair is lacking for sure. Here's the image in question.
> 
> Here's the MSI one:
> 
> Does it matter? I think the Asus RAM Mosfet is definitely warmer than it should be. The MSI one isn't great either. On the other hand, RAM Mostfets are not as critical. I've never heard a RAM Mosfet exploding. CPU Mosfets however have. CPU is more critical, but yeah the RAM is not great on the Asus.
> 
> One other point is that they are using 3.0 GHz on AIDA64 for 10 minutes. We need a 4.1 GHz overclock on Linpak for at least 10 minutes. That should stress out the CPUs to their maximum possible load. Hopefully we will be able to find a review with Linpack.
> 
> Actually to be honest, there isn't a single board right now that I'm impressed by all 3 (they also did the Gigabyte). My conclusion stands. At 300, the MSI X370 XPower is overpriced for what it offers. The VRMs are lacking and would get hotter with a more demanding benchmark. You could make the case for the Asus X370 being overpriced too. Ironically at 200, the Asrock has a stronger Mosfet than the XPower, the Crosshair, and the Gigabyte X370 K7. However, testing will be needed to prove/disprove the Taichi.


Removed screenshots from quote to help save posting space.

Thank you for posting the thermal readings was rather interesting. I think it will be interesting to see is what offerings manufactures will release over the coming months with Ryzen 5 and 3 on the horizon and Zen 2 next year. Hopefully high quality stuff.


----------



## realtomatoes

yeah, i think they were wary of the am4 platform. it's been awhile since amd released a new platform and they were unsure how much demand there would be.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> yeah, i think they were wary of the am4 platform. it's been awhile since amd released a new platform and they were unsure how much demand there would be.


I think they have the answer now seeing as demand was overwhelming lol


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I'd say the hottest point is the most critical.
> 
> Outside of the VRM though, I'd agree that the Asus board is running cooler.
> 
> But the problem I have is that the VRM is the most likely to fail. Compounding the problem, MSI has had a history of their VRMs with Nikos catching fire.
> 
> In my opinion, they both suck ... but for different reasons. The MSI for the inefficient Mosfets, the Asus for the poor memory and the board seems to be a bit hotter overall. Zooming out - right side of Asus is definetely warmer.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't change the fact though that the MSI is a poor value. You could make a case that the Asus X370 Crosshair has some flaws too.
> Agree that the memory VRM on the Crosshair is lacking for sure. Here's the image in question.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the MSI one:
> 
> 
> Does it matter? I think the Asus RAM Mosfet is definitely warmer than it should be. The MSI one isn't great either. On the other hand, RAM Mostfets are not as critical. I've never heard a RAM Mosfet exploding. CPU Mosfets however have. CPU is more critical, but yeah the RAM is not great on the Asus.
> 
> One other point is that they are using 3.0 GHz on AIDA64 for 10 minutes. We need a 4.1 GHz overclock on Linpak for at least 10 minutes. That should stress out the CPUs to their maximum possible load. Hopefully we will be able to find a review with Linpack.
> 
> Actually to be honest, there isn't a single board right now that I'm impressed by all 3 (they also did the Gigabyte). My conclusion stands. At 300, the MSI X370 XPower is overpriced for what it offers. The VRMs are lacking and would get hotter with a more demanding benchmark. You could make the case for the Asus X370 being overpriced too. Ironically at 200, the Asrock has a stronger Mosfet than the XPower, the Crosshair, and the Gigabyte X370 K7. However, testing will be needed to prove/disprove the Taichi.


Tweaktown already tested the Taichi, http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8099/asrock-x370-taichi-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> The CPU and SOC power delivery are the csd 87350 however for ram power delivery they are NIKOs


Ok, after 40 minutes of staring at photos I have yet to identify the mosfets for the ram. And since I like reading . Source?

@TheOldTechGuru What? Your thermals at that load look fine. May your motherboard live out it's life with the vrm's in spec. However at the end of the day 1 pk616b + 2x Pk632ba per phase is still inferior in itself to 1 ir3555A per phase. Give them another name and the specs of the two solutions do not lie. The rest of the design is more than decent and does not deserve to be shorted by cost saving for a component whose failure can destroy my cpu


----------



## realtomatoes

newb question: are the front case fans enough to cool those vrms when using a custom loop?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Ok, after 40 minutes of staring at photos I have yet to identify the mosfets for the ram. And since I like reading . Source?
> 
> @TheOldTechGuru What? Your thermals at that load look fine. May your motherboard live out it's life with the vrm's in spec. However at the end of the day 1 pk616b + 2x Pk632ba per phase is still inferior in itself to 1 ir3555A per phase. Give them another name and the specs of the two solutions do not lie. The rest of the design is more than decent and does not deserve to be shorted by cost saving for a component whose failure can destroy my cpu


But it is HEAT that kills the mosfets. The reason NIKOs got a bad rap is that under-spec'd mosfets were used (due to poor reference design from AMD initially) and they failed spectacularly. Actual feedback on the top Asus and Gigabytes are showing *higher* temps at the VRM's at comparable overclocks. So those are at greater risk of failing.

How can that be? As I have said, poor cooling designs. The cooling doesn't scale with the load. They may be marginally better at idle, but cannot dissipate the extra heat as efficiently. As such, those "premium" mosfets are under more duress than my poor NIKOs...the MSI will likely outlast the other boards.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Ok, after 40 minutes of staring at photos I have yet to identify the mosfets for the ram. And since I like reading . Source?
> 
> @TheOldTechGuru What? Your thermals at that load look fine. May your motherboard live out it's life with the vrm's in spec. However at the end of the day 1 pk616b + 2x Pk632ba per phase is still inferior in itself to 1 ir3555A per phase. Give them another name and the specs of the two solutions do not lie. The rest of the design is more than decent and does not deserve to be shorted by cost saving for a component whose failure can destroy my cpu


Source:


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> newb question: are the front case fans enough to cool those vrms when using a custom loop?


No. The airflow would be way too diffused at the VRMs, if even noticeable. Fans at the top of the case are the best bet for keeping VRMs cool in a water-cooled system.


----------



## cssorkinman

Haven't had any issues with these settings for 4150 mhz for my "normal" use - Example of temps/performance in BF1 64 player servers.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I'd say the hottest point is the most critical.
> 
> Outside of the VRM though, I'd agree that the Asus board is running cooler.
> 
> But the problem I have is that the VRM is the most likely to fail. Compounding the problem, MSI has had a history of their VRMs with Nikos catching fire.
> 
> In my opinion, they both suck ... but for different reasons. The MSI for the inefficient Mosfets, the Asus for the poor memory and the board seems to be a bit hotter overall. Zooming out - right side of Asus is definetely warmer.


The only thing sucking about the msi is the price. The vrm on it is just as safe as the vrm on other am4 boards that don't use D-PAK fets.

The only step up regarding vrm safety is the use of DrMOS fets with integrated thermal shutdown. No current AM4 boards use these.

Edit: Enough with the MSI Ti bashing already. If any of you who criticize the board have solid proof that the VRM on it dies, either prove it or just keep you mouth shut.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*


Yep, really nice in theory. Quality components apparently hamstrung by sloppy cooling design. He doesn't evaluate actual performance and therein lies the rub. Everyone has been too focused on the components and not the functionality of their implementation. So far, real-world results are showing MSI's design to be *functionally* superior. The proof is in the numbers...

Look at the actual VRM temps in comparable overclocks. Also look at the v-drop for the other boards (VRM CPU voltage out vs actual CPU voltage). The v-drop is higher because more of that energy is being lost to heat compared to the MSI and you can actually see this in the FLIR images.

This reminds me of a Porche owner who goes on and on about his superior German engineered car, about how much better it's design and performance is than crappy American sports cars, who then gets taken to the woodshed by a Corvette and is left in disbelief...the proof is in the results.


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> No. The airflow would be way too diffused at the VRMs, if even noticeable. Fans at the top of the case are the best bet for keeping VRMs cool in a water-cooled system.


i do have a radiator on top and it pull air away from the mobo. i guess that doesn't do much either, does it?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> i do have a radiator on top and it pull air away from the mobo. i guess that doesn't do much either, does it?


It will help more than you think, but it depends on the heatsink design. MSI's have a very clear airflow path over a lot of surface area...the other boards, not so much.

You'll just have to do some testing to see how well your specific setup works. Radiating out the top should do pretty well.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Yep, really nice in theory. Quality components apparently hamstrung by sloppy cooling design. He doesn't evaluate actual performance and therein lies the rub. Everyone has been too focused on the components and not the functionality of their implementation. So far, real-world results are showing MSI's design to be *functionally* superior. The proof is in the numbers...
> 
> Look at the actual VRM temps in comparable overclocks. Also look at the v-drop for the other boards (VRM CPU voltage out vs actual CPU voltage). The v-drop is higher because more of that energy is being lost to heat compared to the MSI and you can actually see this in the FLIR images.
> 
> This reminds me of a Porche owner who goes on and on about his superior German engineered car, about how much better it's design and performance is than crappy American sports cars, who then gets taken to the woodshed by a Corvette and is left in disbelief...the proof is in the results.


I agree with you, main point of posting the video was to point out the NIKOs on the Memory VRM


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> I agree with you, main point of posting the video was to point out the NIKOs on the Memory VRM


Ah, sorry about that. Missed that point.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The only thing sucking about the msi is the price. The vrm on it is just as safe as the vrm on other am4 boards that don't use D-PAK fets.
> 
> The only step up regarding vrm safety is the use of DrMOS fets with integrated thermal shutdown. No current AM4 boards use these.
> 
> Edit: Enough with the MSI Ti bashing already. If any of you who criticize the board have solid proof that the VRM on it dies, either prove it or just keep you mouth shut.


Thanks.

As for the integrated thermal shutdown, what is the difference between that and the VRM thermal shutdown settings/method MSI uses (if you know)? You can set a range of auto-shutdown temps or leave it on auto...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ah, sorry about that. Missed that point.


No worries


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> As for the integrated thermal shutdown, what is the difference between that and the VRM thermal shutdown settings/method MSI uses (if you know)? You can set a range of auto-shutdown temps or leave it on auto...


At some point in 2011 DrMOS with integrated shutdown came out. Instead of relying on an external signal to turn off the fets, they turn off themselves. Additionally, there's also the option to turn them off externally, limit their power output, etc.

There are only two companies I know of who use this kind of fets. Intel only on their x79 boards and msi on their x79 boards and some of their boards afterwards (some mini itx i don't recall and some x99 boards).


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> I agree with you, main point of posting the video was to point out the NIKOs on the Memory VRM


Thanks Zhany.

The mosfets in the tweaktown review are not labled as PEA76BA's. Best pic I found. Nikos or not he concludes that they "should" be adequate because they won't be required to work that hard... yeah.. well I've never lost a cpu to dead ram vrm's . But ram isn't cheap either. Stay in spec!

I'm quietly adding the Titanium's heatsink and pipe to my unicorn board specs. It was the first thing that grabbed me when I looked at it.


----------



## Obvcop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I'd say the hottest point is the most critical.
> 
> Outside of the VRM though, I'd agree that the Asus board is running cooler.
> 
> But the problem I have is that the VRM is the most likely to fail. Compounding the problem, MSI has had a history of their VRMs with Nikos catching fire.
> 
> In my opinion, they both suck ... but for different reasons. The MSI for the inefficient Mosfets, the Asus for the poor memory and the board seems to be a bit hotter overall. Zooming out - right side of Asus is definetely warmer.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't change the fact though that the MSI is a poor value. You could make a case that the Asus X370 Crosshair has some flaws too.
> Agree that the memory VRM on the Crosshair is lacking for sure. Here's the image in question.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the MSI one:
> 
> 
> Does it matter? I think the Asus RAM Mosfet is definitely warmer than it should be. The MSI one isn't great either. On the other hand, RAM Mostfets are not as critical. I've never heard a RAM Mosfet exploding. CPU Mosfets however have. CPU is more critical, but yeah the RAM is not great on the Asus.
> 
> One other point is that they are using 3.0 GHz on AIDA64 for 10 minutes. We need a 4.1 GHz overclock on Linpak for at least 10 minutes. That should stress out the CPUs to their maximum possible load. Hopefully we will be able to find a review with Linpack.
> 
> Actually to be honest, there isn't a single board right now that I'm impressed by all 3 (they also did the Gigabyte). My conclusion stands. At 300, the MSI X370 XPower is overpriced for what it offers. The VRMs are lacking and would get hotter with a more demanding benchmark. You could make the case for the Asus X370 being overpriced too. Ironically at 200, the Asrock has a stronger Mosfet than the XPower, the Crosshair, and the Gigabyte X370 K7. However, testing will be needed to prove/disprove the Taichi.


I tried asking this earlier but I eat only reccomended the msi, since the Taichi is out of the question (no motherboard waterblock) what has the better vrm design/power delivery, the gigabyte or the ch6, the msi is 100 quid more expensive for what people say on this board is inferior power delivery


----------



## Artikbot

What's the intended use?

Any of the top dogs will do you well if you're looking at high end air/water as long as you've got a fan in the neighbourings of the heatsink.


----------



## Obvcop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> What's the intended use?
> 
> Any of the top dogs will do you well if you're looking at high end air/water as long as you've got a fan in the neighbourings of the heatsink.


Well EK will only be making monoblocks that cover the vrm's + cpu for the CH6, Gigabyte K7 and the Msi titanium, I'm going to be experimenting with overclocking it pretty often so I want to know what will be the best motherboard out of these three to choose based on the power delivery/VRM's. The Taichi had been my first choice but that is now out of the window.


----------



## ku4eto

Ok, the Taichi seems the best overall..... but why the hell would i need Wi-FI features, that make the MB a lot more expensive!


----------



## Nighthog

Ok I've reached 3950Mhz IBT AVX stability on "very high" setting. Needed all of +0.288 volts offset. Worked my way all way from 0.246 which was stable for 3900Mhz for "maximum" testing.

Same setting worked without issue 1hour Realbench just before IBT AVX.

I basically don't dare try maximum as I was getting weird sensor readings with cores using 13, 15, 25watts for short periods against the usual ~10watt max before with less stressful tests when vcore began to go above 1.450volts(0.276 offset)



I think I'm done.

This motherboard doesn't seem to have much more to give. The max setting is +0.300 offset and that didn't work to get 4.0Ghz stable in anything too stressful. Failed the realbench benchmark after all without a pass.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Ok I've reached 3950Mhz IBT AVX stability on "very high" setting. Needed all of +0.288 volts offset. Worked my way all way from 0.246 which was stable for 3900Mhz for "maximum" testing.
> 
> Same setting worked without issue 1hour Realbench just before IBT AVX.
> 
> I basically don't dare try maximum as I was getting weird sensor readings with cores using 13, 15, 25watts for short periods against the usual ~10watt max before with less stressful tests when vcore began to go above 1.450volts(0.276 offset)
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'm done.
> 
> This motherboard doesn't seem to have much more to give. The max setting is +0.300 offset and that didn't work to get 4.0Ghz stable in anything too stressful. Failed the realbench benchmark after all without a pass.


Those VRM's got pretty hot (93c). I would keep an eye on how hot they get during your normal usage. You might want to look at options to cool them down some...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Obvcop*
> 
> Well EK will only be making monoblocks that cover the vrm's + cpu for the CH6, Gigabyte K7 and the Msi titanium, I'm going to be experimenting with overclocking it pretty often so I want to know what will be the best motherboard out of these three to choose based on the power delivery/VRM's. The Taichi had been my first choice but that is now out of the window.


I do honestly believe the MSI is a *slightly* higher quality board. Given you plan to water cool the CPU and VRM's I don't think you would go wrong with either remaining board. Asus has a better BIOS design from the feedback I have heard, and I keep wavering between which I would pick. The Taichi was my second choice to the MSI, and I really think the Asus and Gigabyte come down to subjective preferences...


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Those VRM's got pretty hot (93c). I would keep an eye on how hot they get during your normal usage. You might want to look at options to cool them down some...


That's nothing, had them at 108C a moment ago when I failed a "maximum" run. More voltage...

I have a 70mm fan on them already, 3200rpm


----------



## Zhany

So I'm going to swap out my Asus Crosshair VI for something else, I'm just not all that happy with if I'm being honest with myself(I seem to have the worst luck with ASUS Motherboards). I'm torn between the MSI Titanium and either the Gigabyte K7 or K5 my main reason that I'm torn is the pricing, I feel I could use the 100 I would save with the K5 and get an NVME SSD and I would also have a use for the dual LAN on the Gigabyte boards for a PFsense VM without having to buy an NIC. However at the same time the overall build quality of the MSI Titanium based on discussions throughout this thread that I participated seems to be quite good as well and would serve me well.

I will not be doing any BCLK overclocking so having a BCLK generator is not needed.

Here are my short requirements in order of importance from most important to least
1. Quality
2. Durability
3. Performance
4. Memory compatibility
5. Feature set(NVME, Dual Lan would be a bonus, don't care or want built in WIFI)
6. Price

Any thoughts/suggestions?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> So I'm going to swap out my Asus Crosshair VI for something else, I'm just not all that happy with if I'm being honest with myself(I seem to have the worst luck with ASUS Motherboards). I'm torn between the MSI Titanium and either the Gigabyte K7 or K5 my main reason that I'm torn is the pricing, I feel I could use the 100 I would save with the K5 and get an NVME SSD and I would also have a use for the dual LAN on the Gigabyte boards for a PFsense VM without having to buy an NIC. However at the same time the overall build quality of the MSI Titanium based on discussions throughout this thread that I participated seems to be quite good as well and would serve me well.
> 
> I will not be doing any BCLK overclocking so having a BCLK generator is not needed.
> 
> Here are my short requirements in order of importance from most important to least
> 1. Quality
> 2. Durability
> 3. Performance
> 4. Memory compatibility
> 5. Feature set(NVME, Dual Lan would be a bonus, don't care or want built in WIFI)
> 6. Price
> 
> Any thoughts/suggestions?


Taichi or K7 and spend the rest on something else.

BTW, why don't you like the Asus?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> So I'm going to swap out my Asus Crosshair VI for something else, I'm just not all that happy with if I'm being honest with myself(I seem to have the worst luck with ASUS Motherboards). I'm torn between the MSI Titanium and either the Gigabyte K7 or K5 my main reason that I'm torn is the pricing, I feel I could use the 100 I would save with the K5 and get an NVME SSD and I would also have a use for the dual LAN on the Gigabyte boards for a PFsense VM without having to buy an NIC. However at the same time the overall build quality of the MSI Titanium based on discussions throughout this thread that I participated seems to be quite good as well and would serve me well.
> 
> I will not be doing any BCLK overclocking so having a BCLK generator is not needed.
> 
> Here are my short requirements in order of importance from most important to least
> 1. Quality
> 2. Durability
> 3. Performance
> 4. Memory compatibility
> 5. Feature set(NVME, Dual Lan would be a bonus, don't care or want built in WIFI)
> 6. Price
> 
> Any thoughts/suggestions?
> 
> 
> 
> Taichi or K7 and spend the rest on something else.
> 
> BTW, why don't you like the Asus?
Click to expand...

I lent my nephew a K7 just to see if he would like it - hes been working on it 7 hours and it still isn't stable.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I lent my nephew a K7 just to see if he would like it - hes been working on it 7 hours and it still isn't stable.


Sounds like a RAM/BIOS issue. No bad reviews on newegg.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I lent my nephew a K7 just to see if he would like it - hes been working on it 7 hours and it still isn't stable.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like a RAM/BIOS issue.
Click to expand...

That's probably true, it's also randomly dropping usb connections









EDIT : He's using the other half of the ram kit I am using in my Titanium


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Taichi or K7 and spend the rest on something else.
> 
> BTW, why don't you like the Asus?


Mainly from personal experience and really just the motherboards I seem to have issue with, for a vast majority of people they are fantastic boards and I like thier laptops, my buddy has an Asus laptop that has taken a beating and keeps on going.

Things I don't like
1. The QShield it makes getting the board lined up on the standoffs a real pain in the butt
2. The conformal coating is ridiculously easy to scratch it seems they are the only boards I've ever managed to get any scratches on, and I accidentally damaged the USB 3.0 header(ripped right out of the board without much force) which is one of the reasons I'm replacing it. Sucks I lost out on the money but oh well it was my fault.
3. I'm actually not all that huge of a fan of the AM3 and AM4 mounting plate interchangeability, I just have a nagging feeling it could cause issues further down the road for some reason.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Mainly from personal experience and really just the motherboards I seem to have issue with, for a vast majority of people they are fantastic boards and I like thier laptops, my buddy has an Asus laptop that has taken a beating and keeps on going.
> 
> Things I don't like
> 1. The QShield it makes getting the board lined up on the standoffs a real pain in the butt
> 2. The conformal coating is ridiculously easy to scratch it seems they are the only boards I've ever managed to get any scratches on, and I accidentally damaged the USB 3.0 header(ripped right out of the board without much force) which is one of the reasons I'm replacing it. Sucks I lost out on the money but oh well it was my fault.
> 3. I'm actually not all that huge of a fan of the AM3 and AM4 mounting plate interchangeability, I just have a nagging feeling it could cause issues further down the road for some reason.


Gotcha. I've noticed myself that the paint on their boards scratch easily. I also don't appreciate paying a premium just because it's Asus. They tend to leave out little things here and there and release a board that's $50-$100 more with a few more features and so on.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Gotcha. I've noticed myself that the paint on their boards scratch easily. I also don't appreciate paying a premium just because it's Asus. They tend to leave out little things here and there and release a board that's $50-$100 more with a few more features and so on.


Agreed I wouldn't be surprised if an ASUS Maximus AM4 board came out in 6 months or so now that all the manufactures know that Ryzen is selling like hotcakes, I'm leaning towards the K7 because of the dual Lan and previous experience with Gigabyte and its a bit cheaper, my very first build was on one of thier ultra durables on socket 775, and I built two media centers with thier boards as well, all worked flawlessly until I retired them from service. When I was on a Z170 I used MSI the Z170 SLI Plus since I was on a strict budget, and for a cheap board it could support a decent overclock and ran flawlessly.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Agreed I wouldn't be surprised if an ASUS Maximus AM4 board came out in 6 months or so now that all the manufactures know that Ryzen is selling like hotcakes, I'm leaning towards the K7 because of the dual Lan and previous experience with Gigabyte and its a bit cheaper, my very first build was on one of thier ultra durables on socket 775, and I built two media centers with thier boards as well, all worked flawlessly until I retired them from service. When I was on a Z170 I used MSI the Z170 SLI Plus since I was on a strict budget, and for a cheap board it could support a decent overclock and ran flawlessly.


I'm positive Asus will release their Hero board and then Maximus. In regards to Gigabyte, nice board but I hate how you have to rely on a CMOS jumper if your OC goes bad. I used to do that 10 years ago. No thanks.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> I'm positive Asus will release their Hero board and then Maximus. In regards to Gigabyte, nice board but I hate how you have to rely on a CMOS jumper if your OC goes bad. I used to do that 10 years ago. No thanks.


Eh the jumper doesn't bother me too much, but I can see your point, also whats the difference between the K5 and the K7 is it just the BCLK generator?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Eh the jumper doesn't bother me too much, but I can see your point, also whats the difference between the K5 and the K7 is it just the BCLK generator?


Pretty much, yes. Color and 1 extra RGB zone on the k7 it looks like.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Pretty much, yes. Color and 1 extra RGB zone on the k7 it looks like.


Cool thank you for the help and suggestions, Ill have to keep an eye out on Newegg, looks like the K7 went out of stock today, hopefully they will get some more in soon.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Cool thank you for the help and suggestions, Ill have to keep an eye out on Newegg, looks like the K7 went out of stock today, hopefully they will get some more in soon.


If you don't care about RGB and want to save some more cash, look into the MSI SLI Plus. Great looking board and price.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> If you don't care about RGB and want to save some more cash, look into the MSI SLI Plus. Great looking board and price.


It does look good and the price is nice, but I lose out the on the Dual Lan with the SLI Plus so a little too feature light, I might go for the Gigabyte K5 since its basically the same as the K7


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> It does look good and the price is nice, but I lose out the on the Dual Lan with the SLI Plus so a little too feature light, I might go for the Gigabyte K5 since its basically the same as the K7


I've never used the dual lan feature. What's the purpose?


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> I've never used the dual lan feature. What's the purpose?


For me it would be for running PFSense through a virtual machine, so that my computer can act as a firewall/gateway for the rest of my home network.


----------



## TheBloodEagle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> I've never used the dual lan feature. What's the purpose?


If you have a switch, you can NIC team and get higher throughput for your local network, no?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> So I'm going to swap out my Asus Crosshair VI for something else, I'm just not all that happy with if I'm being honest with myself(I seem to have the worst luck with ASUS Motherboards). I'm torn between the MSI Titanium and either the Gigabyte K7 or K5 my main reason that I'm torn is the pricing, I feel I could use the 100 I would save with the K5 and get an NVME SSD and I would also have a use for the dual LAN on the Gigabyte boards for a PFsense VM without having to buy an NIC. However at the same time the overall build quality of the MSI Titanium based on discussions throughout this thread that I participated seems to be quite good as well and would serve me well.
> 
> I will not be doing any BCLK overclocking so having a BCLK generator is not needed.
> 
> Here are my short requirements in order of importance from most important to least
> 1. Quality
> 2. Durability
> 3. Performance
> 4. Memory compatibility
> 5. Feature set(NVME, Dual Lan would be a bonus, don't care or want built in WIFI)
> 6. Price
> 
> Any thoughts/suggestions?


Well, my thought is that you tried Asus and they are pretty comparable to Gigabyte in many ways and you weren't happy with it. I would say bite the bullet and try the MSI. You've already seen the Asus offering so I think you can make a pretty quick determination if the MSI is worth it or not. The MB is the one component you are least likely to swap out during the life of your system unless it fails or you outgrow it. You want something that will last and hold up well. If when you get it you don't think it was worth the premium you can quickly return it and go with Gigabyte. If you go with Gigabyte next you will spend a lot of time with it before considering jumping up to the MSI and that additional time will make you more reluctant to swap yet again.

But that's just my opinion...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBloodEagle*
> 
> If you have a switch, you can NIC team and get higher throughput for your local network, no?


Not with most consumer switches. They have to support link aggregation (or channel bonding) to make two switch ports behave as one.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> For me it would be for running PFSense through a virtual machine, so that my computer can act as a firewall/gateway for the rest of my home network.


I bought an older-generation HP server (cheap at the end of the year) to do just that. PFsense doesn't need a lot of horsepower, so this will be my domain controller running a VM version of PFsense with Surticata...when I can finally get around to it. I don't want to start until I replace my UPS with one a little beefier since this will need to be 7x24...so many other distractions.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> So I'm going to swap out my Asus Crosshair VI for something else, I'm just not all that happy with if I'm being honest with myself(I seem to have the worst luck with ASUS Motherboards). I'm torn between the MSI Titanium and either the Gigabyte K7 or K5 my main reason that I'm torn is the pricing, I feel I could use the 100 I would save with the K5 and get an NVME SSD and I would also have a use for the dual LAN on the Gigabyte boards for a PFsense VM without having to buy an NIC. However at the same time the overall build quality of the MSI Titanium based on discussions throughout this thread that I participated seems to be quite good as well and would serve me well.
> 
> I will not be doing any BCLK overclocking so having a BCLK generator is not needed.
> 
> Here are my short requirements in order of importance from most important to least
> 1. Quality
> 2. Durability
> 3. Performance
> 4. Memory compatibility
> 5. Feature set(NVME, Dual Lan would be a bonus, don't care or want built in WIFI)
> 6. Price
> 
> Any thoughts/suggestions?


Biostar's GT7 is worth a look, it hits more than a couple of those criteria so far. Performance and memory compatibility in particular.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> So I'm going to swap out my Asus Crosshair VI for something else, I'm just not all that happy with if I'm being honest with myself(I seem to have the worst luck with ASUS Motherboards). I'm torn between the MSI Titanium and either the Gigabyte K7 or K5 my main reason that I'm torn is the pricing, I feel I could use the 100 I would save with the K5 and get an NVME SSD and I would also have a use for the dual LAN on the Gigabyte boards for a PFsense VM without having to buy an NIC. However at the same time the overall build quality of the MSI Titanium based on discussions throughout this thread that I participated seems to be quite good as well and would serve me well.
> 
> I will not be doing any BCLK overclocking so having a BCLK generator is not needed.
> 
> Here are my short requirements in order of importance from most important to least
> 1. Quality
> 2. Durability
> 3. Performance
> 4. Memory compatibility
> 5. Feature set(NVME, Dual Lan would be a bonus, don't care or want built in WIFI)
> 6. Price
> 
> Any thoughts/suggestions?


I think the Gaming 5 meets all of those criteria.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Biostar's GT7 is worth a look, it hits more than a couple of those criteria so far. Performance and memory compatibility in particular.


Agreed. An underrated board thus far in terms of performance, compatibility, and durability. Decent features as well, not as many as the Fatal1ty Pro, but enough for my needs. Here's a quick 30 minute run, and keep in mind that this is 4.0GHz whilst temporarily stuck with a Gammaxx 400 in push-pull; single-tower air that's basically the definition of average. I'll add as well that I had just played Andromeda for about three hours and ran the stress test immediately after closing the game. I'm quite pleased with the board.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> "Ok I've reached 3950Mhz IBT AVX stability on "very high" setting. Needed all of +0.288 volts offset."
> 
> "I basically don't dare try maximum"
> 
> "I think I'm done. "
> 
> "This motherboard doesn't seem to have much more to give. "




IBT AVX Maximum passed...

+0.300V offset needed.

113C VRM temperature


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Well, my thought is that you tried Asus and they are pretty comparable to Gigabyte in many ways and you weren't happy with it. I would say bite the bullet and try the MSI. You've already seen the Asus offering so I think you can make a pretty quick determination if the MSI is worth it or not. The MB is the one component you are least likely to swap out during the life of your system unless it fails or you outgrow it. You want something that will last and hold up well. If when you get it you don't think it was worth the premium you can quickly return it and go with Gigabyte. If you go with Gigabyte next you will spend a lot of time with it before considering jumping up to the MSI and that additional time will make you more reluctant to swap yet again.
> 
> But that's just my opinion...


Thank you for your input, it will be a tough decision once there is stock available, although the second NIC would be nice, I would rather have something that I know is going to last me until Zen 3 comes out, I heard one mention that the MSI Titanium is using a 7 layer PCB is that true? Because I think most use 6 with cheap boards going down to 5?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Well, my thought is that you tried Asus and they are pretty comparable to Gigabyte in many ways and you weren't happy with it. I would say bite the bullet and try the MSI. You've already seen the Asus offering so I think you can make a pretty quick determination if the MSI is worth it or not. The MB is the one component you are least likely to swap out during the life of your system unless it fails or you outgrow it. You want something that will last and hold up well. If when you get it you don't think it was worth the premium you can quickly return it and go with Gigabyte. If you go with Gigabyte next you will spend a lot of time with it before considering jumping up to the MSI and that additional time will make you more reluctant to swap yet again.
> 
> But that's just my opinion...
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for your input, it will be a tough decision once there is stock available, although the second NIC would be nice, I would rather have something that I know is going to last me until Zen 3 comes out, I heard one mention that the MSI Titanium is using a 7 layer PCB is that true? Because I think most use 6 with cheap boards going down to 5?
Click to expand...

I've seen that on reddit - but can not confirm it.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Thank you for your input, it will be a tough decision once there is stock available, although the second NIC would be nice, I would rather have something that I know is going to last me until Zen 3 comes out, I heard one mention that the MSI Titanium is using a 7 layer PCB is that true? Because I think most use 6 with cheap boards going down to 5?


I believe I was the one who mentioned the 7-layer PCB. They have a small translucent bar near the corner where the audio caps are and it shows all 7 layers labeled so you can literally see the layers. Unfortunately it needs to be backlit to see.

EDIT: see this post for validation: http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/620#post_25978017


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Biostar's GT7 is worth a look, it hits more than a couple of those criteria so far. Performance and memory compatibility in particular.


I've read a couple good reports on the new AM4 Biostar boards (don't recall which models), but they do have an inconsistent reputation to overcome. I would be hesitant to *recommend* them yet, but their AM4 lineup are boards to keep an eye on.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I've seen that on reddit - but can not confirm it.


Could have be me that had mentioned it on Reddit. If you have the board out you can actually see a translucent bar where each layer is labeled and can be directly seen. Problem is you need the board out and it needs back-lighting to see it. It caught my eye when I first got the board and was looking it over.

Found an image that shows it (zoom in on the right corner). You can only see the first two layers and the extreme perspective makes it harder to gauge...



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







If you zoom in to the bottom left of this, you can *barely* make out the last number being a 7:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Could have be me that had mentioned it on Reddit. If you have the board out you can actually see a translucent bar where each layer is labeled and can be directly seen. Problem is you need the board out and it needs back-lighting to see it. It caught my eye when I first got the board and was looking it over.
> 
> Found an image that shows it (zoom in on the right corner). You can only see the first two layers and the extreme perspective makes it harder to gauge...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you zoom in to the bottom left of this, you can *barely* make out the last number being a 7:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I can barley make it out but even then just that side view of the board it looks very thick compared to others I've seen, that gives me a lot more confidence and helps explain the extra cost of the board. I'm leaning towards the Titanium because of this, also another reason is that it has a 90 degree USB 3.0 connector which means when I'm trying to unplug it for some reason I can actually hold on to the connector while removing the cable to make absolutely sure that there won't be any issues with the header.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> I can barley make it out but even then just that side view of the board it looks very thick compared to others I've seen, that gives me a lot more confidence and helps explain the extra cost of the board. I'm leaning towards the Titanium because of this, also another reason is that it has a 90 degree USB 3.0 connector which means when I'm trying to unplug it for some reason I can actually hold on to the connector while removing the cable to make absolutely sure that there won't be any issues with the header.


There's a reason I keep parroting on the build quality. It is heavy and very solid (no flex). Quality can be subjective, but sometimes you can just *feel* the difference.

You really don't need to worry about holding on to the connectors on the MB. I use the vertical connector next to the MB power connector because it's easier to get to and have had to unplug it multiple times (while making changes during the initial build) without issue...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> There's a reason I keep parroting on the build quality. It is heavy and very solid (no flex). Quality can be subjective, but sometimes you can just *feel* the difference.
> 
> You really don't need to worry about holding on to the connectors on the MB. I use the vertical connector next to the MB power connector because it's easier to get to and have had to unplug it multiple times (while making changes during the initial build) without issue...


Yeah the overall build quality I would deem as excellent based on everything I've read so far, a lot of people including myself were way to quick to go OMG NIKOs and discounted the board way too quickly. I looked up the spec sheet on the NIKOs and they can still put out 30 amps at 100C each, but given the cooling solution that MSI appears to have put a lot of thought into, you would sooner kill the CPU with too much voltage than get the VRMs that hot.

My current ASUS board will flex if you stare at it too hard lol, I'm glad to hear that the Titanium doesn't have any flex

The more I think about it the more I keep finding myself going back to the Titanium, I'm going to go with it as soon as they come back in stock on Newegg.

Its funny I was taking a closer look at my MSI Z170 SLI Plus board and there are 4 NIKOs VRMs on there just to power DD4 ram modules on a board with limited overclock capability and barley cost more than 100 USD so they went for overkill on the Ram. So MSI does seem to put a lot of thought in to thier designs even on lower end boards.


----------



## PsyM4n

MSI was burned hard up until some years ago, no wonder they are careful with their vrms nowadays. Even now they occasionally mess up with bad heatsinks and such.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I've read a couple good reports on the new AM4 Biostar boards (don't recall which models), but they do have an inconsistent reputation to overcome. I would be hesitant to *recommend* them yet, but their AM4 lineup are boards to keep an eye on.


I'd have to say the users who have the gt7 model who are ocn members have related positive views overall. Few downsides. That's their flagship product. 60 amp's per phase iirc. It's been oc'd to 4.0 plus 24/7 and stability tested more than casually.

Their budget products, like anyone elses, are less glorious... Hmm, I have more dead budget boards.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Yeah the overall build quality I would deem as excellent based on everything I've read so far, a lot of people including myself were way to quick to go OMG NIKOs and discounted the board way too quickly. I looked up the spec sheet on the NIKOs and they can still put out 30 amps at 100C each, but given the cooling solution that MSI appears to have put a lot of thought into, you would sooner kill the CPU with too much voltage than get the VRMs that hot.
> 
> My current ASUS board will flex if you stare at it too hard lol, I'm glad to hear that the Titanium doesn't have any flex
> 
> The more I think about it the more I keep finding myself going back to the Titanium, I'm going to go with it as soon as they come back in stock on Newegg.
> 
> Its funny I was taking a closer look at my MSI Z170 SLI Plus board and there are 4 NIKOs VRMs on there just to power DD4 ram modules on a board with limited overclock capability and barley cost more than 100 USD so they went for overkill on the Ram. So MSI does seem to put a lot of thought in to thier designs even on lower end boards.


Alas I went omg love the heatsink/heatpipe... ,wait a beat... PRICE! First gen board, launch pricing sure, then again I looked at their intel sku's and at least they're consistant, More expensive parts in the z270 titanium and ... 30 dollars more in price. It will last and has that warranty if it shouldn't. I expect to see a revision. One Titanium user on the msi forums upset about his titanium's lack of bios pushes compared to other msi am4 boards was a good read. $50 more durable than the competition? hrm. yeah. But I don't think anyone's armoring motherboard headers Zhany.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

MSI was release Beta BIOS updates for the Titanium every three days for a while. Some were complaining about lack of official BIOS releases, but they could either keep an agile development pace, or slow down to fully test each revision and release it as an official release. I prefer the former as it accelerates the improvement timeline overall. We should see a stable release based on the updated AGESA code this week...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> MSI was burned hard up until some years ago, no wonder they are careful with their vrms nowadays. Even now they occasionally mess up with bad heatsinks and such.


I would say that is true of just about every MB manufacturer, especially on first-gen boards.

I do recall MSI as initially being more of a budget brand. I suspect that is simply an easier market to get into. They had more than their share of early issues, but their products have matured a TON since then. Biostar seems to be working on a similar trajectory...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> MSI was release Beta BIOS updates for the Titanium every three days for a while. Some were complaining about lack of official BIOS releases, but they could either keep an agile development pace, or slow down to fully test each revision and release it as an official release. I prefer the former as it accelerates the improvement timeline overall. We should see a stable release based on the updated AGESA code this week...


Since you've had a vested interest in the Titanium have you seen it more aggressively overclocked than my admittedly lazy self? And stability tortured, I mean tested, the way nighthog seems to be headed... >.>


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> 
> 
> IBT AVX Maximum passed...
> 
> +0.300V offset needed.
> 
> 113C VRM temperature


https://youtu.be/9D-QD_HIfjA


----------



## Zhany

I was just looking at the images of the rear of the Titanium, I noticed there doesn't seem to be any bits really sticking out from components on the front side. For examples lead/pins from the debug code display. If that is indeed the case I would say that is a very nice touch as other manufactures seem to have just left all the leads as is after the soldering process.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Since you've had a vested interest in the Titanium have you seen it more aggressively overclocked than my admittedly lazy self? And stability tortured, I mean tested, the way nighthog seems to be headed... >.>


I have seen the normal mix of OC's from 3.8 - 4.1, but Ryzen just doesn't overclock much beyond that without really high voltages. As such, I am seeing more chatter about increasing RAM speed than CPU speed - for most MB's. I haven't even really tried to push beyond 3.9 on my system. Voltages (to me) were just getting a little high (above 1.35v). I know there's still headroom, but I don't like to over stress my components too soon, and would rather wait for the BIOS to stabilize before pushing further.

I am finding a lack of solid reporting on overclocking for all motherboards at this time. I can only suspect reviewers are spending time doing the same things as everyone else...trying to tweak memory and working to understand the platform and how various tweaks impact performance. Hell, the CH6 is supposed to be the overclockers dream platform at the moment, but Google "Asus crosshair x370 0verclocking" and there's a dearth of solid reviews/reporting although there's a decent amount of chatter on various forums.

I *hope* one of the major sites, such as maybe Anandtech, is working on a head-to-head shootout review or at least plans one soon...using the same components (literally swapped between boards) with OC settings and both performance and actual thermal/voltage details for the available X370 boards.

That said, CSSORKINMAN has reported very solid results with his board (4.1+ Ghz), and I have reported results (voltages. temps) for my 3.8Ghz stress testing which were also very good.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> https://youtu.be/9D-QD_HIfjA


IKR?

His system can double as a space heater. I don't see why he stops at 119c. At that point, go for BROKE and see if 150c really is the functional limit for VRMs...inquiring minds...are ready to hold his beer! :-D


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> IKR?
> 
> His system can double as a space heater. I don't see why he stops at 119c. At that point, go for BROKE and see if 150c really is the functional limit for VRMs...inquiring minds...are ready to hold his beer! :-D


Ill bring the marshmallows, should be able to get them nice and toasty over that VRM


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Since you've had a vested interest in the Titanium have you seen it more aggressively overclocked than my admittedly lazy self? And stability tortured, I mean tested, the way nighthog seems to be headed... >.>


MSI Titanium is a rip off so the only person that should invest in it are people that have money to spend and like the way it looks.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> 
> 
> IBT AVX Maximum passed...
> 
> +0.300V offset needed.
> 
> 113C VRM temperature


Wondering about thermal limitations of the components around the vrm ...
CPU clocks in test? What?

Apparently the board had more to give .


----------



## chris89

Thermal Limitations are universal for all components. Either high end or low end, VRM should never exceed 88C. If it exceeds 88C, it will not last. Likely highly unstable and likely to fail eventually.

If never to exceed 80C, rather as low as 67C. Performance will be top notch as well as continuous reliability forever.

High end boards still overheat the VRM. It's the pad material limitation between the VRM and the heatsink.

I would seriously consider cooling them. Even 1" thick slab of Ceramic Alumina Thermal Substrate could cool the VRM bellow 65C at load. Zero throttling so the performance sing all-the-way-out.

I can provide more details and information to properly accomplish this on a budget as well. For any motherboard, from ultra low end to ultra high end. Always an option available for more Speed & Reliability.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> Thermal Limitations are universal for all components. Either high end or low end, VRM should never exceed 88C. If it exceeds 88C, it will not last. Likely highly unstable and likely to fail eventually.
> 
> If never to exceed 80C, rather as low as 67C. Performance will be top notch as well as continuous reliability forever.
> 
> High end boards still overheat the VRM. It's the pad material limitation between the VRM and the heatsink.
> 
> I would seriously consider cooling them. Even 1" thick slab of Ceramic Alumina Thermal Substrate could cool the VRM bellow 65C at load. Zero throttling so the performance sing all-the-way-out.
> 
> I can provide more details and information to properly accomplish this on a budget as well. For any motherboard, from ultra low end to ultra high end. Always an option available for more Speed & Reliability.


That would be awesome if you could.. I'd love to upgrade stock without going crazy.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> MSI was release Beta BIOS updates for the Titanium every three days for a while. Some were complaining about lack of official BIOS releases, but they could either keep an agile development pace, or slow down to fully test each revision and release it as an official release. I prefer the former as it accelerates the improvement timeline overall. We should see a stable release based on the updated AGESA code this week...
> 
> 
> 
> Since you've had a vested interest in the Titanium have you seen it more aggressively overclocked than my admittedly lazy self? And stability tortured, I mean tested, the way nighthog seems to be headed... >.>
Click to expand...

Power delivery safety settings in bios would have to be modified to go to maximum settings ( not willing to do that just yet ) at 4.1 ghz and higher on IBT AVX, but this should give you an idea of VRM temps if you wish to make a comparison. I;d be curious to see what the other boards get on the same test at the same clocks.


----------



## chris89

@cssorkinman Amazing temps man. Some sort-of-high temps, but of no concern.









@drdrache What's your motherboard model and atx factor? Thanks


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> @cssorkinman Amazing temps man. Some sort-of-high temps, but of no concern.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @drdrache What's your motherboard model and atx factor? Thanks


Currently running on the ASRock X370 killer SLI/ac
Which is ATX.

Will have a taichi here soon as well.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> @cssorkinman Amazing temps man. Some sort-of-high temps, but of no concern.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @drdrache What's your motherboard model and atx factor? Thanks


The only temp that is a little high is core, but that may be as much as 20 C lower due to AMD's offset on the X chips.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> The only temp that is a little high is core, but that may be as much as 20 C lower due to AMD's offset on the X chips.


Getting ready to run IBT on my stock Ryzen 7 1800x it will be interesting to see what my VRM temps hit on this Crosshair VI that I'm swapping out for a titanium will be.


----------



## chris89

@cssorkinman That offset is a pain man I'm sure? haha 61C... UNREAL


----------



## realtomatoes

@cssorkinman what temp you got in your room?


----------



## drdrache

@cssorkinman on water right?


----------



## chris89

The only way to really make a difference is pull the whole vrm heatsink assembly off and replace with higher end thermal material. Though something cheap like Thermagon T-6100 can really make a difference if they aren't using Fujipoly grey pads. As much as 20C with Thermagon T-6100. We recently used it on a 790-i sli board and vrm came down 20C. Though a cpu heatsink re-fit was in order which was in line with the northbridge heatsink, blowing directly through it. We still have issues since I was rushed on the NB, since contact is lacking. You don't have to worry about that on Ryzen. Only VRM Pads under the heatsink assembly. Not to mention these many VRM around the board especially if covered. Could see temperatures only your imagination could fathom. Unless cooled directly. Something like thermal glue and properly size/ cut to size heatsinks. Actually even a 1mm thick sheet of copper cut with tin snips to proper size would help and thinner for tighter spots like that chip below PCIe x16 #2. Using double sided adhesive thermal material would be ideal to prevent short.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> @cssorkinman what temp you got in your room?


70F

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> @cssorkinman on water right?


Yes , cpu only - Koolance 390, 480 mm Radiator , fan blowing on cpu VRM heat sink.


----------



## Zhany

Room temp is 23 C here and here are my results so far.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Room temp is 23 C here and here are my results so far.


I think that's the non AVX version of IBT .

I'm using the one posted here http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club#post_18427668

Flops will be higher - and temps.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think that's the non AVX version of IBT .
> 
> I'm using the one posted here http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club#post_18427668
> 
> Flops will be higher - and temps.


You are indeed correct, running the AVX version now things are getting a bit toasty


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think that's the non AVX version of IBT .
> 
> I'm using the one posted here http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club#post_18427668
> 
> Flops will be higher - and temps.
> 
> 
> 
> You are indeed correct, running the AVX version now things are getting a bit toasty
Click to expand...

Don't break anything on my account please


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Don't break anything on my account please


Well no throttling that's a good sign 47C on the VRM and I'm on air cooling so there is a good bit of airflow going by the heatsinks, I have two 120mm fans on top pulling air out of the case and one on the rear. And a big 240mm up front bringing in cool air.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Don't break anything on my account please


Final result is interesting, at stock my VRM topped out at 48c just a single degree below you.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Don't break anything on my account please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Final result is interesting, at stock my VRM topped out at 48c just a single degree below you.
Click to expand...

At stock , for what it's worth


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Power delivery safety settings in bios would have to be modified to go to maximum settings ( not willing to do that just yet ) at 4.1 ghz and higher on IBT AVX, but this should give you an idea of VRM temps if you wish to make a comparison. I;d be curious to see what the other boards get on the same test at the same clocks.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


As requested! Biostar GT7 and 1700X at 4.0 GHz (I'm on a single-tower Gammaxx 400 right now whilst awaiting WC parts, so I don't want to push her past this comfy point for now).


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> Currently running on the ASRock X370 killer SLI/ac


Would you mind giving us some shots of the VRM?
Already some high-res pictures of the backside would be interesting.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> Currently running on the ASRock X370 killer SLI/ac
> 
> 
> 
> Would you mind giving us some shots of the VRM?
> Already some high-res pictures of the backside would be interesting.
Click to expand...

as soon as I can get home I will; long day at work.. I do know they get warm (the VRMs) high 70's @ 1.4v - but never out of the 40's when gaming @ 1.35V


----------



## br0da

That already reads quite well I'd say.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> That already reads quite well I'd say.


prob not the greatest i'd say?
I know I also switched fan directions since then I now have my top fan as intake and that dropped all system temps. (pretty sure the noctua was causing dead air)

I MAY have to make a choice, I can only single fan this NH-D15s - and my benchmarks are getting near 68C (ambient was 21.2C)
not sure 100% if it's airflow or paste application. but that seems high for such a large cooler - and the temp jumps around.

I guess getting these pictures will force me to remount.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> MSI Titanium is a rip off so the only person that should invest in it are people that have money to spend and like the way it looks.


Spoken by someone who doesn't have one, has never seen one in person, and is basing this on what others who also do not have one or haven't seen one in person have told them.

Or someone who is simply jealous they cannot afford the best AM4 motherboard available.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> prob not the greatest i'd say?
> I know I also switched fan directions since then I now have my top fan as intake and that dropped all system temps. (pretty sure the noctua was causing dead air)
> 
> I MAY have to make a choice, I can only single fan this NH-D15s - and my benchmarks are getting near 68C (ambient was 21.2C)
> not sure 100% if it's airflow or paste application. but that seems high for such a large cooler - and the temp jumps around.
> 
> I guess getting these pictures will force me to remount.


If you just setup your system, give it a few days for the paste to cure. You may (should) find your temps improve by a few degrees. Nothing major, but it could be enough to make a difference.

I have two fans on the top of my case as well. Since the CPU cooler fan points towards the back (blowing warm air over the hotter VRMs - barely since the Noctua 12s also site high), I have my rear fan and top-rear fan pulling air out. My front-top fan pulls air in to get more cool air over the memory and feeding the CPU cooler. There's probably a modest amount of re-mixing exhaust and intake air, but it seems to work well enough.

If you have the room, play with push vs pull configuration with your CPU fan. Pull may reduce hot-air bleed-out over your VRMs.


----------



## br0da

Let's get rid of the VRMs of the Titanium.
They are definitely less efficient than other AM4 designs but since their cooling seems to be pretty good it doesn't really matter so the board is able to compete with e.g. a CH6 or a Taichi when it comes to overclocking. Are you all fine with that?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> prob not the greatest i'd say?


70 to 80 degrees in stresstests aren't that bad @1,4V. I wouldn't care about those temps.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> I guess getting these pictures will force me to remount.


Just take those pictures if it isn't a big deal for you.
But if you're going to take some shots please do remove the heatsinks of the VRMs and make sure we're able to check even the smallest IC in the VRM, otherwise it wouldn't be worth.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> prob not the greatest i'd say?
> I know I also switched fan directions since then I now have my top fan as intake and that dropped all system temps. (pretty sure the noctua was causing dead air)
> 
> I MAY have to make a choice, I can only single fan this NH-D15s - and my benchmarks are getting near 68C (ambient was 21.2C)
> not sure 100% if it's airflow or paste application. but that seems high for such a large cooler - and the temp jumps around.
> 
> I guess getting these pictures will force me to remount.
> 
> 
> 
> If you just setup your system, give it a few days for the paste to cure. You may (should) find your temps improve by a few degrees. Nothing major, but it could be enough to make a difference.
> 
> I have two fans on the top of my case as well. Since the CPU cooler fan points towards the back (blowing warm air over the hotter VRMs - barely since the Noctua 12s also site high), I have my rear fan and top-rear fan pulling air out. My front-top fan pulls air in to get more cool air over the memory and feeding the CPU cooler. There's probably a modest amount of re-mixing exhaust and intake air, but it seems to work well enough.
> 
> If you have the room, play with push vs pull configuration with your CPU fan. Pull may reduce hot-air bleed-out over your VRMs.
Click to expand...

my rear fan is sadly only a 120mm - and it's exhaust, my single top fan (140mm) was exhaust - but I have switched it to intake to get 5-10C at load better temps.
currently I have the single NF-A15 (IIRC) in the center of the Tower- so it's doing double duty as push/pull - sadly my case of choice doesn't allow many options for 2 fans (NZXT S340) - and IIRC dual fans on that tower doesn't help much. the paste is - approx a week or 2 old; if that - using kryonaut.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Let's get rid of the VRMs of the Titanium.
> They are definitely less efficient than other AM4 designs but since their cooling seems to be pretty good it doesn't really matter so the board is able to compete witth e.g. a CH6 or a Taichi when it comes to overclocking. Are you all fine with that?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> prob not the greatest i'd say?
> 
> 
> 
> 70 to 80 degrees in stresstests aren't that bad @1,4V. I wouldn't care about those temps.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> I guess getting these pictures will force me to remount.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just take those pictures if it isn't a big deal for you.
> But if you're going to take some shots please do remove the heatsinks of the VRMs and make sure we're able to check even the smallest IC in the VRM, otherwise it wouldn't be worth.
Click to expand...

really? I was getting slightly worried with the temps, and I sadly bought into the fear mongering that is rampant about temps/VRMs and not buying MSI







(partly a J/K here)
I figured 80 was near death zone for each. I just like getting as cool as possible - without going crazy modding - and I'm not going back to water (AIO isn't an issue - i barley consider that water)

I honestly don't have an issue with getting those pictures - I may just need to use my less than awesome camera (I am not a owner of a DSR)
I just pray that I can get the shots without pulling the board from case. but will if I have to.

NINJA EDIT :
my last run before switching the fan :


(pstate0 overclock with a +17500 offset, 3.9GHZ - 2933 ram 16-16-16-16-36-1T Dram V 1.350)


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Spoken by someone who doesn't have one, has never seen one in person, and is basing this on what others who also do not have one or haven't seen one in person have told them.
> 
> Or someone who is simply jealous they cannot afford the best AM4 motherboard available.


Lmao! April fools was Saturday!


----------



## chew*

I base everything on experience.

That said i have a taichi now.

That said like i have said the chips do not magically change per board.

Set voltage is different per board...measured voltage at socket however is identical for X frequency.

The taichi needs 1.45 llc 5 to do what my asus pro and ch6 have proven and measured at socket do @ 1.40v. Its going to need soldering and a dmm to find out whats really going on...

It is on bios 1.6 right now. The board imo is still in infant stages as far as bios goes. Bclk is meh for time being on 1.6 ( had it boot at 5 on hardware proven to boot @ 149) and memory overclock (tighten timings) has alot to be desired.

They need to step up there game as the x370 pro is way more functional and costs less.

Can be best damn board design in world but poor bios support can make or break any superior design..


----------



## Artikbot

I personally feel like the whole drama surrounding the voltage regulation on the X370 Titanium has just been blown WAY out of proportion...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Let's get rid of the VRMs of the Titanium.
> They are definitely less efficient than other AM4 designs but since their cooling seems to be pretty good it doesn't really matter so the board is able to compete with e.g. a CH6 or a Taichi when it comes to overclocking. Are you all fine with that?


No not really.

There is more to overclocking than just ramping up cpu clocks.

Cpu is only one part of the equasion.

Total system performance is done by ocing everything in unison.

Taichi at this point? I will not agree. I think functionality is tipping in msi's favor currently..

Compete with this vs ch6...then i will agree.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I base everything on experience.
> 
> That said i have a taichi now.
> 
> That said like i have said the chips do not magically change per board.
> 
> Set voltage is different per board...measured voltage at socket however is identical for X frequency.
> 
> The taichi needs 1.45 llc 5 to do what my asus pro and ch6 have proven and measured at socket do @ 1.40v.
> 
> It is on bios 1.6 right now. The board imo is still in infant stages as far as bios goes. Bclk is meh for time being on 1.6 ( had it boot at 5 on hardware proven to boot @ 149) and memory overclock (tighten timings) has alot to be desired.
> 
> They need to step up there game as the x370 pro is way more functional and costs less.
> 
> Can be best damn board design in world but poor bios support can make or break any superior design..


what you are saying, the asrock x370 fatal1ty pro is a better version of the Tiachi?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Lmao! April fools was Saturday!


My bad. Didn't catch that - but I had been watching the forum all weekend so I should have seen this on Saturday...

EDIT: I thought he was confirming he was being a joker. Instead he was actually confirming he's just another jackass...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> what you are saying, the asrock x370 fatal1ty pro is a better version of the Tiachi?


No not saying anything having not used one.

Im just saying taichi atm has alot to be desired having used it.

As it stands right now my asus x370 pro can walk all over it in a cheaper price range.


----------



## Zhany

Good news the MSI Titanium is back in stock on newegg







, the bad news is my bank transfer hasn't completed yet so my funds to actually buy it aren't available yet









Should complete today, hopefully the stock lasts until tomorrow morning


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> My bad. Didn't catch that - but I had been watching the forum all weekend so I should have seen this on Saturday...


Hmmm. Ok? Enjoy your overpriced board but try not to get too emotional over it.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Good news the MSI Titanium is back in stock on newegg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , the bad news is my bank transfer hasn't completed yet so my funds to actually buy it aren't available yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should complete today, hopefully the stock lasts until tomorrow morning


Thought you wanted the G5? Why do you want the Titanium?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Thought you wanted the G5? Why do you want the Titanium?


G5 works decent enough but overpriced.

My 2c.

For the cost a K7 just makes more sense...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Thought you wanted the G5? Why do you want the Titanium?


Excluding the VRMs the overall build quality seems really good, I guess i'm just really conflicted. I got the ASUS board and I'm not happy with it. I'm afraid if I get the G5 that I might end with more of the same or similar so to speak. My fear is probably irrational but at the same time its just I don't know

It would be nice to save 100 dollars to use toward something else, but at the same time I want something that is rock solid stable, and the opinions here conflict quite a bit, is the MSI Titanium overpriced? Probably

The G5 is in stock and has that dual lan I want but NIC cards are also pretty cheap

Sorry if I seem like i'm all over the place I'm just rather unsure and don't want to choose something I wouldn't like. I wish I had a frys electronics or a microcenter near me then I could go and physically look at the boards before I buy one.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Excluding the VRMs the overall build quality seems really good, I guess i'm just really conflicted. I got the ASUS board and I'm not happy with it. I'm afraid if I get the G5 that I might end with more of the same or similar so to speak. My fear is probably irrational but at the same time its just I don't know
> 
> It would be nice to save 100 dollars to use toward something else, but at the same time I want something that is rock solid stable, and the opinions here conflict quite a bit, is the MSI Titanium overpriced? Probably
> 
> The G5 is in stock and has that dual lan I want but NIC cards are also pretty cheap
> 
> Sorry if I seem like i'm all over the place I'm just rather unsure. I wish I had a frys electronics or a microcenter near me then I could go and physically look at the boards before I buy one.


The MSI literally offers nothing over the G5. You might as well burn a $100 bill.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> G5 works decent enough but overpriced.
> 
> My 2c.
> 
> For the cost a K7 just makes more sense...


I wasn't recommending the G5 to him. It's a board he was looking at buying. Good board nonetheless.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Hmmm. Ok? Enjoy your overpriced board but try not to get too emotional over it.


It's not getting emotional, it's getting tired of ignorant people constantly throwing ****, which I see you have immaturely done yet again and it is not 4/1 anymore.

Enjoy your poor quality board with poorly implemented "high end" components.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> G5 works decent enough but overpriced.
> 
> My 2c.
> 
> For the cost a K7 just makes more sense...


The only difference I can see between the K7 and Gaming 5 seems to be the BCLK generator and the coloration


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> It's not getting emotional, it's getting tired of ignorant people constantly throwing ****, which I see you have immaturely done yet again and it is not 4/1 anymore.
> 
> Enjoy your poor quality board with poorly implemented "high end" components.


You are hilarious. So emotional after buying that overpriced board which offers nothing over other boards priced $100 less. You just joined OC.net so nobody should take you and your ridiculous posts seriously.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> The MSI literally offers nothing over the G5. You might as well burn a $100 bill.


And you *know* this how exactly?

Titanium is a better board, better build quality that will last longer and perform as well or better.

You sound like someone who bought a VW complaining about a Porsche costing more and those how buy them throwing away money because your car will get you to the store just as quickly. Some people enjoy the quality of the ride as much as the functionality.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Hmmm. Ok? Enjoy your overpriced board but try not to get too emotional over it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not getting emotional, it's getting tired of ignorant people constantly throwing ****, which I see you have immaturely done yet again and it is not 4/1 anymore.
> 
> Enjoy your poor quality board with poorly implemented "high end" components.
Click to expand...

his point is semi valid in most peoples minds,
is the board 20% better than the Hero?
is the board 60% better than the Tiachi?

in the same question -
is the hero 27% better than the Tiachi?

there is no way I can agree with that.
you know why? because even now - question #2 is invalidated by C6H and Tiachi owners.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I am sorry you are poor and cannot afford a better quality board. The fact you feel the need to lash out is a little pathetic though...as well as the fact you are adding NOTHING to the conversation. What is the point of your even being here?


I'm sorry I speak the truth about the Titanium being overpriced for what it brings to the table. Like I said, the only people that should buy it are people that don't mind spending extra cash and like the way it looks. Otherwise, save your money take your business elsewhere since you can find the same features on a much cheaper board.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> his point is semi valid in most peoples minds,
> is the board 20% better than the Hero?
> is the board 60% better than the Tiachi?
> 
> in the same question -
> is the hero 27% better than the Tiachi?


Is a Porsche 500% better than a VW Jetta?

Quality goes beyond pure specs and it is subjective. I have already touch upon MANY aspects of the MSI which are simply superior to other offerings. The ONLY complaint I hear about the MSI are the mosfets which yet still seem to be outperforming many of those other boards. So again, why is not worth more when it performs as a top-tier board, has a higher build quality and better components elsewhere?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> his point is semi valid in most peoples minds,
> is the board 20% better than the Hero?
> is the board 60% better than the Tiachi?
> 
> in the same question -
> is the hero 27% better than the Tiachi?
> 
> there is no way I can agree with that.
> you know why? because even now - question #2 is invalidated by C6H and Tiachi owners.


There's no reasoning with someone that has blind love for an overpriced board. The guy just signed up and posts nothing but nonsense and insults. I'd take anything he posts with a grain of salt.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> There's no reasoning with someone that has blind love for an overpriced board. The guy just signed up and posts nothing but nonsense and insults. I'd take anything he posts with a grain of salt.


Sent you a PM with a question


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> his point is semi valid in most peoples minds,
> is the board 20% better than the Hero?
> is the board 60% better than the Tiachi?
> 
> in the same question -
> is the hero 27% better than the Tiachi?
> 
> 
> 
> Is a Porsche 500% better than a VW Jetta?
> 
> Quality goes beyond pure specs and it is subjective. I have already touch upon MANY aspects of the MSI which are simply superior to other offerings. The ONLY complain I hear about the MSI are the mosfets which yet still seem to be outperforming many of those other boards. So again, why is not worth more when it performs as a top-tier board is has a higher build quality and better components elsewhere?
Click to expand...

actually, quality - IS pure specs. it is a spec.
and comparing a VAG Car, to a VAG car? really? which Jetta? which Porsche? talking the base Jjetta Gas? or the TDI Jetta? talking a boxer? or the 918?

we are talking Porsche VS BMW VS Diamler - your comparison is more like MSI Titanium vs the Carbon.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> There's no reasoning with someone that has blind love for an overpriced board. The guy just signed up and posts nothing but nonsense and insults. I'd take anything he posts with a grain of salt.


Who is posting nonsense and insults?
Quote:


> MSI Titanium is a rip off so the only person that should invest in it are people that have money to spend and like the way it looks.


Quote:


> Hmmm. Ok? Enjoy your overpriced board but try not to get too emotional over it.


Quote:


> The MSI literally offers nothing over the G5. You might as well burn a $100 bill.


Quote:


> You are hilarious. So emotional after buying that overpriced board which offers nothing over other boards priced $100 less. You just joined OC.net so nobody should take you and your ridiculous posts seriously.


Quote:


> There's no reasoning with someone that has blind love for an overpriced board. The guy just signed up and posts nothing but nonsense and insults. I'd take anything he posts with a grain of salt.


So, sure...whatever. It's the thief that looks around and sees theives everywhere they look (i.e. people project onto other what they themselves are - in case you don't get it)


----------



## chew*

You guys both need to relax.

I tend to be objective towards all.

Keeps me sane.

Im looking into an msi to test also...when i find an open box ill snag it. Imo not worth 300. On open box its in ch6 price range.

Been collecting all of them for a shootout...we ( my buddies and myself )
Only need k7 and msi now...

We have fatality,taichi,biostar gt7, ch6,x370 pro already for the knock down drag out brawl..

The biostar is actually decent btw....but it has some bios teething issues like taichi..

We are all objective hardcore overclockers and want the best results. In order to do so it requires knowing which boards are best at what...and owning them all...

This is what pro ocing is...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> actually, quality - IS pure specs. it is a spec.
> and comparing a VAG Car, to a VAG car? really? which Jetta? which Porsche? talking the base Jjetta Gas? or the TDI Jetta? talking a boxer? or the 918?
> 
> we are talking Porsche VS BMW VS Diamler - your comparison is more like MSI Titanium vs the Carbon.


OK, sure. Like an alloy body which is stronger and will last better than a steel body...

So how many layers is you PCB? Seven? No? Then it is inferior.

Your "shielded/reinforced slots", are they further reinforced with steel braces and extra MB anchors? No. Then it's inferior...

So yes, there are specs, and there is also performance. My MSI outperforms the CH6 in overclocking - lower voltages and lower VRM temps. It even shows in the FLIR images that the MSI *board itself* is cooler due to a better design. That means less loss of energy to heat, which is why we can use lower voltages.

I have no intention of turning this into a pissing match. I have not derided any other boards regardless of it's performance. I have no need to make my choice seem superior. I am happy with it for many reasons. Others, however, seem to love to slam this board when they are talking out there asses. It's one thing to *suggest* a given board, but constant criticism of a board that is easily the equal and possibly better than what you selected is sad.


----------



## chew*

Until a dmm is hardwired to socket i would not make those claims...

My 2c.

Oh and the ch6 and pro have 4 pins anchored to pcb though the pci slots.

G5 also anchored to pcb...

All quite overkill.

Taichis is the "cheapest" method no anchors to pcb iirc.

Different approach to acchieve same result..if you had one you would know this.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Until a dmm is hardwired to socket i would not make those claims...
> 
> My 2c.


Don't bother arguing with the MSI rep,


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> You guys both need to relax.
> 
> I tend to be objective towards all.
> 
> Keeps me sane.
> 
> Im looking into an msi to test also...when i find an open box ill snag it. Imo not worth 300. On open box its in ch6 price range.
> 
> Been collecting all of them for a shootout...we ( my buddies and myself )
> Only need k7 and msi now...
> 
> We have fatality,taichi,biostar gt7, ch6,x370 pro already for the knock down drag out brawl..
> 
> The biostar is actually decent btw....but it has some bios teething issues like taichi..
> 
> We are all objective hardcore overclockers and want the best results. In order to do so it requires knowing which boards are best at what...and owning them all...
> 
> This is what pro ocing is...


THIS is what I am really looking forward to. Information on ALL boards has been piecemeal at best. Differing reports on different boards, under different conditions makes an *objective* evaluation difficult at best.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Don't bother arguing with the MSI rep,


He is not an msi rep. I can email a rep and have one post here to confirm for you if you would like.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> actually, quality - IS pure specs. it is a spec.
> and comparing a VAG Car, to a VAG car? really? which Jetta? which Porsche? talking the base Jjetta Gas? or the TDI Jetta? talking a boxer? or the 918?
> 
> we are talking Porsche VS BMW VS Diamler - your comparison is more like MSI Titanium vs the Carbon.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, sure. Like an alloy body which is stronger and will last better than a steel body...
> 
> So how many layers is you PCB? Seven? No? Then it is inferior.
> 
> You "shielded/reinforced slots", are they further reinforced with steel braces and extra MB anchors? No. Then it's inferior...
> 
> So yes, there are specs, and there is also performance. My MSI outperforms the CH6 in overclocking - lower voltages and lower VRM temps. It even shows in the FLIR images that the MSI *board itself* is cooler due to a better design. That means less loss of energy to heat, which is why we can use lower voltages.
Click to expand...

do you have documented proof that 7 is helping anything but cost and PR? no - you don't; we assume it's better because in all cases the bigger the #, the better it is. /s

where are these ADDITIONAL steel braces? you mean the extra plastic holding the metal in? or you talking about the through PCB solder points for the bracing? - IF - IF they used thicker steel than every other MFG; then that helps, if not - the end result is the same.

the lower voltages is not inherent of the Motherboard exclusively, it is MORE the chip itself. you should know that -
lower VRM temps? at the same voltage as a CH6? has this been tested? - this is where the value would be easily proven.

and you've seen the FLIR - they arn't even measuring the same locations (one is measuring the board, one is the actual components), and FLIR maps are inaccurate without a guide/legend FOR THAT TEST.

I'm not saying the board isn't great and amazing, I'm just agreeing that it may be overpriced for what you ACTUALLY get.

EDIT : and really, I don't even have a horse in this race right now - as I opted for the Asrock killer and Gaming K4s.

but, round 2.... that's where I am going upscale!


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Taichi at this point? I will not agree. I think functionality is tipping in msi's favor currently..
> 
> Compete with this vs ch6...then i will agree.


Interesting, what do you miss on the Taichi?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The biostar is actually decent btw....but it has some bios teething issues like taichi..


Btw is BCLK OC possible on this board?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> He is not an msi rep. I can email a rep and have one post here to confirm for you if you would like.


I was being sarcastic. MSI would be ashamed if he worked for them, lol. Dude is hilarious though.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> do you have documented proof that 7 is helping anything but cost and PR? no - you don't; we assume it's better because in all cases the bigger the #, the better it is. /s
> 
> where are these ADDITIONAL steel braces? you mean the extra plastic holding the metal in? or you talking about the through PCB solder points for the bracing? - IF - IF they used thicker steel than every other MFG; then that helps, if not - the end result is the same.
> 
> the lower voltages is not inherent of the Motherboard exclusively, it is MORE the chip itself. you should know that -
> lower VRM temps? at the same voltage as a CH6? has this been tested? - this is where the value would be easily proven.
> 
> and you've seen the FLIR - they arn't even measuring the same locations (one is measuring the board, one is the actual components), and FLIR maps are inaccurate without a guide/legend FOR THAT TEST.
> 
> I'm not saying the board isn't great and amazing, I'm just agreeing that it may be overpriced for what you ACTUALLY get.


More layers strengthens the board, reducing flex reducing stress on traces. Micro-cracks in traces increase resistance and power loss.

The MB acts as a heatsink. More layers provide more efficient heat dissipation.

Some layers are used for electrical isolation.

Would you prefer a single layer PCB? No? Then more is better and the only real question is how many are enough.

Those additional reinforcements are NOT plastic. They are *steel* (with back coating - not sure what type). Those reduce stress on the PCIe slots beyond the shiny steel wrapping which is pretty thin.

There have been result posted on the MSI Titanium thread showing temps/voltages at various levels of OC, so we *have* shown it. However, what we lack is a direct comparison since we all have differing components, systems, cooling so it is hard to talk in absolutes. That is why my comments about performance tend to be more measured. I know better.

The FLIR does show the area around the measured point. When you pay attention and look beyond the point of measure you can see the heat of the system. The MSI Titanium shows the lowest overall thermal profile when taken as a whole (compared to the Asus and Gigabyte. I'd have to double-check the Taichi). This was also covered in the Titanium thread. The measurement methodology of TweakTown leaves a lot to be desired since they simply sought out the hottest spots for each board rather than applying a consistent methodology.

I'll make this easy for you:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/520#post_25972452

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/550#post_25974069

CSSORKINMAN has more results for various voltages/OC's with temps as well...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Interesting, what do you miss on the Taichi?
> Btw is BCLK OC possible on this board?


Maybe i missed a bios but...taichi on 1.6

To do a simple oc like 4 gig and pc 3200 ram 14-14-14-34.

Procedure..

Load xmp reboot.

Set cpu oc reboot

Fine tune settings reboot.

Try all at once = fail

Gt7 no bclk so far as i know so far. I see no ICS ref clock chip ( which i previously was mistaken and thought it was asmedia )

Bios updates have been non existant...

Downcore bricks bios...luckily we are very knowledgable....and recovered it but only because it has dual bios...

Cpu overclock wise it ocs good but only has offsets. We prefer manual.


----------



## br0da

Thanks for the input!


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Thanks for the input!


If you need detailed pics of any boards let me know. I will take them or get them for you.

Oh and no power or reset buttons are annoying on taichi...i may solder my own in on the pads...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> If you need detailed pics of any boards let me know. I will take them or get them for you.
> 
> Oh and no power or reset buttons are annoying on taichi...i may solder my own in on the pads...


I wouldn't mind detailed pics of that Biostar board just out of morbid curiosity


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> I wouldn't mind detailed pics of that Biostar board just out of morbid curiosity


Biostar *seems* to be making a push towards building better quality boards. From what I have seen (admittedly, not a whole lot), they still aren't on par with the others. The jury is still out, but they may be a relative value option. I still don't see why it's so hard for manufacturers to use a good design with their heatsinks - something more functional than aesthetic.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Biostar *seems* to be making a push towards building better quality boards. From what I have seen (admittedly, not a whole lot), they still aren't on par with the others. The jury is still out, but they may be a relative value option. I still don't see why it's so hard for manufacturers to use a good design with their heatsinks - something more functional than aesthetic.


That's an awful lot of conjecture when those of us who own the GT7 have put up, as they say. Nothing you've said isn't applicable to every other vendor; they're all sketchy at times and they all have hit or miss options at the low end. You're making a lot of subjective and/or emotionally-based judgements but until I actually see a performance déficit on the GT7 I'll continue to maintain that it's as good an option as anything else out there right now in terms of performance and reliability.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That's an awful lot of conjecture when those of us who own the GT7 have put up, as they say. Nothing you've said isn't applicable to every other vendor; they're all sketchy at times and they all have hit or miss options at the low end. You're making a lot of subjective and/or emotionally-based judgements but until I actually see a performance déficit on the GT7 I'll continue to maintain that it's as good an option as anything else out there right now in terms of performance and reliability.


I said nothing about performance, I said *quality*. Tell me that board has any high-end *build* features found on top quality boards such as PCIe reinforcements. When I refer to "quality", i do refer to it's build as much as its feature set. I am a little old school in that regard.

I said *seems* because all I have heard are generally positive results, but can anyone make an absolute claim yet? I am giving them the benefit of the doubt with the simple caveat that they do still need to prove themselves.

I can't dispute your claim that it is as good as any other board and I didn't, because that is subjective unless you are more specific in the criteria. It depends on what someone is looking for in a board and what matters to *them*. Some design choices simply will not hold up as well, but in many builds it won't matter and those choices will do just fine. Those choices are what boards used for *years* before adding a bunch of upgrades that many won't even require. That's why I suggested it could be an excellent value option - and again that isn't a slight. I literally mean an excellent value as in "bang-for-the-buck".

My comment on not being on-par with others is in a comparison to the *top* offerings from the other manufacturers. However, it is priced lower - again, a better "value" if you don't care about those extras.

However, to make claims on reliability - sorry, but Biostar simply doesn't have a solid reputation still and whether that is simply perception or an issue is yet to be seen with their new line.

I also want to add, nothing I said was intended as a slight. I understand the frustration of others putting down a board they have no experience with. Everything I said was qualified as being based on *limited* information. I have read your positive comments and a couple of others, but that isn't yet a lot to go on. The *trend* is good, but I don't think it is unfair to say it is too early to make any absolute judgements is all..


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I said nothing about performance, I said *quality*. Tell me that board has any high-end *build* features found on top quality boards such as PCIe reinforcements. When I refer to "quality", i do refer to it's build as much as its feature set. I am a little old school in that regard.
> 
> I said *seems* because all I have heard are generally positive results, but can anyone make an absolute claim yet? I am giving them the benefit of the doubt with the simple caveat that they do still need to prove themselves.
> 
> I can't dispute your claim that it is as good as any other board and I didn't, because that is subjective unless you are more specific in the criteria. It depends on what someone is looking for in a board and what matters to *them*. Some design choices simply will not hold up as well, but in many builds it won't matter and those choices will do just fine. Those choices are what boards used for *years* before adding a bunch of upgrades that many won't even require. That's why I suggested it could be an excellent value option - and again that isn't a slight. I literally mean an excellent value as in "bang-for-the-buck".
> 
> My comment on not being on-par with others is in a comparison to the *top* offerings from the other manufacturers. However, it is priced lower - again, a better "value" if you don't care about those extras.
> 
> However, to make claims on reliability - sorry, but Biostar simply doesn't have a solid reputation still and whether that is simply perception or an issue is yet to be seen with their new line.
> 
> I also want to add, nothing I said was intended as a slight. I understand the frustration of others putting down a board they have no experience with. Everything I said was qualified as being based on *limited* information. I have read your positive comments and a couple of others, but that isn't yet a lot to go on. The *trend* is good, but I don't think it is unfair to say it is too early to make any absolute judgements is all..


I care about performance and reliabIlity. A board that offers those things is offering me quality. Tangible quality. Not the ethereal quality of 'maybe this extra PCB layer is doing something or whatever'.

I am a scientist by trade. I don't care about reputations or people's emotional memories. I test and I research and I base any conclusions on testing and research. Components-wise, right under the Hero and Taichi/Fatal1ty Pro. In testing, it has proven to hold up in temperatures, power management, and performance to every other high-end board and has dodged several of the glaring issues that have plagued other boards.

You're entitled to your opinion, but don't tell me I'm making too many declaratives when you're doing the same only without any evidence.


----------



## chew*

Taichi has potential....

Bios is holding it back....took a crap load of workarounds....if it can do this in 1 boot instead of 5 with a bios update...it could be a winner....although the bclk limitation may be hardware...not sure yet...

Ignore performance...all i was looking for was pass or no pass.


----------



## br0da

For those who are interested in the lower end boards too:
A pretty interesting picture just came up on hardwareluxx.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Peterle80*
> 
> Ryzen 1700 @ 3,8 GHz @ 1,297 maxV VDDCR CPU+ ASUS Prime B350-Plus


The MOSFET heatsink get's about 60°C warm, the inductors are at about 80°C.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> For those who are interested in the lower end boards too:
> A pretty interesting picture just came up on hardwareluxx.
> The MOSFET heatsink get's about 60°C warm, the inductors are at about 80°C.


yah i have that board to. 1.3 is preety realistic but voltage swing is.....


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> For those who are interested in the lower end boards too:
> A pretty interesting picture just came up on hardwareluxx.
> The MOSFET heatsink get's about 60°C warm, the inductors are at about 80°C.


Wants me to sign in or something. Can you upload the pic here?


----------



## br0da

@chew*:
Is there an AM4 board you haven't got?








Are you measuring voltage swing with an oscilloscope?

@bardacuda:
Sorry, forgot about it. I'll edit it.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @chew*:
> 
> Are you measuring voltage swing with an oscilloscope.


Not likely.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I care about performance and reliabIlity. A board that offers those things is offering me quality. Tangible quality. Not the ethereal quality of 'maybe this extra PCB layer is doing something or whatever'.
> 
> I am a scientist by trade. I don't care about reputations or people's emotional memories. I test and I research and I base any conclusions on testing and research. Components-wise, right under the Hero and Taichi/Fatal1ty Pro. In testing, it has proven to hold up in temperatures, power management, and performance to every other high-end board and has dodged several of the glaring issues that have plagued other boards.
> 
> You're entitled to your opinion, but don't tell me I'm making too many declaratives when you're doing the same only without any evidence.


Now who's getting worked up over nothing?

For a scientist you are making broad statements and dismissing things you appear to not know much about. That isn't very scientific to simply dismiss what you don't know or don't understand, and to assume it has no relevance to you. It's also amusing you use Appeal to Authority as an attempt to somehow strengthen your position. Excuse me for not being impressed.

As for PCB layers, research it yourself. Here's some help: PCB rigidity reduces stress on surface mount component soldier joints and improves heat dissipation.

This talks to some of the aspects: http://electronicdesign.com/boards/pcb-design-and-its-impact-device-reliability

You can do your own research on other ways MB rigidity can impact longevity. I do my best to NOT make unsubstantiated claims. A forum is not a technical paper and I am not going to site references every time. But if challenged, I will back up my statements. Will you do the same?

All you have actually *demonstrated* is the performance of the board. Everything else you are stating as factual with regard to quality/reliability is purely speculative and opinion at this point. A good component can be brought to premature failure with a poor implementation. You can build the strongest skyscraper with the best steel and have it crash down if the foundation (OK, often piers) are crap.

Biostar simply has a questionable reputation. I was being nice about it, but simply Google it. That means nothing with regards to any individual board as any scientist would understand - that's the nature of statistics. However, it is *fair* to consider reputation when assessing an *unproven* quantity.

My comments are *not* predictive, but neither should they simply be dismissed due to unsubstantiated opinion. If you want to provide details or statistics or any other information that could be independently verified related to your claims of *quality or reliability*, I am sure everyone here (or at least many) would appreciate it. I never questioned its *performance*.

A perfectly fair question is whether my board is worth $100 more than yours. In many cases it may not be. For me, and my specific criteria it was. Several yours ago it absolutely wouldn't have been.

Enjoy your board. I do hope it serves you well for many years. I have *nothing* against it despite my statements of uncertainty about it.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @chew*:
> Is there an AM4 board you haven't got?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you measuring voltage swing with an oscilloscope?
> 
> @bardacuda:
> Sorry, forgot about it. I'll edit it.


I just watch if my dmm jumps around alot.

We can scope it with a snap on scanner........

Are we going to get that in depth? probably not.

I care if I set XX vcore is it applying or is setting some voltage I did not ask it to to the socket ( cpu )

anyway...

Like I said taichi has potential.......there is way more to a motherboard then just the cpu vrm.....trace layout eveything matters.....


----------



## br0da

congrats!
Quote:


> trace layout eveything matters.....


Yeah layout can affect a power supplies performance a lot. Fortunately a buck converter isn't that complex.
Because of stuff like that measuring exactly with what voltage the CPU is fet and taking a look at actual overclocking performance is ways more interesting than flaming boards with NIKOs FETs.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> congrats!
> Yeah layout can affect a power supplies performance a lot. Fortunately a buck converter isn't that complex.
> Because of stuff like that measuring exactly with what voltage the CPU is fet and taking a look at actual overclocking performance is ways more interesting than flaming boards with NIKOs FETs.


It sure is and I kinda like hands on, much better to make an opinion then.

I really have no beef with the msi. I just think its way way overpriced for what it has on the board.

Clearance rack for $240, I wont complain as much.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> ...
> 
> Biostar simply has a questionable reputation. I was being nice about it, but simply Google it. That means nothing with regards to any individual board as any scientist would understand - that's the nature of statistics. However, it is *fair* to consider reputation when assessing an *unproven* quantity.


The same logic applies to msi and nikos.

When I complain about the titanium the comparison that comes readily to mind is a board with a few more features, more expensive components, and a lower price. MSI's z170 titanium.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I care about performance and reliabIlity. A board that offers those things is offering me quality. Tangible quality. Not the ethereal quality of 'maybe this extra PCB layer is doing something or whatever'.
> 
> I am a scientist by trade. I don't care about reputations or people's emotional memories. I test and I research and I base any conclusions on testing and research. Components-wise, right under the Hero and Taichi/Fatal1ty Pro. In testing, it has proven to hold up in temperatures, power management, and performance to every other high-end board and has dodged several of the glaring issues that have plagued other boards.
> 
> You're entitled to your opinion, but don't tell me I'm making too many declaratives when you're doing the same only without any evidence.


Don't waste your time on him. Not worth it. According to him, MSI Titanium is simply the best! Asrock Fatal1ty Pro is cheap crap.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> The same logic applies to msi and nikos.
> 
> When I complain about the titanium the comparison that comes readily to mind is a board with a few more features, more expensive components, and a lower price. MSI's z170 titanium.


So, not really unless you intend to convolute issues.

MSI did have an issue with specific NIKOs on specific boards. In that issue it is possible to isolate a cause and affect (and effect). That has been covered in many places in great detail. Can you do the same for Biostar issues? Not that I am aware of.

As for the MSI Z170 titanium, your point is?

The Gigabyte GA-Z270 Gaming 5 is less expensive than the GA-AX370 Gaming 5. What is better about the AX370 worthy of the extra ~$30?


----------



## drdrache

I May not get those VRM pics tonight... getting the heatsinks off of the top set requires pulling the motherboard from the case
unless the one set is enough?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> Currently running on the ASRock X370 killer SLI/ac
> 
> 
> 
> Would you mind giving us some shots of the VRM?
> Already some high-res pictures of the backside would be interesting.
Click to expand...


----------



## CrazyElf

I've taken some time to think this over and my conclusion still stands - there really isn't any awesome value boards this segment. It is looking like compared to the Intel Z270, no motherboard maker opted to make a true flagship or a barebones value type of board.

I guess the closest we have is the Asrock X370 Taichi, which is a mid-ranged priced board, but it's good an overkill VRM. We really need to get the BIOS release though to get final conclusions in May.

Speculating, I think that many motherboard makers must have decided to go very conservative, underestimating how powerful the IPC would be of AMD's Ryzen. I'm hoping that in the coming months and when Zen+ comes out, we will see some solid refreshes.

We need 3 types of boards I think:

A good value board. This board should be relatively barebones, but with very good VRM. Minimal other features, to keep the price down (ex: LEDs), just a barebones good functioning board, which will be the $150 board. So that means a good VRM, maybe a couple of USB ports, barebones audio, metal on the PCIe slots, and the SATA drives. Not much else. It just needs to have a really good BIOS. You could even make it mATX to save on space.
The $200 USD might be the same VRM, only with a few extra features. Maybe better audio. This one should be a full sized ATX board. The Taichi arguably already occupies this. I would like competition though in this price segment.
A powerful flagship type of board. This board should have amazing overkill VRM, 10 GBps LAN, an audio system that rivals discrete soundcard, a waterblock for the VRMs, and perhaps a PLX 8747 chip. Price will be in the $500 range. On Intel, the closest we have to this is the GIGABYTE AORUS GA-Z270X-Gaming 9 and Asrock Z270 Supercarrier. If you want a cheaper board with no PLX, the Z270 XPower is a great pick. That's Z270. WE don't have this calibre of board on X370 unfortunately. Yes, they are flagships that only a few will ever buy, but like everything else there are halo products.
Right now most of the boards are overkill on features like LEDs and in many cases, to meet a price point they seem to have cut back on the VRM.

Personally for me, I'm waiting to see if the unlocked X390 becomes true. If so, we will need X390 boards with VRMs as well built as their Intel X99 counterparts - maybe even better VRM than X99. Haswell had FIVR to reduce the load. Zeppelin the power output is being bypassed, although Ryzen is very efficient. Same with Skylake E - I will be very disappointed with motherboard makers if there is a downgrade.

As for if X399 becomes true ...







Then we will need some really good motherboards for a 32 core Zen.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Obvcop*
> 
> Ek are only making blocks for the gigabyte K7,asus ch6 and the msi xpower unfortunately. I can't buy the Taichi because of this, what do you guys reccomend instead? It's going under custom loop with a mobo monoblock and I plan on ocing heavy


A good VRM + just air cooling is going to do better than a bad VRM + water cooling.

I'd say the Taichi is fine with just air. Even under LN2, I'd say you probably won't need external cooling.

If you insist on liquid, I'd advise you decide between the Crosshair and the Gigabyte K7. I'd go with the Crosshair if you insist on having a waterblock (I think it's 320A) between the two. Maybe add a heatsink on the RAM Mosfet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> do you have documented proof that 7 is helping anything but cost and PR? no - you don't; we assume it's better because in all cases the bigger the #, the better it is. /s
> 
> where are these ADDITIONAL steel braces? you mean the extra plastic holding the metal in? or you talking about the through PCB solder points for the bracing? - IF - IF they used thicker steel than every other MFG; then that helps, if not - the end result is the same.
> 
> the lower voltages is not inherent of the Motherboard exclusively, it is MORE the chip itself. you should know that -
> lower VRM temps? at the same voltage as a CH6? has this been tested? - this is where the value would be easily proven.
> 
> and you've seen the FLIR - they arn't even measuring the same locations (one is measuring the board, one is the actual components), and FLIR maps are inaccurate without a guide/legend FOR THAT TEST.
> 
> I'm not saying the board isn't great and amazing, I'm just agreeing that it may be overpriced for what you ACTUALLY get.
> 
> EDIT : and really, I don't even have a horse in this race right now - as I opted for the Asrock killer and Gaming K4s.
> 
> but, round 2.... that's where I am going upscale!


More PCB layers generally means that the board is thicker. It creates more surface area to run traces and deliver power to different parts on the motherboard. More layers generally means a more expensive board as each individual sheet has to be laminated.

Actually at this price point, you'd expect 8, not 7 PCB layers, but that's a minor issue. In 2015, the 300 USD Z170 Titanium had 8 PCB layers and a much better VRM to boot, which is one of the reasons why I expected more from this board. Truly extreme boards have been known to have 10 (like the Z77X-UP7) or even 12 layer PCBs on occasion (EVGA X79 Dark). The top GPU PCBs and dual PCB boards also have 12 PCB layers.

I do find that thicker PCB does lead to the board being more resistant to warping from heavy GPUs and CPU coolers.

One thing to note is that more PCB layers a reason to go with the MSI X370 XPower. For one, I would be shocked if the Asus X370 Crosshair did not have at least 6 PCB layers and maybe even 8. The same could be said about the Gigabyte and Asrock boards. We don't know how many layers they have to be honest. Keep in mind that there have been boards that have had 8 layers that have sold for 250 and sometimes even less.

Asrock does however have a history of using lower PCB layers on its low end boards. Its high end boards like the Asrock OC Formula series is all very solidly built.

Here's a GPU ad from EVGA:


Most flagships like MSI's Lightning series (at least the 290X anyways), the Galax HOF LN2, etc all carried 12 layer PCB.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I care about performance and reliabIlity. A board that offers those things is offering me quality. Tangible quality. Not the ethereal quality of 'maybe this extra PCB layer is doing something or whatever'.
> 
> I am a scientist by trade. I don't care about reputations or people's emotional memories. I test and I research and I base any conclusions on testing and research. Components-wise, right under the Hero and Taichi/Fatal1ty Pro. In testing, it has proven to hold up in temperatures, power management, and performance to every other high-end board and has dodged several of the glaring issues that have plagued other boards.
> 
> You're entitled to your opinion, but don't tell me I'm making too many declaratives when you're doing the same only without any evidence.


Right now it is looking like the Biostar is worth a look at, but only if you can get it at a good price. All of the boards are suffering from an immature BIOS at this point, so stability is not going to be good, at least for a few weeks I'm afraid.

I think that in May, once AMD releases the updates for RAM unlocking and AGESA, updates, we should have a better assessment.

Components wise, as I've said, good components don't assure a good OC or a good board, but there's no way to make a good board with subpar components.

Which reminds me on the scientific workloads, please see this on AMD's ECC memory support:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/75030-ecc-memory-amds-ryzen-deep-dive.html

I strongly suspect that in May, we will see updates for full ECC support.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Don't waste your time on him. Not worth it. According to him, MSI Titanium is simply the best! Asrock Fatal1ty Pro is cheap crap.


The issue with the MSI is that it is expensive and not that great. The Asrock is a cheap board that is well, built cheap, so that's quite a bit more tolerable.

If this were a 200 board, it would be competitive. Right now though it is basically selling on its silver white looks and the XPower name.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> The same logic applies to msi and nikos.
> 
> When I complain about the titanium the comparison that comes readily to mind is a board with a few more features, more expensive components, and a lower price. MSI's z170 titanium.


Yeah I would agree with that assessment.

As I described in my reply earlier, the MSI Z270 XPower had a much more powerful board.

The MSI Z170 XPower when it was released, also cost 300, but had:

A 10 + 4 IR3555M design versus the Nikos
8 layer PCB
Same power controller (IR's IR35201 "Salem" is actually really good, so that's not a negative point against either board)
Z170 XPower:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7386/msi-z170a-xpower-gaming-titanium-ed-intel-z170-motherboard-review/index3.html


Yeah it's expensive at 300 USD at release, but it is an amazing board, so I'd totally buy the Z270 version of the XPower if I wanted a mainstream Intel platform (I own a Z87 XPower from the Haswell days). The Z270 XPower nowadays is around $330 USD, $310 with a $20 MIR. https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Z270-XPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM/dp/B01N9OYDC4. That's about the same price as the X370 XPower, but it's a way better board.

The X370 XPower is also in the 300 range, although shortages have been pushing the price up:
https://www.amazon.com/MSI-X370-XPOWER-GAMING-TITANIUM/dp/B06WLNZ1JH/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1491256216&sr=1-1&keywords=x370+xpower


----------



## drdrache

to be completely honest, I bought my ASRock boards based on my experience with the OC formula (87/97/107).

I KNEW going in that i wasn't getting a OC Formula top tier board. does that magically make the Killer cheap? not at all
it's def lower on the scale, but it's about as solid feeling and working as any other mid board I've handled.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> congrats!


Dual rank pc3400 cas is set 17 in bios.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Dual rank pc3400 cas is set 17 in bios.


Very very nice, looks like that BIOS update has done wonders for the Taichi


----------



## br0da

The Taichi is a wonder when it comes to RAM OC. :O
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> I May not get those VRM pics tonight... getting the heatsinks off of the top set requires pulling the motherboard from the case
> unless the one set is enough?


To be honest both would be the most interesting. But if taking photos of the one is easy just take some of them and maybe it's already enough.


----------



## br0da

@chew: Have you ever compared your voltage measurements with your DMM with the values in RyZen Master?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @chew: Have you ever compared your voltage measurements with your DMM with the values in RyZen Master?


Vs ryzen master and hw info....

Ryzen master is wrong. Temps might be right.

And for the hwinfo believers....

My 12v rail can magically supply 24v so yah i take software with a huge grain of salt.

Vcore in one of the two sections( cpu or motherboard ) is close but never spot on compared to my socket measurements.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @chew: Have you ever compared your voltage measurements with your DMM with the values in RyZen Master?
> 
> 
> 
> Vs ryzen master and hw info....
> 
> Ryzen master is wrong. Temps might be right.
> 
> And for the hwinfo believers....
> 
> My 12v rail can magically supply 24v so yah i take software with a huge grain of salt.
> 
> Vcore in one of the two sections( cpu or motherboard ) is close but never spot on compared to my socket measurements.
Click to expand...

then the question is - those of us; who won't, or cannot use a DMM - how do we really know anything?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> then the question is - those of us; who won't, or cannot use a DMM - how do we really know anything?


You don't. And measure pads are wrong to.

Ch6 at pad 1.45 vcore

Ch6 socket 1.40 vcore

You get someone like me to solder back of board and dial in settings that are spot on or close....use those settings.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Vs ryzen master and hw info....
> 
> Ryzen master is wrong. Temps might be right.
> 
> And for the hwinfo believers....
> 
> My 12v rail can magically supply 24v so yah i take software with a huge grain of salt.
> 
> Vcore in one of the two sections( cpu or motherboard ) is close but never spot on compared to my socket measurements.


Given the low CPU voltages, even at very low resistances, unless you measure at the exact point where the sensors do wouldn't you always expect to be a little off? Or in other words, are the deltas low enough to indicate general confidence in the sensor readings given the difference in measurement points?

I find it questionable that they even report 3 significant digits when I would expect that level of accuracy is questionable under less than ideal conditions...or can they really achieve that level of accuracy with current sensors and designs used in MB's?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Given the low CPU voltages, even at very low resistances, unless you measure at the exact point where the sensors do wouldn't you always expect to be a little off? Or in other words, are the deltas low enough to indicate general confidence in the sensor readings given the difference in measurement points?
> 
> I find it questionable that they even report 3 significant digits when I would expect that level of accuracy is questionable under less than ideal conditions...or can they really achieve that level of accuracy with current sensors and designs used in MB's?


Heres the issue..the sensors are calibrated by vendors...they dont come precalibrated.

Some cheat in an effort to hide severe droop....some cheat to make you think board needs less voltage than others.

This why you measure socket...you can elim all bs and just know.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Checked out my buds MSI Titanium today. Looks nice but we both agreed that it's overpriced for what is brings to the table. He'll be exchanging it for a Gigabyte K7 which is a much better board for the price. K7 also looks much nicer.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Checked out my buds MSI Titanium today. Looks nice but we both agreed that it's overpriced for what is brings to the table. He'll be exchanging it for a Gigabyte K7 which is a much better board for the price. K7 also looks much nicer.


My nephew is having plenty of problems with the K7 , dropping usb connection , can't get the ram to operate at rated settings/timings ( same set that has been flawless cl14 1t 3200mhz on the Titanium) and can't get it to be stable at stock settings with his 1700k.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> My nephew is having plenty of problems with the K7 , dropping usb connection , can't get the ram to operate at rated settings/timings ( same set that has been flawless cl14 1t 3200mhz on the Titanium) and can't get it to be stable at stock settings with his 1700k.


You've told me this already, lol. Doesn't mean all K7's are defective. A lot of happy customers over at the K7 thread.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I personally feel like the whole drama surrounding the voltage regulation on the X370 Titanium has just been blown WAY out of proportion...


The VRM is not the actual issue here. It is almost impossible to build a board with 6-phase VRM that wouldn't be able to handle any Ryzen you can throw at it. No matter if you use Niko-Semi or any other kind of cheapest Chinese dump mosfets you can find.

The biggest issue is that MSI treats the customers like total jerkoffs.
It's pretty bad when the official reps of a company tell the customers to _"either grow up, lose your damn internet tough guy acts, and act like adults, or you can leave"_ and lock the threads where users are complaining about the issues (which btw. do exists).

https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283067.56

Using low quality, cheapest components available and marketing them as "Military Grade" is just part of that. Somewhat forgiveable on the entry-level products, where the consumers can somewhat assess the quality based on the price they are paying.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The VRM is not the actual issue here. It is almost impossible to build a board with 6-phase VRM that wouldn't be able to handle any Ryzen you can throw at it. No matter if you use Niko-Semi or any other kind of cheapest Chinese dump mosfets you can find.
> 
> The biggest issue is that MSI treats the customers like total jerkoffs.
> It's pretty bad when the official reps of a company tell the customers to _"either grow up, lose your damn internet tough guy acts, and act like adults, or you can leave"_ and lock the threads where users are complaining about the issues (which btw. do exists).
> 
> https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283067.56
> 
> Using low quality, cheapest components available and marketing them as "Military Grade" is just part of that. Somewhat forgiveable on the entry-level products, where the consumers can somewhat assess the quality based on the price they are paying.


My God. Feel sorry for anyone that needs MSI support when some of their "military grade" parts take a dump.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> My nephew is having plenty of problems with the K7 , dropping usb connection , can't get the ram to operate at rated settings/timings ( same set that has been flawless cl14 1t 3200mhz on the Titanium) and can't get it to be stable at stock settings with his 1700k.
> 
> 
> 
> You've told me this already, lol. Doesn't mean all K7's are defective. A lot of happy customers over at the K7 thread.
Click to expand...

It was an update to the night and day difference between his experience with the k7 and mine with the Titanium . He's on his 3rd day of fighting with problems vs mine running a stable 4 ghz overclock with cl 14 T1 3200 mhz ram with a grand total of 15 minute invested after hardware assembly.

I'm pretty sure he would trade.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> It was an update to the night and day difference between his experience with the k7 and mine with the Titanium . He's on his 3rd day of fighting with problems vs mine running a stable 4 ghz overclock with cl 14 T1 3200 mhz ram with a grand total of 15 minute invested after hardware assembly.
> 
> I'm pretty sure he would trade.


There's 2 people out of 20 on Newegg that received dead MSI Titanium boards. Doesn't mean they're all crap.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Checked out my buds MSI Titanium today. Looks nice but we both agreed that it's overpriced for what is brings to the table. He'll be exchanging it for a Gigabyte K7 which is a much better board for the price. K7 also looks much nicer.


The K7 does look like a nice board. I really wanted a second M.2 slot so it wouldn't have made my short list, and I
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The VRM is not the actual issue here. It is almost impossible to build a board with 6-phase VRM that wouldn't be able to handle any Ryzen you can throw at it. No matter if you use Niko-Semi or any other kind of cheapest Chinese dump mosfets you can find.
> 
> The biggest issue is that MSI treats the customers like total jerkoffs.
> It's pretty bad when the official reps of a company tell the customers to _"either grow up, lose your damn internet tough guy acts, and act like adults, or you can leave"_ and lock the threads where users are complaining about the issues (which btw. do exists).
> 
> https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283067.56
> 
> Using low quality, cheapest components available and marketing them as "Military Grade" is just part of that. Somewhat forgiveable on the entry-level products, where the consumers can somewhat assess the quality based on the price they are paying.


They are all volunteers. It's not even officially supported by MSI. I've already given up on that forum.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> It was an update to the night and day difference between his experience with the k7 and mine with the Titanium . He's on his 3rd day of fighting with problems vs mine running a stable 4 ghz overclock with cl 14 T1 3200 mhz ram with a grand total of 15 minute invested after hardware assembly.
> 
> I'm pretty sure he would trade.


Your Out of the box is great. Others have not had your experience with a Lot of boards, including titanium. If out of the box was part of the price tag now....


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> There's 2 people out of 20 on Newegg that received dead MSI Titanium boards. Doesn't mean they're all crap.


I read those comments. Not sure those two should be building any system based on a brand new platform. Not sure those boards were even dead.They weren't aware of the Flashback capability and never tried to see if a BIOS flash would resolve their issue. There are compatibility issues, especially with the 1.10 BIOS that ships. Relatively few were impacted and most worked through the issue. Not much different than any other platform.

There was another review complaining about a lack of a BIOS reset option other than the motherboard jumper...when the reset button by the I/O ports is *well documented*. Do these people even bother to read the first few pages of the manual? If you can't at least read the manual...









Those two reports on NewEgg are the only 2 DOA reports I have been able to find...and I have searched. But your point is valid - any single report is simply anecdotal and does not represent the totality of the design or quality. Even the best built MB will have *some* level of initial or premature failures. That's just the nature of electronics.

As a general comment on reviews - people are much quicker to complain then praise. I always take reviews with complaints and try to consider the context otherwise *every* product will seem suspect...and that isn't specific to tech...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The VRM is not the actual issue here. It is almost impossible to build a board with 6-phase VRM that wouldn't be able to handle any Ryzen you can throw at it. No matter if you use Niko-Semi or any other kind of cheapest Chinese dump mosfets you can find.
> 
> The biggest issue is that MSI treats the customers like total jerkoffs.
> It's pretty bad when the official reps of a company tell the customers to _"either grow up, lose your damn internet tough guy acts, and act like adults, or you can leave"_ and lock the threads where users are complaining about the issues (which btw. do exists).
> 
> https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283067.56
> 
> Using low quality, cheapest components available and marketing them as "Military Grade" is just part of that. Somewhat forgiveable on the entry-level products, where the consumers can somewhat assess the quality based on the price they are paying.


Nice recent review of the Titanium:

http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/

They are using an earlier Beta BIOS but still got very good results.

Amusing they comment on the VRMs in their conclusion, and yet also comment that voltage regulation at the 4Ghz OC was *essentially perfect* and actual power consumption was only a tad more than Asus and better than the Gigabyte Gaming 5...so the issue is...perception? How could a MB built with crappy VRM's be *more efficient* than the really nice Gigabyte VRMs and so close to those awesome Asus VRMs and also deliver near perfect voltage regulation?...and even perform faster as well? It just can't be...


----------



## yendor

I'm convinced some doa reviews on the egg and amazon are from people who tried to use the motherboard video ports....


----------



## yendor

Double posted.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Nice recent review of the Titanium:
> 
> http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/
> 
> They are using an earlier Beta BIOS but still got very good results.
> 
> Amusing they comment on the VRMs in their conclusion, and yet also comment that voltage regulation at the 4Ghz OC was *essentially perfect* and actual power consumption was only a tad more than Asus and better than the Gigabyte Gaming 5...so the issue is...perception? How could a MB built with crappy VRM's be *more efficient* than the really nice Gigabyte VRMs and so close to those awesome Asus VRMs and also deliver near perfect voltage regulation?...and even perform faster as well? It just can't be...


It isn't. They take more power in to deliver the same power out. It's in the spec sheet. Won't change.


----------



## chew*

how is it more efficient if it consumes more power


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> how is it more efficient if it consumes more power


Look again:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







At 4.0Ghz OC:

Asus CH6 81W at idle 234W with load

Giga Game5 81w at idle 251W with load

MSI Titanium 77W at idle 236W with load

So the Titanium is lower than all at idle when overclocked, 15W *less* than Gigabyte under load, and only 2W more than the CH6 with the amazing VRMs. So of the 6 reading, lower in all but one and within 2W in the only one it loses.

Is it that hard to read a chart?

Maybe the mosfet isn't the ONLY part of the design that matters for efficiency?

and for stock, yeah it's 1W higher at idle, but still falls between the other two at load. But who buys these boards to run stock, as so many here like to remind everyone. That why stock speed results simply do not tell the whole story.

It's also faster in actual performance at the same clock speed.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> It isn't. They take more power in to deliver the same power out. It's in the spec sheet. Won't change.


You do realize when looking at the spec sheet that the performance curve is non-linear? So how they are utilized will impact efficiency. The mosfets are also not the only part of the system that looses energy to resistive losses? FLIR imaging shows how cool the MSI is as a whole where the other boards show much more heat throughout, and especially along the electrical feeds to the CPU.


----------



## chew*

but you claimed yourself it used more power.........

Anything that uses more power is not efficient.

Those two things do not belong in the same sentence together.........


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> but you claimed yourself it used more power.........
> 
> Anything that uses more power is not efficient.
> 
> Those two things do not belong in the same sentence together.........


I was taking it all as a whole since the CH6 is slightly lower in two results. If I had claimed unequivocally that it was lower power *everyone* would have jumped on that. I do not *over* state results. If anything I prefer to under-state...

and what I *did* say was it was more efficient than the Gigabyte...and it arguably is (1w at idle is effectively equal and subject to rounding error)


----------



## chew*

I take a lot of reviews with a grain of salt now until they break out the iron and dmm.

To compare consumption all boards must be at same measured voltage.

I know this, stilt knows this.

Anyone from the old school know this.

Most reviewers are a joke nowadays.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I take a lot of reviews with a grain of salt now until they break out the iron and dmm.
> 
> To compare consumption all boards must be at same measured voltage.
> 
> I know this, stilt knows this.
> 
> Anyone from the old school know this.
> 
> Most reviewers are a joke nowadays.


Depends on the criteria. Are you talking about efficiency at a given voltage or efficiency to achieve a given performance level? If a board acheive 4.0Ghz at a lower voltage but at that voltage it is slightly less efficient, which is the fair statement? Most people want to know what it takes to get to a certain clock. That give you a performance per-watt figure which seems like a typical measure. So what if a board is more efficient at 1.3v if it needsd 1.45v (theoretically) to achieve equivalent results?

And beyond voltage (which was absolutely stable) and power utilization (which I can only assume used the same testing method), at the same clock speed it performs better. Not significantly, but I know people her would harp on that if they could.

Let say all boards are giving incorrect voltage and are higher, or even just the MSI board. They measured power usage *at the wall*, so that would mean the MSI board is even that much more efficient. It's a no-win argument at a certain level...


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I take a lot of reviews with a grain of salt now until they break out the iron and dmm.
> 
> To compare consumption all boards must be at same measured voltage.
> 
> I know this, stilt knows this.
> 
> Anyone from the old school know this.
> 
> Most reviewers are a joke nowadays.


Many reviewers exist nowadays that know what they are talking about and go quite far into testing components.

Ten years ago you would be lucky if someone went as far as taking the casing off a psu or the heatsink off a vrm. Nowadays you have people who go much further than that.


----------



## chew*

5 years ago...things were decent...now?

Thats why we had ryzen reviews all over the place


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 5 years ago...things were decent...now?
> 
> Thats why we had ryzen reviews all over the place


Now you are conflating arguments. Gaming reviews are different than the type of review I posted. You also didn't bother to read the article that said they test power consumption *at the wall* which kind of blows your voltage argument out the window.

Look, you make solid points but the context matters, and when you fall back to the same trite arguments without even looking at the specific context of the test you only undermine yourself in the long run.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 5 years ago...things were decent...now?
> 
> Thats why we had ryzen reviews all over the place


5 years ago we had people who knew what they were talking about and people who didn't. The same applies now.

As something like the internet becomes more mainstream, the number of people using it who over-react or don't know what they are talking about increases exponentially.
For example, vrms on motherboards up until about 15 years ago were all using 2-3 phases, without heat-sinks, to power up to ~70 watt processors. You didn't see people complaining or over-reacting all over the place back then, just cause of a specific brand being used or because of the packaging used for the integrated circuits. The most important point here is that excluding hardware affected by the capacitor plague of the 2000s, the said hardware still works.

Now? Now you have people pushing processors far beyond their specifications, on boards not meant to do this, and they complain because the nikos/renesas/ti/onsemi transistors used on these boards blew up. Of course it's the board maker's fault, it's not as if there are people out there who don't know what they are doing... or are there?


----------



## chew*

Im far from undermining myself. Apples to apples meaured properly volt for volt then you measure at the wall.

I agree back then some reviewers sucked.

Im going to say this now however....the ones that did over clocking results or attempted...i watched the videos...they suck..sorry but its the truth.

Fumbling with settings means not really sure what they are doing.

Shooting for gold first boot on this chip?

You clearly do not understand chip then.

Stick to gaming [email protected] stock..

Ill do a video of booting at 3390 dual rank 32gb....then you guys will understand.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Im far from undermining myself. Apples to apples meaured properly volt for volt then you measure at the wall.
> 
> I agree back then some reviewers sucked.
> 
> Im going to say this now however....the ones that did over clocking results or attempted...i watched the videos...they suck..sorry but its the truth.
> 
> Fumbling with settings means not really sure what they are doing.
> 
> Shooting for gold first boot on this chip?
> 
> You clearly do not understand chip then.
> 
> Stick to gaming reviews.
> 
> Ill do a video of booting at 3390 dual rank 32gb with dual rank....then you guys will understand.


Well, unless you have the spec-sheet of the processor handy you also don't know 100% what you're doing.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Well, unless you have the spec-sheet of the processor handy you also don't know 100% what you're doing.


Really because i have no spec sheet never had never asked nor never wanted any spec sheet from amd now or in the past....

Talk to stilt if you want specs.

Talk to me if you want to break the rules...

I apply a methodical flow chart to overclocking.

It tells me everything i need to know without any documentation...


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> 5 years ago we had people who knew what they were talking about and people who didn't. The same applies now.
> 
> As something like the internet becomes more mainstream, the number of people using it who over-react or don't know what they are talking about increases exponentially.
> For example, vrms on motherboards up until about 15 years ago were all using 2-3 phases, without heat-sinks, to power up to ~70 watt processors. You didn't see people complaining or over-reacting all over the place back then, just cause of a specific brand being used or because of the packaging used for the integrated circuits. The most important point here is that excluding hardware affected by the capacitor plague of the 2000s, the said hardware still works.
> 
> Now? Now you have people pushing processors far beyond their specifications, on boards not meant to do this, and they complain because the nikos/renesas/ti/onsemi transistors used on these boards blew up. Of course it's the board maker's fault, it's not as if there are people out there who don't know what they are doing... or are there?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Im far from undermining myself. Apples to apples meaured properly volt for volt then you measure at the wall.
> 
> I agree back then some reviewers sucked.
> 
> Im going to say this now however....the ones that did over clocking results or attempted...i watched the videos...they suck..sorry but its the truth.
> 
> Fumbling with settings means not really sure what they are doing.
> 
> Shooting for gold first boot on this chip?
> 
> You clearly do not understand chip then.
> 
> Stick to gaming reviews.
> 
> Ill do a video of booting at 3390 dual rank 32gb with dual rank....then you guys will understand.


I agree. Almost every review on YouTube exposed themselves as being hacks. All they knew was what they had learned by watching other go through the motions on mature Intel platforms. They showed a severe lack of fundamental understanding of *why* they were doing things and simply tried repeating the same old pattern.

On top of that, gaming benchmarks are all but worthless except for showing how that game will run at that time on that specific platform/architecture. When there's only one platform/architecture, it works well enough and that is all most of these reviewers have ever really dealt with. They never really had to pay attention to Bulldozer other than to say they included it. Nobody expected it to perform so results there never really mattered, so their methods never came into question.

As for the review, absolute comparisons of voltages are invalid. Relative voltage stability is valid - unless you want to claim the vendor somehow "Volkswagen'd" their sensors to skew relative readings on the same board. Actual clock speed and memory speed achievements are valid. Performance comparisons are valid if the same components were used and the same version of benchmarks (since these are all the same platform), and power readings comparisons for power at the wall are valid. So much of this review is valid - with the caveat that the platform is still immature and some absolute results are subject to change - meaning comparing these results to any other review would be questionable...


----------



## chew*

True not to mention microcode version if varied from board to board....in my testing has an impact on results and ability.

On power draw via microcode? Yah im not going to vouch for that...but could be an interesting test.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> You do realize when looking at the spec sheet that the performance curve is non-linear? So how they are utilized will impact efficiency. The mosfets are also not the only part of the system that looses energy to resistive losses? FLIR imaging shows how cool the MSI is as a whole where the other boards show much more heat throughout, and especially along the electrical feeds to the CPU.


I looked at the flir, dismissed it. Looked again, still dismiss it. Hot spots at differing center of focus, nice. Readings farther away from center of focus? suspect. Readings show vrms in spec? Yay, now ignoring rest of flir.

Now power consumption of the total system when measured at the wall ALMOST has some validity. However it doesn't account for features that draw power which are not part of titanium.
Overclocking method not covered. If c&q is still operating on system a and not on system b then system b will show higher draw at idle. kind of annoying.
Voltages software reported during oc.. reference is made to 20mV lower than ch6 (known to have 100 mv difference between software report and actual measured at the socket, that's power DELIVERED)

Flip side, someone will toss a dimm on the socket eventually and we'll find out what that gets to cpu. And no, the mosfets won't magically becoming more efficient. Hey, the whole board could be more efficient. Controller's pretty nice! Downstream, not so much. Damn weird place to save a few bucks on production cost for a top tier product.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I looked at the flir, dismissed it. Looked again, still dismiss it. Hot spots at differing center of focus, nice. Readings farther away from center of focus? suspect. Readings show vrms in spec? Yay, now ignoring rest of flir.
> 
> Now power consumption of the total system when measured at the wall ALMOST has some validity. However it doesn't account for features that draw power which are not part of titanium.
> Overclocking method not covered. If c&q is still operating on system a and not on system b then system b will show higher draw at idle. kind of annoying.
> Voltages software reported during oc.. reference is made to 20mV lower than ch6 (known to have 100 mv difference between software report and actual measured at the socket, that's power DELIVERED)
> 
> Flip side, someone will toss a dimm on the socket eventually and we'll find out what that gets to cpu. And no, the mosfets won't magically becoming more efficient. Hey, the whole board could be more efficient. Controller's pretty nice! Downstream, not so much. Damn weird place to save a few bucks on production cost for a top tier product.


There are also differences in the BCLK generator chip being present or not and RGB difference will contribute to power draw as well.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I looked at the flir, dismissed it. Looked again, still dismiss it. Hot spots at differing center of focus, nice. Readings farther away from center of focus? suspect. Readings show vrms in spec? Yay, now ignoring rest of flir.


Just because you chose to not understand how flir works doesn't invalidate what is obviously shown. You *chose* to dismiss values off-center for no valid reason. Location relative to the center does not impact readings unless you are dealing with reflections...

Here's a video showing a moving FLIR image. Heat values are consistent regardless of positioning (jump to the 1 minute mark. Time link does work with video links here):


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











So far it seems ANY result I post that goes against preconceptions is dismissed arbitrarily, and then when I refute those dismissals new reasons come up. And yet the evidence from MANY sources continues to grow. I can only assume as soon as ANY result comes up that aligns with these biases, these same people will concur immediate with those singular results...?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> There are also differences in the BCLK generator chip being present or not and RGB difference will contribute to power draw as well.


and those would be more significant at stock power readings. They cannot come close to accounting for the deltas under load when overclocked. LEDs are a fraction of a watt. BLCK counts as part of the architecture and the power cost for implementing it.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> You do realize when looking at the spec sheet that the performance curve is non-linear? So how they are utilized will impact efficiency. The mosfets are also not the only part of the system that looses energy to resistive losses? FLIR imaging shows how cool the MSI is as a whole where the other boards show much more heat throughout, and especially along the electrical feeds to the CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> I looked at the flir, dismissed it. Looked again, still dismiss it. Hot spots at differing center of focus, nice. Readings farther away from center of focus? suspect. Readings show vrms in spec? Yay, now ignoring rest of flir.
> 
> Now power consumption of the total system when measured at the wall ALMOST has some validity. However it doesn't account for features that draw power which are not part of titanium.
> Overclocking method not covered. If c&q is still operating on system a and not on system b then system b will show higher draw at idle. kind of annoying.
> Voltages software reported during oc.. reference is made to 20mV lower than ch6 (known to have 100 mv difference between software report and actual measured at the socket, that's power DELIVERED)
> 
> Flip side, someone will toss a dimm on the socket eventually and we'll find out what that gets to cpu. And no, the mosfets won't magically becoming more efficient. Hey, the whole board could be more efficient. Controller's pretty nice! Downstream, not so much. Damn weird place to save a few bucks on production cost for a top tier product.
Click to expand...

FWIW idle power usage vs prime 95 blend usage at 4150 MHZ .
5 - 120mm fans - 16 gb ram at 1.35 volts .900 nb v, Koolance pump , samsung ssd , R9 Fury,


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Just because you chose to not understand how flir works doesn't invalidate what is obviously shown. You *chose* to dismiss values off-center for no valid reason. Location relative to the center does not impact readings unless you are dealing with reflections...
> 
> Here's a video showing a moving FLIR image. Heat values are consistent regardless of positioning (jump to the 1 minute mark. Time link does work with video links here):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far it seems ANY result I post that goes against preconceptions is dismissed arbitrarily, and then when I refute those dismissals new reasons come up. And yet the evidence from MANY sources continues to grow. I can only assume as soon as ANY result comes up that aligns with these biases, these same people will concur immediate with those singular results...?


Oh I dismissed the flir the first time I saw it because it was used to claim the titanium ran hotter somewhere. I suppose I could revisit that dismissal and now accept that the titanium runs hotter somewhere? You pick. Motherboards and glossy coatings of unknown refractive quality? NEVER happen..

I never had a preconception about the titaniums power draw at the wall. I do have one about the efficiency of the mosfets. If they're rated at x efficiency at 80c then I can imagine them being more efficient at lower temperatures, like the titanium's managing to keep them at. If rated at lower temps then the only direction their efficiency can goes as temps rise is down...

No dmm measurement at the socket? hmm. would rather see what actually gets there at x clocks and load rather than what software is calibrated to tell me. Best intentions granted to the vendors to provide me accurate information it still doesn't match. As long as it's consistant and I know what it is then I'm good to go.

Questions about differences not measured by the review aside and despite saving $1.80 or more per phase it looks competitive and arguably better in power consumption than the g. Which doesn't have the bclk generator in it's overhead. Now how much is rgb costing the asus board?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Oh I dismissed the flir the first time I saw it because it was used to claim the titanium ran hotter somewhere. I suppose I could revisit that dismissal and now accept that the titanium runs hotter somewhere? You pick. Motherboards and glossy coatings of unknown refractive quality? NEVER happen..
> 
> I never had a preconception about the titaniums power draw at the wall. I do have one about the efficiency of the mosfets. If they're rated at x efficiency at 80c then I can imagine them being more efficient at lower temperatures, like the titanium's managing to keep them at. If rated at lower temps then the only direction their efficiency can goes as temps rise is down...
> 
> No dmm measurement at the socket? hmm. would rather see what actually gets there at x clocks and load rather than what software is calibrated to tell me. Best intentions granted to the vendors to provide me accurate information it still doesn't match. As long as it's consistant and I know what it is then I'm good to go.


The specs for the mosfets show efficiency curves dependent on load and temp, so they both play a role.The spec sheet has been posted several times.

And I don't disagree about the voltages, but the power draw from the wall doesn't lie. Same components (memory, HD, PSU, CPU, etc), lower power at 4GHz OC. There simply is no getting around that. If MSI's VRM is so inefficient, then the other MB's must be crap everywhere else to draw so much more power because no other single aspect of the MB should be drawing nearly enough power to shift the scales that much. There is no getting around these numbers:

Asus CH6 81W at idle 234W with load

Giga Game5 81w at idle 251W with load

MSI Titanium 77W at idle 236W with load


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> FWIW idle power usage vs prime 95 blend usage at 4150 MHZ .
> 5 - 120mm fans - 16 gb ram at 1.35 volts .900 nb v, Koolance pump , samsung ssd , R9 Fury,


But it's the Titanium, {insert excuse here} therefore there is no way it can be efficient. {insert denial} until {insert some other test here} can provide *real* numbers.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> But it's the Titanium, {insert excuse here} therefore there is no way it can be efficient. {insert denial} until {insert some other test here} can provide *real* numbers.


power at cpu suspect until dmm.

note that there's no claim of inferiority attached. Just the desire for certainty. Maybe the msi's controller and software are the only ones that accurately report the voltage at the socket.That would be good to know. In C's setup it's academic either way, we know it's stable, been stable, been pushed harder, not like joe youtube reviewer who popped it into the case and turned everything up to 11 and called it good or bad based on 15 minutes of effort. ok I'm jealous, 15 minutes oob and oc'd ram and cpu. Enviable on ANY motherboard.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> But it's the Titanium, {insert excuse here} therefore there is no way it can be efficient. {insert denial} until {insert some other test here} can provide *real* numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> power at cpu suspect until dmm.
> 
> note that there's no claim of inferiority attached. Just the desire for certainty. Maybe the msi's controller and software are the only ones that accurately report the voltage at the socket.That would be good to know. In C's setup it's academic either way, we know it's stable, been stable, been pushed harder, not like joe youtube reviewer who popped it into the case and turned everything up to 11 and called it good or bad based on 15 minutes of effort. ok I'm jealous, 15 minutes oob and oc'd ram and cpu. Enviable on ANY motherboard.
Click to expand...

It is what it is.
I'll post results and let the "chips" fall as they may.

What bothers me is when someone doesn't have a clue what they are doing ( what's a QVL? , do I need to attach a heatsink to the cpu if im just going to update the bios?, the motherboard has hdmi out, why do I need a graphics card??) and loudly cast the blame on the hardware


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> The specs for the mosfets show efficiency curves dependent on load and temp, so they both play a role.The spec sheet has been posted several times.
> 
> And I don't disagree about the voltages, but the power draw from the wall doesn't lie. Same components (memory, HD, PSU, CPU, etc), lower power at 4GHz OC. There simply is no getting around that. If MSI's VRM is so inefficient, then the other MB's must be crap everywhere else to draw so much more power because no other single aspect of the MB should be drawing nearly enough power to shift the scales that much. There is no getting around these numbers:
> 
> Asus CH6 81W at idle 234W with load
> 
> Giga Game5 81w at idle 251W with load
> 
> MSI Titanium 77W at idle 236W with load


Pity nobody here has the nous or equipment to test this properly...hence the circles.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Pity nobody here has the nous or equipment to test this properly...hence the circles.


Does it even matter? CH6, Game 5 and Titanium all seem to be very capable of any non-suicidal OC runs.


----------



## chew*

The only one here less there are other ln2 guys in this thread with a bone to pick should be me tbh...

All of them should handle 24/7.

My grassroots votes for the cheapest cost without cheap quality always...

Based on new findings on taichi...anything more expensive should be worried....as suspected...bios is holding it back.

Give them all another month or so then we start slinging poo.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The only one here less there are other ln2 guys in this thread with a bone to pick should be me tbh...
> 
> All of them should handle 24/7.
> 
> My grassroots votes for the cheapest cost without cheap quality always...
> 
> Based on new findings on taichi...anything more expensive should be worried....as suspected...bios is holding it back.
> 
> Give them all another month or so then we start slinging poo.


I'd like to point out (from an ln2 point of view) that the current record for any of the 8 core ryzen 7(1700/1700x/1800x) on the cpu-z charts is a 1700x, clocked at 5414.03 MHz... And the board used is......?

Oh God hold on... Can't be.... Yep. You guessed it. The MSI Titanium... that white... silver... Wtv... Niko using motherF.. Board.









Not that I would value such things as it does not affect my life or choices in anyway but I do find this to be a little amusing.

Top 15
1700x
http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e20372031373030582045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72

1700
http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e203720313730302045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72

1800x
http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e20372031383030582045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> I'd like to point out (from an ln2 point of view) that the current record for any of the 8 core ryzen 7(1700/1700x/1800x) on the cpu-z charts is a 1700x, clocked at 5414.03 MHz... And the board used is......?
> 
> Oh God hold on... Can't be.... Yep. You guessed it. The MSI Titanium... that white... silver... Wtv... Nikon using motherF.. Board.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not that I would value such things as it does not affect my life or choices in anyway but I do find this to be a little amusing.
> 
> Top 15
> 1700x
> http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e20372031373030582045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72
> 
> 1700
> http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e203720313730302045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72
> 
> 1800x
> http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e20372031383030582045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72


Suicide screenshots are no indication of the board capabilities, VRM wise.
Regardless of the voltage and clocks used the power draw will be significantly lower during the suicide validation, than at stock while fully stressed.

Validation at 5.5GHz / 1.800V on a 8C/16T Ryzen wouldn't use more than < 50W of power.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Suicide screenshots are no indication of the board capabilities, VRM wise.
> Regardless of the voltage and clocks used the power draw will be significantly lower during the suicide validation, than at stock while fully stressed.
> 
> Validation at 5.5GHz / 1.800V on a 8C/16T Ryzen wouldn't use more than < 50W of power.


I do understand what you are saying.

I just find it "strange" that no amount of data from the users that do have the MSI seems to suffice.

If normal use is shown with good clocks, temps, voltages = sensors must be calibrated to "lie" it cannot be..

If power drawn at the wall is shown = board does not have nuff leds like the others..

If well above "normal" oc(4.1 and above), stable ocs are shown, with vrm temps well within the spec and normality = again sensors must not be reporting well. The cpu must have more voltage than shown... Vrm readings must not be correct and the wattage also..

Now.. Ln2... Was it a suicide run? Sure, just like any other Ln2 run as far as I am concerned. Some vendors do advertise Ln2 related features (Asus being one). Features that should help getting those world wide records... Yet the msi, the "doubtful one" is the one at the top. Msi/amd merit? Or the overclockers talent? I'd like to think both, everything matters as long as you get there. Otherwise let's just remove all merit from all board manufacturers as far as this Ln2 stuff is concerned. Any board will do...

And that was my point. Shiit vrm or not. Vrm capable or not. Overpriced or not... The msi "seems to" be able to do more than it should be able to... Time and time again... If one where to take only the "Niko argument" into account... This should not be possible. Just like any device a board is more than a vrm... Look at the results. Look at the performance. That is what matters. Is it not?

So I reiterate... The vrm on the msi is fine and no-one is going to find themselves not doing this or that on that account. Prove me wrong.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> I do understand what you are saying.
> 
> I just find it "strange" that no amount of data from the users that do have the MSI seems to suffice.


And that was my point with my sarcastic response. At this point I can just have fun with it because it has become such a farce. I simply do not find the same level of resistance to ANY other reports from other MBs. At this point, if Chew actually came back with favorable reports/tests I would expect people to claim faulty equipment!









To be clear, my intent has never been to claim the Titanium is *better*, but to counter the blanket/generic claims that it is sub-par. I do think it's fair to ask if it is worth the price, but only based on a personal value proposition given your needs/criteria - not due to performance or quality.


----------



## yendor

Lately the only people who've outright called them crappy or inferior have been titanium owners with their backs up.
Overall the review was positive. I did call the software reported voltage difference questionable. We already know the software can be inaccurate for the others, no, they're not set up to LIE no ore than the titanium is. Could be the titanium is better by more than 20 millivolts. Hey how bout we slap a dmm on that sucker and find out what it's really delivering. Doubt gone. Titanium wins. Hurrah!

After a few more minutes looking at the power draw I realized that the titanium clearly needs MUCH MORE LED. The lack of this feature alone is clearly a performance killer. Although it must use the most power of any component (Which explains advertising emphasis), by process of elimination the truly superior board is revealed in the power draw chart.

Ladies and gentlemen, we must either buy g5's or , less expensive component wise. LED strips. more. much more.

Can we daisy chain them?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Lately the only people who've outright called them crappy or inferior have been titanium owners with their backs up.


Yep, we have to go all the back to Monday for unqualified/unprompted criticism of the Titanium...

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/630#post_25978751

It is the only top-tier MB getting this kind of disrespect. The proof is out, so at this point I simply enjoy revealing the ignorance of these posters and watching them flail around giving excuses.

There are legit criticisms about its price/value which is something certainly open to debate as that is highly subjective.

Quality is also very hard to quantify, which is why I do give my *opinions* for my reasoning. But this thread is supposed to be primarily about the VRM's for AM4 boards and I would think everyone would be interested in *available real world reports* related to the VRM performance. I know I remain interested. No single report is definitive, but each additional review/report provides more data and paints an ever improved picture. I will put imperfect data against misplaced perceptions any day.

And again, when I do post reviews I am never doing so to put down other MBs. As commented elsewhere, any of the top boards from every manufacturer seems more than capable of reaching maximum OC's for Ryzen and doing so consistently. Differences tend to be fairly modest.

I remain on the lookout for more thorough/detailed reviews that do not rely on on-board sensors for their data so that we can get a better relative performance comparison across the various boards, but more and more I feel that info will simply be interesting and not likely to make a substantive difference given the various performance reporting we are seeing - especially with regards to values being reported by the CPU itself. If there were serious differences in MB sensors, we should be seeing the impact at the CPU sensors.


----------



## The Stilt

I've had plenty of first hand experience on the X370 Titanium, since I had 30 of them available at one point.

The board (like most other boards) has several issue (software and hardware). There is no specific issue which is the deal breaker, however all of the issues / "features" combined do. If MSI manages to improve their level of support (and attitude) and the price of the board drops to reasonable levels (~200$) then I see no good reason to steer clear of the board.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> I've had plenty of first hand experience on the X370 Titanium, since I had 30 of them available at one point.
> 
> The board (like most other boards) has several issue (software and hardware). There is no specific issue which is the deal breaker, however all of the issues / "features" combined do. If MSI manages to improve their level of support (and attitude) and the price of the board drops to reasonable levels (~200$) then I see no good reason to steer clear of the board.


MSI forum is an issue. Lack of *official* forum support by MSI is not excusable in my eyes. They were pretty good with BIOS updates for a bit, then had an issue and seem to have overreacted to that. Not sure why. If they want to charge a premium, they really need to support the product as a *premium* product. That said, most users are very stable and mostly looking for improved memory compatibility/capability and some improved BIOS features that aren't critical.

At $250 I would strongly argue the Titanium would *currently* be the best *overall* offering at that price. I also expect (hope) to see the price slowly drop as overall X370 board availability improves, as competition generally does that. I do see build features worthy of a premium, but the current level of that premium may be harder to justify with increased competition. I just don't see it going lower than that without cutting some build options that I personally am looking for that no other manufacturer offers.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Suicide screenshots are no indication of the board capabilities, VRM wise.
> Regardless of the voltage and clocks used the power draw will be significantly lower during the suicide validation, than at stock while fully stressed.
> 
> Validation at 5.5GHz / 1.800V on a 8C/16T Ryzen wouldn't use more than < 50W of power.


Agreed...

Wprime 1024 on hwbot would be more of an indicator.

Why wprime 1024? It claimed our awesome dr mos msi am3 board...it claimed many sockets and cpus from intel.

Also some objectiveness if you will.

If people like me have done 8529 or like stilt 87xx? Sorry stilt i forget exact speed no offense, guys like us wont even bother.....

But since you brought it up i will make it my mission to test what each board can suicide at...and probably wreck a os or two in process....yay the hard drive duper gets to put some work in.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> And that was my point with my sarcastic response. At this point I can just have fun with it because it has become such a farce. I simply do not find the same level of resistance to ANY other reports from other MBs. At this point, if Chew actually came back with favorable reports/tests I would expect people to claim faulty equipment!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *To be clear, my intent has never been to claim the Titanium is *better**, but to counter the blanket/generic claims that it is sub-par. I do think it's fair to ask if it is worth the price, but only based on a personal value proposition given your needs/criteria - not due to performance or quality.


You were claiming that the Titanium is better than most offerings. You even posted this about my Asrock Fatal1ty Pro, "Enjoy your poor quality board with poorly implemented "high end" components."


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Agreed...
> 
> Wprime 1024 on hwbot would be more of an indicator.
> 
> Why wprime 1024? It claimed our awesome dr mos msi am3 board...it claimed many sockets and cpus from intel.
> 
> Also some objectiveness if you will.
> 
> If people like me have done 8529 or like stilt 87xx? Sorry stilt i forget exact speed no offense, guys like us wont even bother.....
> 
> But since you brought it up i will make it my mission to test what each board can suicide at...and probably wreck a os or two in process....yay the hard drive duper gets to put some work in.


Out of curiosity I ran Wprime 1024 (version 2.10) and it didn't stress my system as much as AIDA64 did. It couldn't even keep my CPU pegged consistently, but it seems to have a bug as it wouldn't let me set more than 256 threads without an error. :-/


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> You were claiming that the Titanium is better than most offerings. You even posted this about my Asrock Fatal1ty Pro, "Enjoy your poor quality board with poorly implemented "high end" components."


I claim it is a *better quality* board and will stand by that. I have already made it clear what my basis for that is.

I do not *claim* it is better, but I will show reviews and reports of it's performance that may show it performing better as a basis to validate the claim that it is not "sub-par", which is the initial comment dating well back from which all later criticisms also align with and solely based on the decision to use NIKOs without consideration of the total design and its actual performance.

Yes, take my sarcastic comment out of context. That was again in *response* to criticisms of the Titanium with comparisons to the "better" VRMs used by ASRock indicating the ASRock was a much better board for the money.

You conveniently left out the comment of YOURS I was responding to, which was only part of a chain of your comments critical of the MSI...
Quote:


> Hmmm. Ok? Enjoy your overpriced board but try not to get too emotional over it


So I threw actual results back in your face. If you want to claim my board is overpriced because it costs more, I can claim yours is inferior in it's implementation if its "better" VRMs don't perform as well. I don't sling mud, but I sure as hell will throw it back at someone.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> I've had plenty of first hand experience on the X370 Titanium, since I had 30 of them available at one point.
> 
> The board (like most other boards) has several issue (software and hardware). There is no specific issue which is the deal breaker, however all of the issues / "features" combined do. If MSI manages to improve their level of support (and attitude) and the price of the board drops to reasonable levels (~200$) then I see no good reason to steer clear of the board.
> 
> 
> 
> MSI forum is an issue. Lack of *official* forum support by MSI is not excusable in my eyes. They were pretty good with BIOS updates for a bit, then had an issue and seem to have overreacted to that. Not sure why. If they want to charge a premium, they really need to support the product as a *premium* product. That said, most users are very stable and mostly looking for improved memory compatibility/capability and some improved BIOS features that aren't critical.
> 
> At $250 I would strongly argue the Titanium would *currently* be the best *overall* offering at that price. I also expect (hope) to see the price slowly drop as overall X370 board availability improves, as competition generally does that. I do see build features worthy of a premium, but the current level of that premium may be harder to justify with increased competition. I just don't see it going lower than that without cutting some build options that I personally am looking for that no other manufacturer offers.
Click to expand...

where do you find the Titanium for $250?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> where do you find the Titanium for $250?


I said it *At $250 it would be*...

Micro Center has had it on sale a couple of times in the $260 range as far as I know, and that has been the lowest price I have heard of other than open box sales.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I claim it is a *better quality* board and will stand by that. I have already made it clear what my basis for that is.
> 
> I do not *claim* it is better, but I will show reviews and reports of it's performance that may show it performing better as a basis to validate the claim that it is not "sub-par", which is the initial comment dating well back from which all later criticisms also align with and solely based on the decision to use NIKOs without consideration of the total design and its actual performance.
> 
> Yes, take my sarcastic comment out of context. That was again in *response* to criticisms of the Titanium with comparisons to the "better" VRMs used by ASRock indicating the ASRock was a much better board for the money.
> 
> You conveniently left out the comment of YOURS I was responding to, which was only part of a chain of your comments critical of the MSI...
> So I threw actual results back in your face. If you want to claim my board is overpriced because it costs more, I can claim yours is inferior in it's implementation if its "better" VRMs don't perform as well. I don't sling mud, but I sure as hell will throw it back at someone.


All I said was that the Titanium was overpriced for what it brings to the table which pretty much any sane person can agree with. That's when you lost your cool and started to claim how the Titanium is a superior board and how it's better than Gigabyte's offerings as well as the Asrock boards apparently. Not sure how you claim the Titanium is a superior board when tweaktown rated the Taichi a 95/100 in performance and I quote, "*Excellent VRM: The IR controller matched with IR doublers, NexFETs, 60A chokes, and 12K capacitors results in some of the best thermal test results and performance I have seen so far.* It is a bit overkill, but it should result in solid power delivery 24/7." Tweaktown has pretty much reviewed and tested almost every single board for years now so I tend to think they know what they are talking about.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> All I said was that the Titanium was overpriced for what it brings to the table which pretty much any sane person can agree with. That's when you lost your cool and started to claim how the Titanium is a superior board and how it's better than Gigabyte's offerings as well as the Asrock boards apparently. Not sure how you claim the Titanium is a superior board when tweaktown rated the Taichi a 95/100 in performance and I quote, "*Excellent VRM: The IR controller matched with IR doublers, NexFETs, 60A chokes, and 12K capacitors results in some of the best thermal test results and performance I have seen so far.* It is a bit overkill, but it should result in solid power delivery 24/7." Tweaktown has pretty much reviewed and tested almost every single board for years now so I tend to think they know what they are talking about.


You are being disingenuous. You started the comment chain with this:
Quote:


> MSI Titanium is a rip off so the only person that should invest in it are people that have money to spend and like the way it looks.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/630#post_25978751

So you want to stick with your claim that you are innocent in this whole thing?


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> All I said was that the Titanium was overpriced for what it brings to the table which pretty much any sane person can agree with. That's when you lost your cool and started to claim how the Titanium is a superior board and how it's better than Gigabyte's offerings as well as the Asrock boards apparently. Not sure how you claim the Titanium is a superior board when tweaktown rated the Taichi a 95/100 in performance and I quote, "*Excellent VRM: The IR controller matched with IR doublers, NexFETs, 60A chokes, and 12K capacitors results in some of the best thermal test results and performance I have seen so far.* It is a bit overkill, but it should result in solid power delivery 24/7." Tweaktown has pretty much reviewed and tested almost every single board for years now so I tend to think they know what they are talking about.
> 
> 
> 
> You are being disingenuous. You started the comment chain with this:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Titanium is a rip off so the only person that should invest in it are people that have money to spend and like the way it looks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/630#post_25978751
> 
> So you want to stick with your claim that you are innocent in this whole thing?
Click to expand...

well, he's not wrong, @ $300 - even the overclocking experts here agree it's a rip off.

EDIT : and that's really what everyone has been saying since the beginning, we don't feel that it's worth $300.


----------



## The Stilt

Considering the C6H + Prey bundle has been selling for < 209€ (incl. 19% tax) in Europe, no AM4 motherboard should cost more than that.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> well, he's not wrong, @ $300 - even the overclocking experts here agree it's a rip off.
> 
> EDIT : and that's really what everyone has been saying since the beginning, we don't feel that it's worth $300.


Ah, Appeal to Authority...It's amusing we have come full circle. So, if I may ask, what exactly is their basis for this evaluation? What is it about being an overclocker that qualifies someone to make an overall assessment of value? Point to one source that claims the board is a "rip-off", or at least give a reason beyond blindly following what someone else tells you.


----------



## chew*

I will answer this question....

What makes being an overclocker like me more qualified to asses quality?

Well for one I will stress board at least 4x more than you.

I will run more ridiculous voltage than you.

I will void warranty to do what needs to be done whether it be mods measuring points whatever is required.

Speaking for myself only...the way i insulate eliminates user error from equasion ( frying pwm with condensation ) you can pour water on my pwm...it will still work...

And since im just a fan of what works i won't play favorites.

Oh and wprime 1024...16 thread chip = 16 threads.

Run it full bore under ln2 max current draw results change drastically...its killed clarkdale, gulftown, melted sockets and burned up pwm...under ln2 full load max clocks...it is proven to kill hardware...

Why the hell are you running 256....


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Considering the C6H + Prey bundle has been selling for < 209€ (incl. 19% tax) in Europe, no AM4 motherboard should cost more than that.


And yet I have heard multiple complaints about the quality of the CH6 - headers easily getting pulled off the MB, the surface easily getting scratched such that the actual traces get damaged, etc. Your opinion would appear to be narrowly based on the VRMs, and you are welcome to it.

What I have issue with is people presenting this as fact. It simply isn't. If you build your systems once, are gentle with it, and rarely change components, are gentle with it and don't have any accidents, I doubt there would be much difference. If you intend to have it for a while and survive multiple upgrades and changes, I have yet to see another board better able to consistently withstand that without worry of issues than the Titanium. I've already explained why and provided citations as to why the differences matter.


----------



## madweazl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> And yet I have heard multiple complaints about the quality of the CH6 - headers easily getting pulled off the MB, the surface easily getting scratched such that the actual traces get damaged, etc. Your opinion would appear to be narrowly based on the VRMs, and you are welcome to it.
> 
> What I have issue with is people presenting this as fact. It simply isn't. If you build your systems once, are gentle with it, and rarely change components, are gentle with it and don't have any accidents, I doubt there would be much difference. If you intend to have it for a while and survive multiple upgrades and changes, I have yet to see another board better able to consistently withstand that without worry of issues than the Titanium. I've already explained why and provided citations as to why the differences matter.


Wait, we're comparing reliability on month old hardware? You guys are savage LOL.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I will answer this question....
> 
> What makes being an overclocker like me more qualified to asses quality?
> 
> Well for one I will stress board at least 4x more than you.
> 
> I will run more ridiculous voltage than you.
> 
> I will void warranty to do what needs to be done whether it be mods measuring points whatever is required.
> 
> Speaking for myself only...the way i insulate eliminates user error from equasion ( frying pwm with condensation ) you can pour water on my pwm...it will still work...
> 
> And since im just a fan of what works i won't play favorites.
> 
> Oh and wprime 1024...16 thread chip = 16 threads.
> 
> Run it full bore under ln2 max current draw results change drastically...its killed clarkdale, gulftown, melted sockets and burned up pwm...under ln2 full load max clocks...it is proven to kill hardware...
> 
> Why the hell are you running 256....


16 threads on WPrime wouldn't keep the CPU loaded...CPU utilization would fluctuate...hardly a stress test. I was trying to see if more threads would keep a pipeline of work in order to keep the CPU stressed. My system didn't break a sweat at 16 threads.

Your response tells me you are specifically an expert at direct evaluation of the power delivery subsystem of a MB. That isn't a slight as what you do takes significant skill and knowledge, but it is narrowly focused on only one aspect of a complete evaluation and needs to be assessed in-context.

I don't claim *expertise* in any of the design aspects of a MB, but my knowledge and understanding is broad and I have researched much of the issues I have raised and have cited *expert* references where possible, and other citations or reviews where more details are lacking, to back up my wide-ranging assessments of the build. One issue I have raised is VRM cooling designs. I suspect some of the relative shortcomings (I did say *relative*) in actual temp performance on many of these boards is due to poor VRM cooling designs. Again, I try to take a holistic view of the design and not overly focus on one aspect. But that is a personal choice since no single aspect is of overwhelming concern to me. If price, or extreme OC, or RAID, or anything else was of more importance I would weigh that aspect more heavily.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madweazl*
> 
> Wait, we're comparing reliability on month old hardware? You guys are savage LOL.


They were only a few comments, but others chimed in that these concerns weren't specific to just the CH6 and have been "issues" with Asus relating to the type of top-layer coating they use. The header issue seems odd to me and proper technique shouldn't cause any issues, but the comment is worth noting as a general question as to durability.

But again, these should be taken with a grain of salt. Most users will never encounter these issues. However, if general claims about quality or durability are being raised I see no reason to not pass along what I have heard - *with the understanding any issues reported are anecdotal.*


----------



## chew*

Dude all the boards have issues.

Like i said not a fanboy just a fan of what works.

Gaming 5
Not that i have one but m2 placement sucks..
Borrowed pwm sink from z270 and eliminated heatpipe....a 4c/8t platform.
Bios immature.

Prime x370pro.

Chokes run very warm

Could not pass my 3200 imc/mem stress testing on known capable hardware.
(latest bios needs retesting)

Ch6

Wing commander plastic over vcore vrm.

Chokes run very warm

Super flakey posting procedures as seems most ref clk boards are. Mind of it's own...setting that worked fail later. Settings that failed work later. I suspect this is more chip than board. Shotgun approach does not work on ryzen....

Taichi

Atm cpu clocks seem weak...dmm will confirm what is up later could be less or more volts than i think...my 1700 is really really picky with vcore

Devices drop with bclk.

Biostar gt7

Bricks its bios when using downcore....need i say more...

And this is just an off the top of my head list....i have a ton of stuff jotted down...weird performance loss swapping os on one board but not another benchmark specific etc etc...

Hate to be negative nancy but just showing objectivity.

All of the above have good qualities as well.


----------



## chew*

Btw as far as boards and pricing goes?

Titanium $300? Not worth it

Its competitors are far cheaper with equivalent quality or better.

Gaming 5 at like $190? Not worth it.

Its competitors are far cheaper with equivalent quality or better.

So theres objectivity for you...

Currently no mainstream is worth $190-200

Currently no top tier is worth $300


----------



## CrazyElf

BIOS Updates are all over the map right now.




Asrock gains and Gigabyte loses in this one, but don't think is is gospel. It's far from mature.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Nice recent review of the Titanium:
> 
> http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/
> 
> They are using an earlier Beta BIOS but still got very good results.
> 
> Amusing they comment on the VRMs in their conclusion, and yet also comment that voltage regulation at the 4Ghz OC was *essentially perfect* and actual power consumption was only a tad more than Asus and better than the Gigabyte Gaming 5...so the issue is...perception? How could a MB built with crappy VRM's be *more efficient* than the really nice Gigabyte VRMs and so close to those awesome Asus VRMs and also deliver near perfect voltage regulation?...and even perform faster as well? It just can't be...


Yet they also said this:
http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/3/?PageSpeed=noscript
+
Quote:


> For the CPU power delivery section, six NIKOS PowerPAK PK616BA and twelve NIKOS PowerPAK PK632BA are combined. The SOC section gets four PK616BA MOSFETs and four PK632BA.
> 
> *MSI's power delivery system seems a little light for a flagship, overclocking-geared design.* ASRock and ASUS offer higher total phase counts on their competitors while also using efficient Texas Instrument NexFET power blocks (MOSFETs).


Edit: Which means that they agreed with my assessment that the board's VRM at $300 was lacking for a flagship and that the competition is offering a more powerful VRM.

Also read:
Quote:


> The lack of voltage monitoring points is not a smart move by MSI.


There's no Voltage Checkpoints. ON a flagship.

See the Z270 XPower for a comparison:


I don't see any Checkpoints on the X370 XPower.


The point I've been trying to emphasize is that this is a terrible value for the money. It is not a flagship. It does not have a good VRM, it is expensive, and is missing many features you would expect in a flagship (clock generator, voltage checkpoints, enough SATA ports, etc). If this were 200, nobody would be saying this.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The VRM is not the actual issue here. It is almost impossible to build a board with 6-phase VRM that wouldn't be able to handle any Ryzen you can throw at it. No matter if you use Niko-Semi or any other kind of cheapest Chinese dump mosfets you can find.
> 
> The biggest issue is that MSI treats the customers like total jerkoffs.
> It's pretty bad when the official reps of a company tell the customers to _"either grow up, lose your damn internet tough guy acts, and act like adults, or you can leave"_ and lock the threads where users are complaining about the issues (which btw. do exists).
> 
> https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283067.56
> 
> Using low quality, cheapest components available and marketing them as "Military Grade" is just part of that. Somewhat forgiveable on the entry-level products, where the consumers can somewhat assess the quality based on the price they are paying.


Their RMA is actually pretty decent, from my experience, but yeah they really under-delivered on up this motherboard. I just hope that they release a revision B and for future AMD products, release a top tier board worthy of a flagship title.

I mean, yes, Ryzen is efficient, but flagship board means flagship VRM, flagship parts, and rapid BIOS updates.

To be fair, I do not believe those forum representatives actually work for MSI. If the board were 200, it would not be an issue, but right now, it's overpriced. That and they need an official forum with employees that work for MSI.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Btw as far as boards and pricing goes?
> 
> Titanium $300? Not worth it
> 
> Its competitors are far cheaper with equivalent quality or better.
> 
> Gaming 5 at like $190? Not worth it.
> 
> Its competitors are far cheaper with equivalent quality or better.
> 
> So theres objectivity for you...
> 
> Currently no mainstream is worth $190-200
> 
> Currently no top tier is worth $300


If they could fix the BIOS issues, the X370 Taichi might be the one to get. Very strong VRM and seems like a well put together board. There's a deal for the X370 Fata1ty Professional Gaming - same board only 250, with a 40 USD MIR so 210, but only if you write a review for Asrock. It has a 5 Gbps LAN and some Creative software.

Right now though, I"d sit back and wait. At least until the May patch that we are expecting from AMD to fix up the RAM. Otherwise, agree that there are no exceptional value boards.

It's also worth seeing who gets the most AGESA updates.

There is however, no fix for the boards that have subpar hardware. Only a revision B from MSI, which I've written to MSI's employees.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

I agree Chew, and I suspect most issues will be ironed out with BIOS updates. That could include odd voltage behaviors and a lot of various anomalies. Some things are just what they are and aren't likely to change or improve without board revisions.

We are ALL essentially Beta testers, not just of the BIOS for our given board, but for the design and build of the initial revision of our boards. Almost certainly, every single one of our boards will go through one or more revisions to address (hopefully) minor issues that cannot be fixed through software. They don't call it being on the "bleeding edge" for nothing.

Rather than dissing any make/model based on paper evaluations, at this point it would seem that identifying any under-performers would be of most value to many since the majority of X370 boards appear to be very well and most B350 seem to do better than expected. Once you can eliminate those that show real issues, the debate over which to recommend is much more subjective and really less critical - coming down to either elimination by features, price, or other criteria.


----------



## Artikbot

Worthiness is in the eyes of the beholder.

Judging what a board is worth just purely on theoretical overclocking capabilities without taking into account its feature set is nothing short off foolish.


----------



## yendor

Just need more rgb


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> And yet I have heard multiple complaints about the quality of the CH6 - headers easily getting pulled off the MB, the surface easily getting scratched such that the actual traces get damaged, etc. Your opinion would appear to be narrowly based on the VRMs, and you are welcome to it.
> 
> What I have issue with is people presenting this as fact. It simply isn't. If you build your systems once, are gentle with it, and rarely change components, are gentle with it and don't have any accidents, I doubt there would be much difference. If you intend to have it for a while and survive multiple upgrades and changes, I have yet to see another board better able to consistently withstand that without worry of issues than the Titanium. I've already explained why and provided citations as to why the differences matter.


I've used C6H since December and never had any issues with the three board I have. The only real issue I'm aware of was the corrupting EC firmware, eventhou none of my boards never got corrupted.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Let's get rid of the VRMs of the Titanium.
> They are definitely less efficient than other AM4 designs but since their cooling seems to be pretty good it doesn't really matter so the board is able to compete with e.g. a CH6 or a Taichi when it comes to overclocking. Are you all fine with that?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> prob not the greatest i'd say?
> 
> 
> 
> 70 to 80 degrees in stresstests aren't that bad @1,4V. I wouldn't care about those temps.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> I guess getting these pictures will force me to remount.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just take those pictures if it isn't a big deal for you.
> But if you're going to take some shots please do remove the heatsinks of the VRMs and make sure we're able to check even the smallest IC in the VRM, otherwise it wouldn't be worth.
Click to expand...

My cell phone camera sucks, and I can try and get more later but :



I thought they were supposed to be SM4336?

Sorry... This is by the I/O ... Not the low side I guess? I can get those another day, but I needed my machine for work for a bit.


----------



## cutterjohn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ah, Appeal to Authority...It's amusing we have come full circle. So, if I may ask, what exactly is their basis for this evaluation? What is it about being an overclocker that qualifies someone to make an overall assessment of value? Point to one source that claims the board is a "rip-off", or at least give a reason beyond blindly following what someone else tells you.


Face it. It's a ripoff. I took a look at ALL of the 'top' (and I use top loosely as NONE of them qualify as 'top' IMNHO) and was ASTOUNDED as the MSRP v. 'features'/design. Dropped that overpriced piece of junk right off my list w/o a second thought.

My PERSONAL list ended up:
#1 (tie) Taichi X370/Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming
#2 C6H which I 'pre-ordered' from amazon but got screwed by them.

I ended up making a 100m roundtrip to ucenter and picked up a fatal1ty that I had held. (I ALSO had a taichi held but decided on the way that even though I MUCH preferred the aesthetics of the Taichi, that I'd eventually find a 5Gbps ether port useful, probably sooner rather than later.

As to perf, it's pretty much exactly like the Taichi. I've an 1800X NOT OCed(waiting for a bit more BIOS stability, which I would ALSO be doing even w/C6H or ANY other board), and max 2667 on mem(a 2x8GB kit or a 2x16GB kit BOTH are G.skill. The 8GB are Samsung but apparently the 'E'-die (2t) and the 16GB are Hynix, also 2t so I thinking I'm NOT doing badly so far as I have NOT monkeyed with SoC OR RAM Voltages.

VRMs according to hwinfo 5.47b (& 5.50) have shown even under stress testing that they NEVER go about 42C(no CPU OC, as much 'OC' as I can get on RAM W/O monkeying w/Voltages).

That said, yes I do agree that VRMs on the better power design boards, e.g. c65, taichi, fatal1ty, etc. are probably overkill unless you're going nuts with LN2, and hell maybe even then.

So YES at the end of the day, the MSI Titanium IS a ripoff IMNHO. It offer EXACTLY NOTHING over it's competitors, and EVEN LESS than they do for $20-80+ more(taking into account ucenter 'sales', variation in etail prices, etc.). Simply put the Titanium is NOT even a $200 board. Personally, I'd consider it better suited in the GT7 price range which BTW I ALSO did consider along with the k7 when newegg was getting those in stock fairly regularly, but I decided to hold out for one of my top 3 choices.

BTW the fatal1ty was $220 from ucenter, the taichi would've been $200. i did NOT originally intend to make the ucenter trip OR I'd've likely just bought EVERYTHING from them again but locally(and online) they were the ONLY ones to consistently get some stock of at least the ASROCK, and Gigabyte boards. (Sounds like Frys is as well, but we have no Frys.) Additionally, anecdotally I understand that ucenter ALSO tends to have stock that they do NOT list online. I didn't check when I went as I just wanted a damned board, and to get back home and FINALLY turn a $1500+ pile of parts into a desktop. Admittedly, the 2x8GB mem, the eVGA PSU(1kW overkill but didn't know), and a few other things I had started purchasing quite some time ago in anticipation of building a new primary desktop this year as I was planning on building one BUT wanted to see if Ryzen was worth it, and well it was.

I am still bitterly disappointed with the lackluster 'high' end boards though, speaking of coming from an x79 ASUS board on my primary desktop. I AM REALLY hoping that the HEDT (hopefully Naples based) platforms are trues, as I find the paucity of PCIe lanes to be cramping ALREADY. [EDIT] AND I'm NOT really sold that dual channel memory is SUFFICIENT to feed an octacore CPU. [/EDIT]

[EDIT2]
I've NEVER had a mobo NOT survive 'multiple' upgrades over it's lifetime, and I'm the sort that tends to change GPUs, add memory, etc. over the years as I FULLY EXPECT a 'higher' end board to last at least 5y. The x79 has lasted something like 6, and realistically only because the perf increase on Intel HEDT has been pretty lackluster since Sandy Bridge.

Granted I' changed GPUs TWICE on the x79, and RAM probably 3 or 4 times, and I generally don't drop heavy sharp edged objects on mobos, so even the crappiest build quality board would work for me so long as it actually FUNCTIONED in the first place, however I suspect even what you would consider to be a poorer build 'quality' boards is damned well good enough if you have any sort of coordination, unless you're talking ECS, Maxsun or something like that, then ALL bets are off as they're usually just BAD all over.
[/EDIT2]


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cutterjohn*
> 
> Face it. It's a ripoff. I took a look at ALL of the 'top' (and I use top loosely as NONE of them qualify as 'top' IMNHO) and was ASTOUNDED as the MSRP v. 'features'/design. Dropped that overpriced piece of junk right off my list w/o a second thought.
> 
> {Meandering Diatribe redacted...}


Wow, thanks for the long winded worthless rant. It's enlightening learning how little people understand evaluating a product or about build quality. The fact you bought a 1kW PSU shows a high level level of ignorance of with regards to building a PC. PSU's have a non-linear performance curve and yours will have such a low load it will be wasting energy. This isn't your PSU, but it gives an idea:



So excuse me if I *completely* ignore your opinions...because you obviously aren't making *informed* decisions.


----------



## cutterjohn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Wow, thanks for the long winded worthless rant. It's enlightening learning how little people understand evaluating a product or about build quality. The fact you bought a 1kW PSU shows a high level level of ignorance of with regards to building a PC. PSU's have a non-linear performance curve and yours will have such a low load it will be wasting energy. This isn't your PSU, but it gives an idea:
> 
> So excuse me if I *completely* ignore your opinions...because you obviously aren't making *informed* decisions.


give it up oldtechgeezer. The board is feature poor, and has a relatively weak power design. I'm not going to bother arguing with you, as you are an ignorant fanboi evidently.

That said I have used boards from EVERY major mfg (ASUS, gigabyte, ASROCK, BIOSTAR, Clevo(notebook I would mention others but I have doubts wrt to some namebrand notebooks and the ODM of their mobos regardless of what's on the silk screening, e.g. aliebware USED to use Clevo boards, ASUS, Gigabyte & MSI use their own but HP? Dell? I suspect of contracting with ODMs kind of like Sager uses Clevo boards) RECENTLY) EXCEPTING MSI. Would you like to know why? Of course you don't since you INSIST on KEEPING your head STUCK FIRMLY in the sand. MSI boards have NOT been very good ever TBH AND they tend to be OVERPRICED to boot although admittedly for a while ASUS was approaching that OVERPRICING level but they seemed to have learnt their lesson and backed off.

As to the PSU, you completely ignorant idiot, I PURCHASED it at a point in time when I SUSPECTED the X79's PSU MIGHT be going. I DECIDED to KEEP it given that IF I went X99 or replacement that guess what you fool? The x79 is easily drawing c. 650W on a 800W PSU, my Ryzen with CURRENT components, easily 500+W max draw which will ONLY go UP. That YES INDEED I REALLY DO want a HIGH wattage PSU GIVEN the BASE POWER USAGE!

You seem to like accusing others of cherrypicking pot. FFS you are too argumentative to bother with.

[EDIT]
BTW IF I wanted the very MOST EFFICIENT BEST EVAR FSCKING PSU EVAR !'d FSCKING DESIGN and BUILD it MY FSCKING self FFS!
[/EDIT]


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Considering the C6H + Prey bundle has been selling for < 209€ (incl. 19% tax) in Europe, no AM4 motherboard should cost more than that.


I also happen to be living in Europe and those prices are nowhere to be found much less the standard/medium.

Cheapest in Portugal: 269,90€
Cheapest in Germany: 269€
Cheapest in Spain: 269€
Cheapest in Italy: 244,76€
(I ignore new sellers and market place sellers that charge no vat and give no invoice)

So where excaly do you find these Asus Crosshair VI Hero at sub-209 prices with tax?

You say 19% vat so it should be in one of these, Romania, Germany or Cyprus.

*Cheapest* I could find in Romania was 1230 LEI > 270 Eur, Germany was already covered... so that leaves Cyprus?

I also happend to have access to the supply chain prices (wave-computer, ingram, etc,) and the price you mention is lower than that (price stores buy at):
Without vat
Without store %

Look, I have worked in this business and I know discounts do happen from either Asus, or by client at the supply chain, quantitys etc. I understand that, but...

Still that price you said is far from the standard if it does indeed exist. And I'd like to know where for reference sake.?!

I wont even mention UK prices (brexit)..

I do consider the Asus to have a more adequate price than the MSI for the feature set. And the components on it are of better spec. No question. Same for the gigabyte, asrock. That was already established. This as far as the VRM components go. Nothing else.

If other components are to be looked at, I could say the cooling solution on the MSI is better and it should be more expensive for MSI to implement it vs other "cheaper" solutions.

I would also say the ASMedia ASM2142 used on the MSI is better(faster) and the one offered on the ASUS and gigabyte, and it is more expensive....

I would have to believe the MSI white coating/paint has a cost, a cost that should be higher than the standard "black" coat. This is a question of taste, but it does add cost.

Other components where already mentioned here (reinforcements and PCB)

Quality control does differ from brand to brand. Support also. And on this one plus and minus are to be had on every brand, from the 1 year asrock warranty, to the msi lack of direct support via the official forum, or from the Asus direct support.... where I live it sucks balls.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cutterjohn*
> 
> That said I have used boards from EVERY major mfg (ASUS, gigabyte, ASROCK, BIOSTAR, Clevo(notebook I would mention others but I have doubts wrt to some namebrand notebooks and the ODM of their mobos regardless of what's on the silk screening, e.g. aliebware USED to use Clevo boards, ASUS, Gigabyte & MSI use their own but HP? Dell? I suspect of contracting with ODMs kind of like Sager uses Clevo boards) RECENTLY) EXCEPTING MSI. Would you like to know why? Of course you don't since you INSIST on KEEPING your head STUCK FIRMLY in the sand. MSI boards have NOT been very good ever TBH AND they tend to be OVERPRICED to boot although admittedly for a while ASUS was approaching that OVERPRICING level but they seemed to have learnt their lesson and backed off.


In case you haven't realized, MSI made the most reliable ATX boards that ever existed about 5-6 years ago.

From a company who is known to produce really crappy low end boards, this is really hard to believe.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cutterjohn*
> 
> give it up oldtechgeezer. The board is feature poor, and has a relatively weak power design. I'm not going to bother arguing with you, as you are an ignorant fanboi evidently.
> 
> That said I have used boards from EVERY major mfg (ASUS, gigabyte, ASROCK, BIOSTAR, Clevo(notebook I would mention others but I have doubts wrt to some namebrand notebooks and the ODM of their mobos regardless of what's on the silk screening, e.g. aliebware USED to use Clevo boards, ASUS, Gigabyte & MSI use their own but HP? Dell? I suspect of contracting with ODMs kind of like Sager uses Clevo boards) RECENTLY) EXCEPTING MSI. Would you like to know why? Of course you don't since you INSIST on KEEPING your head STUCK FIRMLY in the sand. MSI boards have NOT been very good ever TBH AND they tend to be OVERPRICED to boot although admittedly for a while ASUS was approaching that OVERPRICING level but they seemed to have learnt their lesson and backed off.
> 
> As to the PSU, you completely ignorant idiot, I PURCHASED it at a point in time when I SUSPECTED the X79's PSU MIGHT be going. I DECIDED to KEEP it given that IF I went X99 or replacement that guess what you fool? The x79 is easily drawing c. 650W on a 800W PSU, my Ryzen with CURRENT components, easily 500+W max draw which will ONLY go UP. That YES INDEED I REALLY DO want a HIGH wattage PSU GIVEN the BASE POWER USAGE!
> 
> You seem to like accusing others of cherrypicking pot. FFS you are too argumentative to bother with.
> 
> [EDIT]
> BTW IF I wanted the very MOST EFFICIENT BEST EVAR FSCKING PSU EVAR !'d FSCKING DESIGN and BUILD it MY FSCKING self FFS!
> [/EDIT]


Ha! Wow, I am just so impressed...LOL. Since a decent X79 *system* idles at below 100w and *peaks at less than 300w and that is under stress testing with extreme overclocking*..you must have a special talent for building low-efficiency systems.

I have quad-socket, 24-core servers with over 384GB ram, and 16-drive 10k RPM raid-10 arrays running 7x24 production database servers that have smaller power supplies than that (750w - and only due to the number of drives - but it is a high-quality PSU meant for 7x24 service in a datacenter environment). Sorry, I engineer server builds for professional environments so all these people giving their opinion on what is "quality" with these consumer boards is amusing. The main difference is server equipment is designed to just work, and to do so for YEARS without flash or unnecessary features. They don't try to impress, but the quality is obvious in the attention to the little details. That is more my mindset, and that is what I look for. Asus and Gigabyte are simply disappointing. They phoned in those designs. ASRock was a bit better, but warranty was a concern (someone reported ASRock told them they offer a 3 year warranty, but that still isn't what their website says).

MSI boards used to be crap...that was a LONG time ago. Guess what, so were ASRock, and Biostar, and every other brand has released **** products. Don't try to play name games with me. I've been building systems from scratch since the the 286 days when if you needed an FPU you bought it separately. Supporting and working with systems before then, when if you wanted a real time clock you had add one, usually with an EMS memory expander card which could get you beyond 640KB of memory. Formatting your 20MB MFM drive (or 30MB RLL drive if you splurged) required a dos debug command. I've seen more than my share of quality and crap, and built more systems than I can count over the years - from basic to datacenter level.

Everything back then was expensive and well built. Even your "top quality" $200 boards are crap in comparison. The quality of components have improved in capabilities and reliability, but the *build* quality is just crap in comparison. They ad lots of flash and cheap "features" that make tweakers drool which I could give a rats ass about, and skimp on things that matter for longevity. The MSI board is one of the few solid, well-built boards. That's no guarantee it won't suffer a premature electronic failure - nothing can predict that for any individual board. But it will take a lot more abuse than any board you consider so great, and apparently perform better (based on benchmarks), OC just as high and maintain low temps. Is it expensive, yes. Overpriced? Maybe, but there's nothing else I could find as well built with the attention to details that matter for longevity. To call it "junk" is really just pure ignorance.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ha! Wow, I am just so impressed...LOL. Since a decent X79 *system* idles at below 100w and *peaks at less than 300w and that is under stress testing with extreme overclocking*..you must have a special talent for building low-efficiency systems.
> 
> I have quad-socket, 24-core servers with over 384GB ram, and 16-drive 10k RPM raid-10 arrays running 7x24 production database servers that have smaller power supplies than that (750w - and only due to the number of drives - but it is a high-quality PSU meant for 7x24 service in a datacenter environment). Sorry, I engineer server builds for professional environments so all these people giving their opinion on what is "quality" with these consumer boards is amusing. The main difference is server equipment is designed to just work, and to do so for YEARS without flash or unnecessary features. They don't try to impress, but the quality is obvious in the attention to the little details. That is more my mindset, and that is what I look for. Asus and Gigabyte are simply disappointing. They phoned in those designs. ASRock was a bit better, but warranty was a concern (someone reported ASRock told them they offer a 3 year warranty, but that still isn't what their website says).
> 
> MSI boards used to be crap...that was a LONG time ago. Guess what, so were ASRock, and Biostar, and every other brand has released **** products. *Don't try to play name games with me*. I've been building systems from scratch since the the 286 days when if you needed an FPU you bought it separately. Supporting and working with systems before then, when if you wanted a real time clock you had add one, usually with an EMS memory expander card which could get you beyond 640KB of memory. Formatting your 20MB MFM drive (or 30MB RLL drive if you splurged) required a dos debug command. I've seen more than my share of quality and crap, and built more systems than I can count over the years - from basic to datacenter level.
> 
> Everything back then was expensive and well built. Even your "top quality" $200 boards are crap in comparison. The quality of components have improved in capabilities and reliability, but the *build* quality is just crap in comparison. They ad lots of flash and cheap "features" that make tweakers drool which I could give a rats ass about, and skimp on things that matter for longevity. The MSI board is one of the few solid, well-built boards. That's no guarantee it won't suffer a premature electronic failure - nothing can predict that for any individual board. But it will take a lot more abuse than any board you consider so great, and apparently perform better (based on benchmarks), OC just as high and maintain low temps. Is it expensive, yes. Overpriced? Maybe, but there's nothing else I could find as well built with the attention to details that matter for longevity. To call it "junk" is really just pure ignorance.


But you've already played 'name games' in this very thread. Your primary objection to the GT7 is that it's made by Biostar, who possess a 'questionable reputation'. I responded that all board vendors have a questionable reputation at the low-end and advocated an objective and rational approach to evaluating X370 motherboards based on repeatable, testable metrics and measurements. Anybody who's been following this thread at all recognises your blatant fanboyism and questionable credibility; to wit, you've used the term 'Appeal to Authority' at least twice whilst doing the very same in the above-quoted post. In an informal environment, 'Appeal to Authority' is a practical necessity, lest the forum consist of nothing but whitepapers offered and rebutted with more whitepapers and no editorial.

Unless you've taken apart all of these boards piece by piece and sheared the PCB layer by layer, trying to quantify one above the others based on 'build quality' with precisely no measurement or metric is simply subjective analysis. That's fine, but not when your entire game in this thread has been to call others out for perceived logical shortcomings while holding yourself up as some impartial arbiter. I don't know you. The Stilt and chew* have reputations that precede them and I'll take their words at face-value until/unless they're directly contradicted by evidence. You've presented nothing to justify your dogmatic tone and you've offered nothing of value to those of us who have been in the many X370 threads with DMM's / flukes / IR putting forth numbers and data in repeatable testing.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Does it even matter? CH6, Game 5 and Titanium all seem to be very capable of any non-suicidal OC runs.


No, it doesn't.


----------



## SteelBox

What is the VRM temperature of B350 gaming 3 in idle and load? I plan to use this board with R5 1600 for the next 5+ years. Will I be ok with stabillity and durabillity?


----------



## yendor

It depends on the overclock, the steep hump ryzen processors show once they leave their sweet spot will psu the temps up. But so far of the voltage for the oc is on the very rough order of 1.3x none of the b350's seems seems likely to overheat vrms with decent heatsink and airflow.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> I also happen to be living in Europe and those prices are nowhere to be found much less the standard/medium.
> 
> Cheapest in Portugal: 269,90€
> Cheapest in Germany: 269€
> Cheapest in Spain: 269€
> Cheapest in Italy: 244,76€
> (I ignore new sellers and market place sellers that charge no vat and give no invoice)
> 
> So where excaly do you find these Asus Crosshair VI Hero at sub-209 prices with tax?
> 
> You say 19% vat so it should be in one of these, Romania, Germany or Cyprus.
> 
> *Cheapest* I could find in Romania was 1230 LEI > 270 Eur, Germany was already covered... so that leaves Cyprus?
> 
> I also happend to have access to the supply chain prices (wave-computer, ingram, etc,) and the price you mention is lower than that (price stores buy at):
> Without vat
> Without store %
> 
> Look, I have worked in this business and I know discounts do happen from either Asus, or by client at the supply chain, quantitys etc. I understand that, but...
> 
> Still that price you said is far from the standard if it does indeed exist. And I'd like to know where for reference sake.?!
> 
> I wont even mention UK prices (brexit)..
> 
> I do consider the Asus to have a more adequate price than the MSI for the feature set. And the components on it are of better spec. No question. Same for the gigabyte, asrock. That was already established. This as far as the VRM components go. Nothing else.
> 
> If other components are to be looked at, I could say the cooling solution on the MSI is better and it should be more expensive for MSI to implement it vs other "cheaper" solutions.
> 
> I would also say the ASMedia ASM2142 used on the MSI is better(faster) and the one offered on the ASUS and gigabyte, and it is more expensive....
> 
> I would have to believe the MSI white coating/paint has a cost, a cost that should be higher than the standard "black" coat. This is a question of taste, but it does add cost.
> 
> Other components where already mentioned here (reinforcements and PCB)
> 
> Quality control does differ from brand to brand. Support also. And on this one plus and minus are to be had on every brand, from the 1 year asrock warranty, to the msi lack of direct support via the official forum, or from the Asus direct support.... where I live it sucks balls.


Mindfactory.de sold the board (including a free Prey) for 208.95€ at least until last Sunday.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> I thought they were supposed to be SM4336?


Yeah there are SM4337 as highside and SM4336 as lowside.
Thanks for the pics!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteelBox*
> 
> What is the VRM temperature of B350 gaming 3 in idle and load? I plan to use this board with R5 1600 for the next 5+ years. Will I be ok with stabillity and durabillity?


Search for posts of the TO in this thread.


----------



## SteelBox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Search for posts of the TO in this thread.


TO is the author name??


----------



## br0da

Nighthog is the authors name.
-> http://www.overclock.net/newsearch/?search=&resultSortingPreference=relevance&byuser=Nighthog&output=posts&sdate=0&newer=1&type=all&containingthread%5B0%5D=1624051&advanced=1
There are lots of impressions from him.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> But you've already played 'name games' in this very thread. Your primary objection to the GT7 is that it's made by Biostar, who possess a 'questionable reputation'. I responded that all board vendors have a questionable reputation at the low-end and advocated an objective and rational approach to evaluating X370 motherboards based on repeatable, testable metrics and measurements. Anybody who's been following this thread at all recognises your blatant fanboyism and questionable credibility; to wit, you've used the term 'Appeal to Authority' at least twice whilst doing the very same in the above-quoted post. In an informal environment, 'Appeal to Authority' is a practical necessity, lest the forum consist of nothing but whitepapers offered and rebutted with more whitepapers and no editorial.
> 
> Unless you've taken apart all of these boards piece by piece and sheared the PCB layer by layer, trying to quantify one above the others based on 'build quality' with precisely no measurement or metric is simply subjective analysis. That's fine, but not when your entire game in this thread has been to call others out for perceived logical shortcomings while holding yourself up as some impartial arbiter. I don't know you. The Stilt and chew* have reputations that precede them and I'll take their words at face-value until/unless they're directly contradicted by evidence. You've presented nothing to justify your dogmatic tone and you've offered nothing of value to those of us who have been in the many X370 threads with DMM's / flukes / IR putting forth numbers and data in repeatable testing.


No, that isn't a "name game". I wasn't dropping a bunch of brands to claim some superior experience in making a judgement. I was quite clear in expressing a concern based on widespread perceptions. Also, Biostar doesn't rank in the top four MB manufacturers as far as low-RMA percentages. Asus. Gigabyte, MSI, and ASRock all have RMA stats within 0.5% of each other and all are <3%. No available data for Biostar I could find. That could be due to volume, or due to issues. Either way, available data is lacking or inconsistent.

However, even giving that I made no absolute proclamations calling it "junk". I made no *absolute* judgements. I simply noted a cautionary recommendation that _Biostar appears to be making more of a push towards building quality high end boards; that this model looked good but reliability *could* be a question mark_. If you pay attention, That is NOT a direct evaluation of the board. It's not praise, but hardly damning.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I simply noted a cautionary recommendation that _Biostar appears to be making more of a push towards building quality high end boards; that this model looked good but reliability *could* be a question mark_. If you pay attention, That is NOT a direct evaluation of the board. It's not praise, but hardly damning.


You're encouraging FUD with little basis if any in fact.

Budget boards now. they all have corner's cut to improve the bottom line and that's true for all vendors where it's buyer beware. . Notorious failures? Can't find any.
1700 at 4.3 on air? Still a happy chip at a more conservative clock. hmm, interesting. on their 'official' facebook biostar page. Didn't validate it manually. Pity, would have been nice to see up there.


----------



## zeneffect

Biostar x370gt7, higher quality components than say... Msi

http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/pb-ir3555.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a40153567fd3ac28d3


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zeneffect*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biostar x370gt7, higher quality components than say... Msi
> 
> http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/pb-ir3555.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a40153567fd3ac28d3


Heh...maybe gigabyte will drop there 3553 now and upgrade....


----------



## PsyM4n

"Higher Quality" components... As if most people who posted so far know what defines such a thing.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> "Higher Quality" components... As if most people who posted so far know what defines such a thing.


While that may be true there is no denying IR 3555 is better quality than other choices and shall we say better capacity handling than say IR 3553...


----------



## helioNz4R

The K5 is already out in Japan: http://www.gdm.or.jp/crew/2017/0407/202567

Meanwhile still no info on availability in EU/US, im torn between just getting the X370 Prime or waiting it out and getting the K5. Man, this sucks. If the Gigabyte rep reads this and has any info on the matter, please shed some light on the situation.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *helioNz4R*
> 
> The K5 is already out in Japan: http://www.gdm.or.jp/crew/2017/0407/202567
> 
> Meanwhile still no info on availability in EU/US, im torn between just getting the X370 Prime or waiting it out and getting the K5. Man, this sucks. If the Gigabyte rep reads this and has any info on the matter, please shed some light on the situation.


Same layout as k3 gaming pwm.

I will go out on a limb and say we will not be impressed by whats under "the hood"


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> While that may be true there is no denying IR 3555 is better quality than other choices and shall we say better capacity handling than say IR 3553...


Is it better quality? In what terms?

As for power output, from a point onwards power increases are making zero difference and in most cases, the said point is pretty low.


----------



## zeneffect

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Is it better quality? In what terms?
> 
> As for power output, from a point onwards power increases are making zero difference and in most cases, the said point is pretty low.


from a power output, from a point onwards power increases make a difference so long as you bring temperatures in line. for us that actually overclock sub zero, vrm choice can make or break a record.

also higher amperage carrying capacity at same thermal limit usually indicates that they run cooler as well. which in testing, they do.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zeneffect*
> 
> from a power output, from a point onwards power increases make a difference so long as you bring temperatures in line. for us that actually overclock sub zero, vrm choice can make or break a record.
> 
> also higher amperage carrying capacity at same thermal limit usually indicates that they run cooler as well. which in testing, they do.


Yeah, right. A vrm that outputs like ~700 watts, with its highest efficiency being reached at ~450 watts, with its power coming from an eps connector that is meant to give less than 350 watts, on cpus that draw like ~300 watts max at extreme cooling scenarios (ln2, phase), is actually far less useful than a weaker vrm that just happens to reach its peak at around the same point your processor reaches its limitations.

There's a reason why seemingly "stronger" vrms are less competitive than relatively "weaker" vrms in regards to overclocking records and the likes. The top spots are usually reserved for cpu/ram/mobo combinations that just happen to have properties that positively affect each other and just end up "working".


----------



## chew*

Sometimes amperage capability > watts.

Not always the case thus the "sometimes"

Zens biostar gt7 has proven its worth in overclockability thus far however...especially on 1700x which i suspect is AMD's dumping grounds for crappy r7's 90w chips.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Sometimes amperage capability > watts.
> 
> Not always the case thus the "sometimes"


Yeah, when the vrm tdp is too high for the cooling system or when the amperage is specified for different voltage, etc.

There are too many variables. A very powerful vrm is no better than a very weak vrm in pro o/c scenarios. What you want is balance... that is different for each processor.

Essentially, you want both a "golden chip" processor and a board that just happens to peak at the same relative point as the processor, so that you can pull those few mhz that make the difference.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Yeah, when the vrm tdp is too high for the cooling system or when the amperage is specified for different voltage, etc.
> 
> There are too many variables. A very powerful vrm is no better than a very weak vrm in pro o/c scenarios. What you want is balance... that is different for each processor.
> 
> Essentially, you want both a "golden chip" processor and a board that just happens to peak at the same relative point as the processor, so that you can pull those few mhz that make the difference.


Absolutely.

Even on air with same hardware combos just swapping boards i am seeing vast differences.

One could say that one board may have better electrical properties suited towards my cpu and memory versus another board.

Perfect example is my taichi. Memory/imc wise its killer. Cpu oc wise i have not pinned down my issue yet.

Still looking into it and need to swap backplate....weird backplate can not check socket voltage....its blocked.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Absolutely.
> 
> Even on air with same hardware combos just swapping boards i am seeing vast differences.
> 
> One could say that one board may have better electrical properties suited towards my cpu and memory versus another board.


Yeah. That's why you see boards performing better with cpu lines of different properties (tdp, voltage range, cores, etc) while performing worse if any of the above properties change.
At the same time, other boards that previously had worse results, do better when any of these properties change.


----------



## Raephen

I went ahead and ordered a MSI B350M Mortar. I'll be ordering a Ryzen 5 in the next few weeks (probably the 1600X).

Here's some shots of the VRM's:




And the whole board:



To my surpirse, the main VRM heatsink is attached by phillips-head screws... Being a budget board, I half expected push-pins. If there is is interest in those VRM chips, I could always take a pic of those.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raephen*
> 
> I went ahead and ordered a MSI B350M Mortar. I'll be ordering a Ryzen 5 in the next few weeks (probably the 1600X).
> 
> Here's some shots of the VRM's
> If there is is interest in those VRM chips, I could always take a pic of those.


Probably all On semi like other b350


----------



## Raephen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Probably all On semi like other b350


"All on semi"?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Probably all On semi like other b350


Br0da loves pics. May already have. His vrm list has the mortar with RT8894A controller and PK616BA highside , 2 PK632BA on the low.

There've been a few motherboard models that have used different components. One mobo, escapes my memory at the moment, seems to be using at least two different sets of fets.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raephen*
> 
> I went ahead and ordered a MSI B350M Mortar. I'll be ordering a Ryzen 5 in the next few weeks (probably the 1600X).
> 
> Here's some shots of the VRM's:
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3004282/width/350/height/700
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3004284/width/350/height/700
> 
> And the whole board:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3004286/width/350/height/700
> 
> To my surpirse, the main VRM heatsink is attached by phillips-head screws... Being a budget board, I half expected push-pins. If there is is interest in those VRM chips, I could always take a pic of those.


It'd be a decent mATX board for the money if they changed the I/O to include USB 3.1 Gen 2 , possibly added some shielding onto the audio (ALC892), and ditched DVI-D (this is probably kept in similar fashion to how other manufacturers kept VGA port). The Realtek LAN is a fairly reasonable compromise for B350 , it isn't a huge deal. Given the lackluster mATX options it's a solid choice however.

That looks to confirm br0da's list with PK616BA highside and PK632BA lowside.

The side you uncovered appears to be the SOC side. The CPU VRM side should have a doubled low side,
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Br0da loves pics. May already have. His vrm list has the mortar with RT8894A controller and PK616BA highside , 2 PK632BA on the low.
> 
> There've been a few motherboard models that have used different components. One mobo, escapes my memory at the moment, seems to be using at least two different sets of fets.


It's the Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 & Killer SLI . Uses a Sinopower SM4336+SM4337 OR NIKOS PK618BA lowside + unnamed mosfet high side.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raephen*
> 
> "All on semi"?


Ignore me my minds a bit distracted for the time being. Had to put my dog down so...mind is in the gutter atm..


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Raephen*
> 
> I went ahead and ordered a MSI B350M Mortar. I'll be ordering a Ryzen 5 in the next few weeks (probably the 1600X).
> 
> Here's some shots of the VRM's:
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3004282/width/350/height/700
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3004284/width/350/height/700
> 
> And the whole board:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3004286/width/350/height/700
> 
> To my surpirse, the main VRM heatsink is attached by phillips-head screws... Being a budget board, I half expected push-pins. If there is is interest in those VRM chips, I could always take a pic of those.
> 
> 
> 
> It'd be a decent mATX board for the money if they changed the I/O to include USB 3.1 Gen 2 , possibly added some shielding onto the audio (ALC892), and ditched DVI-D (this is probably kept in similar fashion to how other manufacturers kept VGA port). The Realtek LAN is a fairly reasonable compromise for B350 , it isn't a huge deal. Given the lackluster mATX options it's a solid choice however.
> 
> That looks to confirm br0da's list with PK616BA highside and PK632BA lowside.
> 
> The side you uncovered appears to be the SOC side. The CPU VRM side should have a doubled low side,
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Br0da loves pics. May already have. His vrm list has the mortar with RT8894A controller and PK616BA highside , 2 PK632BA on the low.
> 
> There've been a few motherboard models that have used different components. One mobo, escapes my memory at the moment, seems to be using at least two different sets of fets.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's the Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 & Killer SLI . Uses a Sinopower SM4336+SM4337 OR NIKOS PK618BA lowside + unnamed mosfet high side.
Click to expand...

My awesome Killer has the Sinopowers - both of my K4s have the Sinos as well - I wonder how many actually had the Nikos?


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ignore me my minds a bit distracted for the time being. Had to put my dog down so...mind is in the gutter atm..


We''re sorry for your loss


----------



## Raephen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ignore me my minds a bit distracted for the time being. Had to put my dog down so...mind is in the gutter atm..


I hear you, man. A few years back I was confronted by the same choice: have one of my best friends "go to sleep", or have her suffer on for who knows how long. I still miss her to this day, and even thinking about her brings tears to my eyes.

Take care, Chew.


----------



## realtomatoes

gents,

given what we know of the mobo vrms quality and the price gouging i see from my local stores (prices below), might i ask if the asus prime x370 pro is the best value if the goal is a 3.9-4.0ghz daily driver?
i'm cooling the r7 and gpu with a custom loop, with a radiator on top to pull out hot air. not sure if that helps much with cooling the vrm though.
taichi is what i got my eye on but asrock isn't in the market yet and rep isn't sure if or when they are coming.

local prices:
Asus Prime X370 Pro $196.85
Asus ROG Crosshair 6 Hero $341.90
MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium $326.56
Gigabyte Aorus AX370 Gaming 5 $237.10
Gigabyte Aorus AX370 Gaming K7 $264.99


----------



## PsyM4n

Yeah, the asus prime is the better deal there.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> gents,
> 
> given what we know of the mobo vrms quality and the price gouging i see from my local stores (prices below), might i ask if the asus prime x370 pro is the best value if the goal is a 3.9-4.0ghz daily driver?
> i'm cooling the r7 and gpu with a custom loop, with a radiator on top to pull out hot air. not sure if that helps much with cooling the vrm though.
> taichi is what i got my eye on but asrock isn't in the market yet and rep isn't sure if or when they are coming.
> 
> local prices:
> Asus Prime X370 Pro $196.85
> Asus ROG Crosshair 6 Hero $341.90
> MSI X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium $326.56
> Gigabyte Aorus AX370 Gaming 5 $237.10
> Gigabyte Aorus AX370 Gaming K7 $264.99


Holy hell where do you live? All those prices seem outrageous.

I think best advice here is to wait for price gouging to subside...


----------



## realtomatoes

south east asia.
generally, distributors and retailers got a $30-50 mark up on pretty much anything they sell here. it gets worst for premium parts like the 1080Ti reference cards, that sells for $843.37.

yeah, am not in a hurry with those prices.


----------



## Karagra

Asus Ch6 Beta bios has done some amazing things.
I honestly think I could push the frequency higher


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> Asus Ch6 Beta bios has done some amazing things.
> I honestly think I could push the frequency higher


Is that fully stable? Which RAM kit are you using?


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Wow, thanks for the long winded worthless rant. It's enlightening learning how little people understand evaluating a product or about build quality. The fact you bought a 1kW PSU shows a high level level of ignorance of with regards to building a PC. PSU's have a non-linear performance curve and yours will have such a low load it will be wasting energy. This isn't your PSU, but it gives an idea:
> 
> 
> 
> So excuse me if I *completely* ignore your opinions...because you obviously aren't making *informed* decisions.


Ok then argue with this

http://www.fsplifestyle.com/PROP162000377/


That's my PSU btw


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Wow, thanks for the long winded worthless rant. It's enlightening learning how little people understand evaluating a product or about build quality. The fact you bought a 1kW PSU shows a high level level of ignorance of with regards to building a PC. PSU's have a non-linear performance curve and yours will have such a low load it will be wasting energy. This isn't your PSU, but it gives an idea:
> 
> 
> 
> So excuse me if I *completely* ignore your opinions...because you obviously aren't making *informed* decisions.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok then argue with this
> 
> http://www.fsplifestyle.com/PROP162000377/
> 
> 
> That's my PSU btw
Click to expand...

don't worry... you'll be wrong


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> You're encouraging FUD with little basis if any in fact.
> 
> Budget boards now. they all have corner's cut to improve the bottom line and that's true for all vendors where it's buyer beware. . Notorious failures? Can't find any.
> 1700 at 4.3 on air? Still a happy chip at a more conservative clock. hmm, interesting. on their 'official' facebook biostar page. Didn't validate it manually. Pity, would have been nice to see up there.


Fine, I will put it simply - Biostar has not publicly released RMA statistics to date. *Based on available statistics*, ASUS, MSI, ASRock, and Gigabyte (in no specific order) will be more reliable.

You can find reported stats for the aforementioned 4 vendors. If you can find any contrsdictory data on BIOSTAR, then please post it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> Ok then argue with this
> 
> http://www.fsplifestyle.com/PROP162000377/
> 
> 
> That's my PSU btw


That is a very high quality PSU. . Still overkill, but I could see a reason to buy a PSU like that a couple of years ago. Power usage trending hadn't really started to fall, so this would give efficiency and future proof you.

http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story6&reid=398

(anyone looking for a *GOOD* PSU should be checking JohnnyGuru before buying)

If I was looking today, I would only really consider a PSU like this (1200w) for a server (something like a large NAS server) where it may sit idle for a while but spinning up all disks would create a surge in power need (you maintain efficiency on both ends). A PSU like this would be perfect for a build like that. But the 850W would be hard to argue against given it's efficiency and 7 year warranty.


----------



## SuperZan

If you're referring to the ubiquitous Hardware.fr report, it's not a case of manufacturers releasing statistics, it's a compilation prepared by a French hardware retailer. That's why, for example, EVGA doesn't show up for consistently for VGA RMA numbers.

"More about the Hardware.fr report

Hardware.fr is part of LDLC, the largest seller of computer components in France. Every six months, Hardware.fr compiles LDLC's return merchandise authorization (RMA) statistics, and publishes the results - providing an independent assessment of reliability levels among the world's leading technology-hardware brands."


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> If you're referring to the ubiquitous Hardware.fr report, it's not a case of manufacturers releasing statistics, it's a compilation prepared by a French hardware retailer. That's why, for example, EVGA doesn't show up for consistently for VGA RMA numbers.
> 
> "More about the Hardware.fr report
> 
> Hardware.fr is part of LDLC, the largest seller of computer components in France. Every six months, Hardware.fr compiles LDLC's return merchandise authorization (RMA) statistics, and publishes the results - providing an independent assessment of reliability levels among the world's leading technology-hardware brands."


That is only one. There are some other reports online, but they tend to be older (and sources not always clearly sited). The volume used in the Hardware.fr is too small in my opinion to be a reliable guide. A couple of hundred units is pretty insignificant. From some posts I could find, it appears there are internal industry reports available but those are restricted (NDA's).

There are also reviews on NewEgg, Amazon, etc. But again, I take those with a grain of salt because people are more likely to complain than to praise, and they can also be VERY subjective. Your MB isn't scoring that high right now on NewEgg, but when I read the specifics only a couple seemed to be real issues. Most were subjective complaints about the BIOS or compatibility and I throw those out as those can apply to ANY AM4 board right now.

I'm really not trying to be biased. There are a lot of people posting who really LOVE their Biostar boards (not AM4-specific, just from general searches), and many others who swear they are not good. I can't find any statistics that are viable one way or the other, so I suspect the truth is somewhere in-between. They probably make a lot of very good boards, and probably had issues at one time or another with some of their models.

Same can be said of MSI. Seems MSI had issues with their Z170A line of boards, but that data is from Hardware.fr, which I already gave my opinion on. Sample size is a bit small, but the numbers still jumped out. But those boards used "better" VRMs, which again begs the question as to how much of an impact just the VRMs have on reliability. All X99 boards as well as AMD 990 boards had higher than average failure rates and those aren't cheap boards. So this does beg the question as to whether there is any practical way to gauge reliability on a new MB short of waiting until they have been out a year or so...it really doesn't seem like brand, VRMs, or anything else is very suitable as a *predictor* of reliability as a number of "quality" brands/models have succumb to higher than normal failure rates.

If Ryzen had come out a few years ago, Biostar probably would have landed on my short list. It's hard to deny the value they offer. I had bought MSI and ECS boards years ago when they were up-and-coming and less well known. My criteria was just different this time around.


----------



## yendor

Problem is that citing any statistics that have 0 data about a product line and stating the ones that enjoy the luxury of available data are going to be more reliable. ..







continues to add to the FUD.
Internet searches will turn up yet another, unjustified!, negative hit on their reliability. From THIS thread.


----------



## SuperZan

Empirically, going only from my own experiences and those that I've witnessed and verified first-hand, they've always had trouble at the low-end... like every other vendor. They've just happened to sell loads of low-end boards relative to their total sales because they've generally only had a few models in the performance space per socket. However, their 'best' products have, again: empirically, been quite good. Reviews and consumer complaints tend to tell the same tale. No hard, conclusive numbers to back it up, unfortunately, but if they were truly a trainwreck far beyond the big-name vendors based on the industry-available numbers I doubt that AMD would sell them licenses for their highest-end chipsets.

What I'm saying is that it's very easy to build a mountain out of a molehill on the internet and that's what happens very often with less popular brands. All of the vendors struggle to make reliable £50 motherboards. All of the vendors generally make reliable £200 motherboards (obvious exceptions exist in both cases, AM3+ was a major source of outliers). I've probably bought about 80 motherboards over the past few years at both extremes and my pitifully small sample-size and admittedly subjective empirical experiences shape my purchasing decisions where solid statistics are unavailable. My past experiences with motherboards towards the top of Biostar's ranges made me much less wary of taking a shot with the GT7, especially seeing as it's in use by known professional overclockers who will find a glaring hardware weakness quickly and decisively. The components checked out, it passed the extreme-overclocker taste test, and the most recent high-end motherboards by Biostar on the Intel side have been well-reviewed. It wasn't the certainty of maths, but buying the GT7 was far from flying blind.


----------



## chew*

Ok so weeded through the taichi stability issues. I am fairly certain i found the culprit.

For a 1.40 set in bios 1.40 measured at socket overclock your going to want llc lvl 1.....

Apparently on 1.94a the tables are literally backwards....lvl 5 delivers the least voltage...1.36v @ socket.

Lvl 3 1.38v @ socket...

Seems they have it 100% backwards...

For soc 1.062 lvl 1 llc = measured 1.050 at socket.

Hope this helps....

This proves yet again only socket matters


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok so weeded through the taichi stability issues. I am fairly certain i found the culprit.
> 
> For a 1.40 set in bios 1.40 measured at socket overclock your going to want llc lvl 1.....
> 
> Apparently on 1.94a the tables are literally backwards....lvl 5 delivers the least voltage...1.36v @ socket.
> 
> Lvl 3 1.38v @ socket...
> 
> Seems they have it 100% backwards...
> 
> For soc 1.062 lvl 1 llc = measured 1.050 at socket.
> 
> Hope this helps....
> 
> This proves yet again only socket matters


I think Asrock considers that a " feature"


----------



## chew*

Would be nice if they sent me the memo lol...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Would be nice if they sent me the memo lol...


You surely aren't the first one to be taken by surprise by that - the Vishera thread would have a confused Asrock user drop every so often.

Socket temps seemed to plague the Asrock 990 boards - the only one I have any experience with was the Extreme 3 . Which has been a good board but it really didn't have much business pushing 6 or 8 core chips very hard. Bios was fine but the LLC was terribly heavy handed and it was a very warm running board.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> You surely aren't the first one to be taken by surprise by that - the Vishera thread would have a confused Asrock user drop every so often.
> 
> Socket temps seemed to plague the Asrock 990 boards - the only one I have any experience with was the Extreme 3 . Which has been a good board but it really didn't have much business pushing 6 or 8 core chips very hard. Bios was fine but the LLC was terribly heavy handed and it was a very warm running board.


Socket lever when clamped with a cpu in it did not feel as "firm". I can check brand to compare later. Plenty of boards here.

Vrm temps are stellar @ 1.40 sub 60...more on low side of 50s...

Of course i do not believe software so take that with a huge grain of salt.

So far i can not complain and now that i have llc sorted 1 hour plus in at 3900 which is min OC expected from this cpu....max is 3950....woopy doo lol.

You get idea though. It's hitting target i expect all boards to hit @1.40....and doing so with 32g @ 3200 14-14-8-14-34.

That certainly counts for something as i fully expected dual rank 32g to cost a hit in cpu speed...


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok so weeded through the taichi stability issues. I am fairly certain i found the culprit.
> 
> For a 1.40 set in bios 1.40 measured at socket overclock your going to want llc lvl 1.....
> 
> Apparently on 1.94a the tables are literally backwards....lvl 5 delivers the least voltage...1.36v @ socket.
> 
> Lvl 3 1.38v @ socket...
> 
> Seems they have it 100% backwards...
> 
> For soc 1.062 lvl 1 llc = measured 1.050 at socket.
> 
> Hope this helps....
> 
> This proves yet again only socket matters


The graph at the right hand side of BIOs suggests the LLC level 5 has the greatest droop. At least that's what I saw in the Level1Techs review.


----------



## chew*

Lol...its there...never even paid it any attention..


----------



## bardacuda

Did some quick and dirty tests @ 1.350, LLC Level 1, on the ASUS Prime X370-Pro. The tests were 5 runs IBT (30 mins) @ Max (13890MB), and 20 mins of Prime 95 @ 512/1024 FFT, 12288MB

BIOS 0515 Settings:
- CPU: 3800MHz (152 FID / 8 DID) @ 1.350V
- LLC: Level 1 VCore, Level 1 VSoC
- RAM: 2400MHz 12-12-12-32 @ 1.25V
- Everything else: Auto

21°C ambient room temperature. 82W total system draw at the wall @ idle (Cool n' Quiet not working).
System specs in signature.

IBT run:
- Speed: 170GFlops
- Total system draw: 258W
- CPU: 61.3°C, VRM: 54°C, Chokes: 72°C
- VRM heatsink is midly warm to the touch but not at all uncomfortable (too reflective to get a good reading with IR thermometer I think)

Pics:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Pic of system to get an idea of cooling:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Choke Temps:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







VRM Temps:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







HWiNFO:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!










I moved the thermometer around looking for the hottest spots during the hottest part of the run, and that's what I put as the choke temps and tried to capture in the pics.


----------



## chew*

Exactly what i said. Preety warm chokes


----------



## bardacuda

What are safe temps for the chokes anyway? Is it comparable to the fets? Any spec sheets? Seems like choke temp is going to be the limiting factor in my OCing (without modding on a heatsink anyway).


----------



## chew*

I dont think it matters. They are just copper coils encased in a ceramic so you don't hear them scream under load.

I think heat generated is from vibration but i skipped electrical engineering 101...

Maybe someone more qualified can confuse us average guys better.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I dont think it matters. They are just copper coils encased in a ceramic so you don't hear them scream under load.
> 
> I think heat generated is from vibration but i skipped electrical engineering 101...
> 
> Maybe someone more qualified can confuse us average guys better.


Heat generation would be a result of resistance in the copper wire itself, granted copper is a pretty good conductor but it will still generate heat as electricity passes through it.


----------



## bardacuda

Ah ok so they themselves are probably not going to fail from heat (it's just a copper coil with a ferrous core inside ceramic), but the heat they transfer to other components in nearby circuitry is the problem. In that case I'll just try to keep em under 85.

EDIT: I derped out in my testing and was using too much RAM in IBT. I forgot about the quirks of running a linpack test.

IBT run:
- Speed: 170 179GFlops
- Total system draw: 258 265W
- CPU: 61.3 62.8°C, VRM: 54 56°C, Chokes: 72 76°C

Screencap:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## chew*

ok I am finally satisfied with the board enough to give it a big thumbs up.

Cpu ocs decent.

Memory ocs very good.

Capacity of memory with an oc on memory while overclocked is pretty stellar.

Runs very cool.










Couple complaints....lose wifi with this ref clock... ( i have a usb wifi in working fine )

No clue if 3d is realistic at this ref clock yet...but that pretty much applies to any ref clock of 120....

Workstation wise if no graphics needed...man this thing is going to rip..


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> ok I am finally satisfied with the board enough to give it a big thumbs up.
> 
> Cpu ocs decent.
> 
> Memory ocs very good.
> 
> Capacity of memory with an oc on memory while overclocked is pretty stellar.
> 
> Runs very cool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couple complaints....lose wifi with this ref clock... ( i have a usb wifi in working fine )
> 
> No clue if 3d is realistic at this ref clock yet...but that pretty much applies to any ref clock of 120....
> 
> Workstation wise if no graphics needed...man this thing is going to rip..


as amazing as that is - I'm not sure I'm aware of any modern workstation apps that could really make use of this power - and NOT need decent 3d accelerator of some type.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> as amazing as that is - I'm not sure I'm aware of any modern workstation apps that could really make use of this power - and NOT need decent 3d accelerator of some type.


Well then I guess this is a good thing then.

I ripped my launch day review results in some 3d benchmarks and ran a comparison at these settings on this board.

Looks like this board is turning out to be a real winner. Gonna loop prime and heaven combined all night now see how it holds up......


----------



## oc99aa

*Greetings to all of you*

*We want a list to determine which motherboard is best for overclocing, features, stability with high voltage

X370 = $ 120-200

B350 70-120 $

We want everyone to share any name*


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> as amazing as that is - I'm not sure I'm aware of any modern workstation apps that could really make use of this power - and NOT need decent 3d accelerator of some type.
> 
> 
> 
> Well then I guess this is a good thing then.
> 
> I ripped my launch day review results in some 3d benchmarks and ran a comparison at these settings on this board.
> 
> Looks like this board is turning out to be a real winner. Gonna loop prime and heaven combined all night now see how it holds up......
Click to expand...

damn bro - this is the board I've been wanting; but had to make due with the Killer (don't get me wrong, there is nothing about my Killer that is bad, or that I can even really "dislike")
i might get a taichi sooner or later.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> damn bro - this is the board I've been wanting; but had to make due with the Killer (don't get me wrong, there is nothing about my Killer that is bad, or that I can even really "dislike")
> i might get a taichi sooner or later.


Figured you might like this...

https://youtu.be/aXHlTMKyse8


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> damn bro - this is the board I've been wanting; but had to make due with the Killer (don't get me wrong, there is nothing about my Killer that is bad, or that I can even really "dislike")
> i might get a taichi sooner or later.
> 
> 
> 
> Figured you might like this...
> 
> https://youtu.be/aXHlTMKyse8
Click to expand...

there are words I want to say - but all of them end with : I want. good job.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *oc99aa*
> 
> *Greetings to all of you*
> 
> *We want a list to determine which motherboard is best for overclocing, features, stability with high voltage
> 
> X370 = $ 120-200
> 
> B350 70-120 $
> 
> We want everyone to share any name*


At that price range for X370: Asrock Taichi, Gigabyte Gaming 5, Biostar GT7, ASUS Prime Pro.

I haven't had any experience with B350.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Figured you might like this...
> 
> https://youtu.be/aXHlTMKyse8


I'm at a loss of words as to how awesome that is.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> there are words I want to say - but all of them end with : I want. good job.


Np. Sometimes you need to see to believe. I will never ever misrepresent a product. It either works or it doesn't. But sometimes you just need to see it for yourself


----------



## DADDYDC650

TechPowerUp gave the Taichi a perfect 10/10.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASRock/X370_Taichi/


----------



## Karagra

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> TechPowerUp gave the Taichi a perfect 10/10.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASRock/X370_Taichi/


Did you notice they kept the Asus CH6 out of the benchmarks.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> Did you notice they kept the Asus CH6 out of the benchmarks.


Probably because they have yet to review the Asus CH6.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Probably because they have yet to review the Asus CH6.


Techpowerup did not test wifi with refclock then.

That is a 9/10 imo. No perfect 10 board imo. Can't find something wrong with any board you either are not trying hard enough or not doing your job right.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Techpowerup did not test wifi with refclock then.
> 
> That is a 9/10 imo. No perfect 10 board imo. Can't find something wrong with any board you either are not trying hard enough or not doing your job right.


Tweaktown gave it a 9.5 for performance.

Question, what's the issue you ran into and can it possibly be limited to a few boards including your own?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Tweaktown gave it a 9.5 for performance.
> 
> Question, what's the issue you ran into and can it possibly be limited to a few boards including your own?


I doubt it.

Its directly ref clock related...ref clock 120 = lose 2 features that are selling points. Bluetooth/wifi drops. It comes and goes depending on what ref clock your at.

Im using a usb wifi now that works with ref clock since my little oc lab room is no longer hardwired for internet.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I doubt it.
> 
> Its directly ref clock related...ref clock 120 = lose 2 features that are selling points. Bluetooth/wifi drops. It comes and goes depending on what ref clock your at.
> 
> Im using a usb wifi now that works with ref clock since my little oc lab room is no longer hardwired for internet.


According to your posts, I'm guessing you've only worked with 1 Taichi board?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> According to your posts, I'm guessing you've only worked with 1 Taichi board?


Well im not made of money so yah....but its not randomly dropping like a bad component...it works fine 100 ref clock and various other ref clock settings.

Others it just drops as if it never existed. 120 is one of those points.

Some devices are just not fond of pci clocks...this is common knowledge.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Well im not made of money so yah....but its not randomly dropping like a bad component...it works fine 100 ref clock and various other ref clock settings.
> 
> Others it just drops as if it never existed. 120 is one of those points.
> 
> Some devices are just not fond of pci clocks...this is common knowledge.


So if it's common knowledge that messing with the bus speed of the processor could cause issues with some components, why would reviewers knock off points in their reviews? Perhaps if other boards featured built in WiFi/BT, they would also run into the same occurrence.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> So if it's common knowledge that messing with the bus speed of the processor could cause issues with some components, why would reviewers knock off points in their reviews? Perhaps if other boards featured built in WiFi/BT, they would also run into the same occurrence.


Could be a bios bug...

Could be choice of component.

A usb driven wifi works fine....so once again component choice...

I did not build a ref clock board they did...

If you know of an issue 1 pick a component that tolerates it....or...dont install the feature...


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Could be a bios bug...
> 
> Could be choice of component.
> 
> A usb driven wifi works fine....so once again component choice...
> 
> I did not build a ref clock board they did...
> 
> If you know of an issue 1 pick a component that tolerates it....or...dont install the feature...


Feature has always been YMMV. I'm thankful they included the WiFi/BT. Perhaps other Taichi boards bus speeds can be pushed further. Could be pushed further with a BIOS update. Be nice if others with a Taichi could confirm WiFi/BT issues with certain bus speeds. I won't be around my PC for a couple of days.


----------



## chew*

Bios updates im sure can get it better. 1.6->1.94 was a gain...

120 is already pushing it for 24/7 rigs imo.

Benching sure but at the end of the day 24/7 matters most.


----------



## AlphaC

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index3.html
Quote:


> The VRM is in an 8+2 phase configuration. The PWM controller is the Richtek RT8894A offers 4+2 phase operation, with three integrated drivers on the 4 phase channel. Richtek is using the PWM in 4+1 phase mode and doubling the phases by doubling the number of components on each driver. The three integrated drivers are supplemented by one RT9624F for the main four CPU phases. Another RT9624A is used for the SOC phase.
> 
> High and low-side MOSFETs are Nikos PK616BA and PK632BA PowerPAK MOSFETs. The memory VRM is controlled by a Richtek RT8125E single-phase PWM controller with integrated driver. The memory VRM uses double the number of MOSFETs for the single phase, and should be enough for four DDR4 DIMMs.


http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html
Quote:


> The VRM on the motherboard is in an 8+4 phase configuration resulting from the doubling of 4+2 phases. The International Rectifier IR35201 offers 8+0, 7+1, and 6+2 PWM channel rail modes, and ASRock is using the 6+2 mode in a 4+2 phase configuration. The tried and true PWM is matched up with three doubler/dual driver IR3598 chips, but they aren't being used as doublers. Rather they are used as dual drivers since the IR3598 can take in two PWM channels and offer two driver outputs.
> 
> The CPU Core gets two IR3598, and the SOC rail gets one. The output from each dual driver is connected to two sets of power stage components; this method of doubling just adds an extra set of power stage components. The method used here improves full load performance, but it's that great for light-load efficiency. Anyways, the high and low side MOSFETs are the NIKOS PK618B and PZ0903BK PowerPAKs. They seem to get the job done fine. The motherboard does use 12K polymer solid capacitors.
> 
> A single Richtek RT8120D single phase PWM with integrated driver outputs to two phases using the same doubling method as the CPU VRM and the same power stage and output filter components.


seems he got the cheaper one with PZ0903BK

Apparently the heatsink or doubling method must be better than that of the Krait Gaming becuase it is 7 - 8 degrees Celsius cooler under load

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8137/biostar-x370gt7-motherboard-review/index3.html
Quote:


> That is an expensive VRM; it uses all International Rectifier control and power stage hardware. It starts off with the fully digital IR35201 working in 6+2 phase mode. Four of the six main phases are routed to four IR3599 doublers, which then output to two IR3555.
> 
> The IR3555 are International Rectifier's second-generation of 60A fully integrated power stages. They are some of the highest rated power stages on the market. I don't know much about the inductors, but the capacitors are rated 5K. The SOC rail gets two PWM channels, which are then routed to two IR3599, and then to four IR3555M.
> 
> An Anpec APW7120 single phase PWM with driver output to two Sinopower SM4377 PowerPAK MOSFETs for a single phase memory VRM.


Just confirms what we knew


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index3.html
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> The VRM is in an 8+2 phase configuration. The PWM controller is the Richtek RT8894A offers 4+2 phase operation, with three integrated drivers on the 4 phase channel. Richtek is using the PWM in 4+1 phase mode and doubling the phases by doubling the number of components on each driver. The three integrated drivers are supplemented by one RT9624F for the main four CPU phases. Another RT9624A is used for the SOC phase.
> 
> High and low-side MOSFETs are Nikos PK616BA and PK632BA PowerPAK MOSFETs. The memory VRM is controlled by a Richtek RT8125E single-phase PWM controller with integrated driver. The memory VRM uses double the number of MOSFETs for the single phase, and should be enough for four DDR4 DIMMs.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> The VRM on the motherboard is in an 8+4 phase configuration resulting from the doubling of 4+2 phases. The International Rectifier IR35201 offers 8+0, 7+1, and 6+2 PWM channel rail modes, and ASRock is using the 6+2 mode in a 4+2 phase configuration. The tried and true PWM is matched up with three doubler/dual driver IR3598 chips, but they aren't being used as doublers. Rather they are used as dual drivers since the IR3598 can take in two PWM channels and offer two driver outputs.
> 
> The CPU Core gets two IR3598, and the SOC rail gets one. The output from each dual driver is connected to two sets of power stage components; this method of doubling just adds an extra set of power stage components. The method used here improves full load performance, but it's that great for light-load efficiency. Anyways, the high and low side MOSFETs are the NIKOS PK618B and PZ0903BK PowerPAKs. They seem to get the job done fine. The motherboard does use 12K polymer solid capacitors.
> 
> A single Richtek RT8120D single phase PWM with integrated driver outputs to two phases using the same doubling method as the CPU VRM and the same power stage and output filter components.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> seems he got the cheaper one with PZ0903BK
> 
> Apparently the heatsink or doubling method must be better than that of the Krait Gaming becuase it is 7 - 8 degrees Celsius cooler under load
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8137/biostar-x370gt7-motherboard-review/index3.html
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> That is an expensive VRM; it uses all International Rectifier control and power stage hardware. It starts off with the fully digital IR35201 working in 6+2 phase mode. Four of the six main phases are routed to four IR3599 doublers, which then output to two IR3555.
> 
> The IR3555 are International Rectifier's second-generation of 60A fully integrated power stages. They are some of the highest rated power stages on the market. I don't know much about the inductors, but the capacitors are rated 5K. The SOC rail gets two PWM channels, which are then routed to two IR3599, and then to four IR3555M.
> 
> An Anpec APW7120 single phase PWM with driver output to two Sinopower SM4377 PowerPAK MOSFETs for a single phase memory VRM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Just confirms what we knew
Click to expand...

are these retail boards?
or do these reviewers just swap the same boards for reviews?


----------



## AlphaC

Not sure if he bought them but AFAIK AMD provided review kits did not have those 3 boards.

If I remember correctly Sin usually sells the midrange non-OC boards for a discount after reviewing them.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Not sure if he bought them but AFAIK AMD provided review kits did not have those 3 boards.
> 
> If I remember correctly Sin usually sells the midrange non-OC boards for a discount after reviewing them.


right, but who actually buys them? AMD didn't provide - do a certain # of boards get swapped, and the reason some reviews are near the end of the chain, is they sell/giveaway them?
I guess I am confused - some reviewers state "I got this from Company X - it was NIB" others; it could be the same hardware that's been abused by 14 reviewers, and is pre-release anyway.

only reason I say this - is my boards were supposed to have the same VRM, but don't. and this is only the 2nd/3rd time I've seen proof.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> right, but who actually buys them? AMD didn't provide - do a certain # of boards get swapped, and the reason some reviews are near the end of the chain, is they sell/giveaway them?
> I guess I am confused - some reviewers state "I got this from Company X - it was NIB" others; it could be the same hardware that's been abused by 14 reviewers, and is pre-release anyway.
> 
> only reason I say this - is my boards were supposed to have the same VRM, but don't. and this is only the 2nd/3rd time I've seen proof.


20 years ago we wouldn't blink at the thought of replacing our own components. When I look at some of them now I'm tempted.

Do you want the other components? You'd have a reasonable case for rma....

I have a tinfoil hat theory, got one for everything. Parts ordered in bulk by msi, HUGE volume discount and bottom line decision. Or design template that says amd, 95 watt. X component. Your board. Other theory. Limited run and then see production cost per large run savings with lower cost units in bulk. You profit. Unless you want the other components...


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index3.html


I think Sin is wrong about the SoC VRMs: https://forums.tweaktown.com/publication-discussion/64661-msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review.html#post508273


----------



## AlphaC

He has a picture of the back of the board which means you may be right

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index2.html


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> right, but who actually buys them? AMD didn't provide - do a certain # of boards get swapped, and the reason some reviews are near the end of the chain, is they sell/giveaway them?
> I guess I am confused - some reviewers state "I got this from Company X - it was NIB" others; it could be the same hardware that's been abused by 14 reviewers, and is pre-release anyway.
> 
> only reason I say this - is my boards were supposed to have the same VRM, but don't. and this is only the 2nd/3rd time I've seen proof.


Amd usually gets the boards from vendors flashes bios to one with an agesa supporting cpu for review and then ships them to reviewers.

Vendors are most likely aware that the boards are going for a cpu review.

Actual board reviews is usually review site dealing directly with vendor...

Other than to flash bios or in r7 launch case the only thing they did was premount the noctua base hardware and remove am4 bracket which they tossed in noctua box.

All my boards except the gaming 5 have been purchased myself.

I have a prime b350 plus that is a "review" board but am doing a giveaway contest on XS with it. Has not been out of box...i have my $80 micro center clearance rack prime b350 plus to test with instead









Cpu wise. I doubt they have been sending out gold tbh. My 1700 flakey chip errors in windows instead of dramatic crash at 4.1 in cinebench.

1700x can barely do 3.9 cinebench..

1800x can barely do 4.1 cinebench.

None of those are spectacular. I have seen way better chips out there...

In my experience ( i am willing to bet stilt will agree ) most of the chips reviewers get are easily surpassed by retails...


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> He has a picture of the back of the board which means you may be right
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index2.html


Also the Pro Gaming Carbon seems to have the same VRM design and the IC on the backside is surrounded by the same SMD components. It can be seen in the last picture here: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-7.html#post25405483
That's another Richtek RT9624F.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew*
> 
> I offered to ship it back they said nah you find a use for it.


***!


----------



## DADDYDC650

Taichi PCB breakdown

https://youtu.be/_ic5d5qAhBU


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Taichi PCB breakdown
> 
> https://youtu.be/_ic5d5qAhBU


That was interesting, I love that they went full overkill on the VRM. Looks like there needs to be some work on the software though for readings and the LLC settings


----------



## bobcatchris

any good b350 boards for ocing? vrms are pretty low on most i looked at.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Taichi PCB breakdown
> 
> https://youtu.be/_ic5d5qAhBU


At 11:40 , Xpower review coming soon.

Lol at OVERKILL VRM for memory (but we did know that). He also nitpicks the new BIOS BCLK mods & inaccurate V_Core , suggesting LLC level 4 or 5
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bobcatchris*
> 
> any good b350 boards for ocing? vrms are pretty low on most i looked at.


MSI B350 Pro Carbon


----------



## cssorkinman

@br0da

There seems to be a discrepancy between what is listed as the controller for the X370 Titanium here https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html#post25344552 and what HWINFO is reporting from the board itself - http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-IR35204MTRPBF-DS-v01_00-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d462576f347501579c95e21172b9

I really don't know which is correct however or if it is a significant enough difference to matter but I thought you might want to be made aware of this.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @br0da
> 
> There seems to be a discrepancy between what is listed as the controller for the X370 Titanium here https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html#post25344552 and what HWINFO is reporting from the board itself - http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-IR35204MTRPBF-DS-v01_00-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d462576f347501579c95e21172b9
> 
> I really don't know which is correct however or if it is a significant enough difference to matter but I thought you might want to be made aware of this.


It's a less expensive component. Run for the hills! ( I don't think that's your cpu vrm controller, only 4 phases )


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> @br0da
> 
> There seems to be a discrepancy between what is listed as the controller for the X370 Titanium here https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html#post25344552 and what HWINFO is reporting from the board itself - http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-IR35204MTRPBF-DS-v01_00-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d462576f347501579c95e21172b9
> 
> I really don't know which is correct however or if it is a significant enough difference to matter but I thought you might want to be made aware of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a less expensive component. Run for the hills! ( I don't think that's your cpu vrm controller, only 4 phases )
Click to expand...

Actually it lists that same part for both VR1 and VR 2 in HWINFO - if it's correct or not, I have no idea.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Overpriced VRM design on the MSI Titanium? Ouch!


----------



## br0da

@cssorkinman: HWiNFO readings are often wrong, take a look at the sources in the last column the table.








Also a 3+1 controller wouldn't be able to do the job on the XPower since there are just two doublers / drivers for the four SoC phases and additional drivers for the six CPU VCC phases would be needed.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @cssorkinman: HWiNFO readings are often wrong, take a look at the sources in the last column the table.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also a 3+1 controller wouldn't be able to do the job on the XPower since there are just two doublers / drivers for the four SoC phases.


Thanks for the confirmation br0da - really appreciate your input.

Fresh windows install along with bios 1.4 update on the Titanium. Working my way back to a daily overclock.

4100 mhz prime 95 1.425 volts in bios, LLC in auto.... take a look at the V-core







.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Thanks for the confirmation br0da - really appreciate your input.
> 
> Fresh windows install along with bios 1.4 update on the Titanium. Working my way back to a daily overclock.
> 
> 4100 mhz prime 95 1.425 volts in bios, LLC in auto.... take a look at the V-core
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


We were overdue for the sceenshot









I think that mystery controller which shows up twice is for your two phase ram pwm....

You might be able to lay eyes on it without too much effort if it still bugs ya to see it show up.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Fresh windows install along with bios 1.4 update on the Titanium. Working my way back to a daily overclock.
> 
> 4100 mhz prime 95 1.425 volts in bios, LLC in auto.... take a look at the V-core


Ill take a look when its a dmm.

Until that happens...sorry not impressed.

I know better and more importantly i know msi history with software vs measured socket especially with something left on "auto"


----------



## chew*

In other news.

Board #2 that can do the impossible.

32g pc 3200 14-14-14-34 CH6 4x8g configuration how to...

Ryzen -Mythbusters R5/CH6 edition.

https://youtu.be/yAiW3IO-cIQ


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Fresh windows install along with bios 1.4 update on the Titanium. Working my way back to a daily overclock.
> 
> 4100 mhz prime 95 1.425 volts in bios, LLC in auto.... take a look at the V-core
> 
> 
> 
> Ill take a look when its a dmm.
> 
> Until that happens...sorry not impressed.
> 
> I know better and more importantly i know msi history with software vs measured socket especially with something left on "auto"
Click to expand...

Niko vrm's in the 40'sC ..... can't be pushing too much voltage... can they ?









Still working on 4.1 ghz prime stable , new bios or new version of prime is making it a little harder to accomplish.



CH6 or Tiachi can you match those VRM temps in 70 F ambients at those clocks and voltages?


----------



## chew*

Your talking 50% less pwm heatsink on those boards prime pro included.....

bad comparison is a bad comparison.

Socket voltage will come out sooner or later.......either by myself or someone else.

If you trust hw monitor? sure I can easily beat those temps at hotter ambients with less heatsink and more voltage......

Not hard to shove fans behind PCB or over vrm and say hey look my pwm runs cool......


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Your talking 50% less pwm heatsink on those boards prime pro included.....
> 
> bad comparison is a bad comparison.
> 
> Socket voltage will come out sooner or later.......either by myself or someone else.
> 
> If you trust hw monitor? sure I can easily beat those temps at hotter ambients with less heatsink and more voltage......
> 
> Not hard to shove fans behind PCB or over vrm and say hey look my pwm runs cool......


well... they would be cooler


----------



## chew*

Ryzen - Mythbusters R5/Taichi edition how to 32g dual rank.
https://youtu.be/MwM7HmREc5Y


----------



## AlphaC

Other picture sources for VRM:

http://www.hkepc.com/14930/%E9%A0%82%E7%B4%9A_AMD_Gaming_%E5%B9%B3%E5%8F%B0_ASUS_ROG_Crosshair_VI_HERO_%E4%B8%BB%E6%A9%9F%E6%9D%BF




TI NexFET, 10K caps , R40 choke

http://www.hkepc.com/15098/%E4%B8%BB%E6%94%BB%E4%B8%AD%E9%9A%8E_Ryzen_53_%E5%B9%B3%E5%8F%B0_ASUS_PRIME_X370-PRO_%E4%B8%BB%E6%A9%9F%E6%9D%BF



claims 1.2 mΩ RDS(on) for the TI NexFET ; R68 choke, 5K caps

http://www.hkepc.com/14898/%E6%8A%B5%E7%8E%A9_Ryzen_Gaming_%E6%9D%BF_GIGABYTE_AORUS_AX370-Gaming_5





http://www.hkepc.com/14882/%E4%B8%BB%E6%B5%81%E7%B4%9A_AM4_%E5%B9%B3%E5%8F%B0_ASUS_PRIME_B350-PLUS_%E4%B8%BB%E6%A9%9F%E6%9D%BF




4C09B+4C06B MOSFET , R68 Choke, 5K caps

* Reason is to determine consistency of samples. Some Asrock boards have variance.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Overpriced VRM design on the MSI Titanium? Ouch!


I keep hearing how inefficient this design is and yet it performs better than the Gigabyte design he touts in comparison...and is only a *hair* behind the CH6. The wattage measurements were taken *at the wall*, not with software. Still waiting on an explanation. I know Chew's response, but *at the wall*...so I don't want to hear excuses about software or calibration...

http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/10/


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







By the way, my question is serious. Somebody must be missing something, and I think it is in everyone's interest to understand what it is...


----------



## chew*

You really need to dig deep when comparing stock...vrm settings by default llc @ default.

Onboard devices or lack of.

Its really tough to make an accurate assessment.

Just a couple examples. Ch6 memory vrm runs @ extreme by default.

Taichi has wifi/bt on by default.

Just examples.

Tough call tbh


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I keep hearing how inefficient this design is and yet it performs better than the Gigabyte design he touts in comparison...and is only a *hair* behind the CH6. The wattage measurements were taken *at the wall*, not with software. Still waiting on an explanation. I know Chew's response, but *at the wall*...so I don't want to hear excuses about software or calibration...
> 
> http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/10/
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, my question is serious. Somebody must be missing something, and I think it is in everyone's interest to understand what it is...


Last I heard there was more on a motherboard than the vrm. Components not present on one board obviously aren't going to show up as power draw. . This would in theory result in lower power measured at the wall. This was laid out the last time the argument was made that power at wall meant vrm was more efficent. So unless you want to be the one who goes over the competing boards feature by feature, calculates power draws at load and then does the math....

As for temps, vrm cooling on that board is possibly the best. Better than competitors.

So.. more power in to one subsystem to get same power to cpu = performing product.

It can do that and still draw less power at the wall than a board with other things, that it doesn't have, drawing power, or it could just be so much more efficient elsewhere that it draws less power at the wall despite using more in one subsystem. Neither is irreconcilable with the less expensive parts. They do their job.

Putting a dmm on that socket won't prove they're more efficient, or less. It'll just prove that there's a difference in what software is reporting vs what gets to the cpu and that happens with just about every motherboard.The motherboard won't care, it'll keep doing it's job. But you'll know. Maybe squeeze a bit more performance out

Or you could be like cssorkinman who's motherboard won't care.when if it learns the software that reports it's voltage's is off by x amount. It'll just keep trucking along at 4.0 with 3200 and his horrible 15 minute set up time. I feel his pain. Must be terrible.. bears it well.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Last I heard there was more on a motherboard than the vrm. Components not present on one board obviously aren't going to show up as power draw. . This would in theory result in lower power measured at the wall. This was laid out the last time the argument was made that power at wall meant vrm was more efficent. So unless you want to be the one who goes over the competing boards feature by feature, calculates power draws at load and then does the math....
> 
> As for temps, vrm cooling on that board is possibly the best. Better than competitors.
> 
> So.. more power in to one subsystem to get same power to cpu = performing product.
> 
> It can do that and still draw less power at the wall than a board with other things, that it doesn't have, drawing power, or it could just be so much more efficient elsewhere that it draws less power at the wall despite using more in one subsystem. Neither is irreconcilable with the less expensive parts. They do their job.
> 
> Putting a dmm on that socket won't prove they're more efficient, or less. It'll just prove that there's a difference in what software is reporting vs what gets to the cpu and that happens with just about every motherboard.The motherboard won't care, it'll keep doing it's job. But you'll know. Maybe squeeze a bit more performance out
> 
> Or you could be like cssorkinman who's motherboard won't care.when if it learns the software that reports it's voltage's is off by x amount. It'll just keep trucking along at 4.0 with 3200 and his horrible 15 minute set up time. I feel his pain. Must be terrible.. bears it well.


VRM's use up the most power of any subsystem by far, except the GPU. Neither the CH6 nor the Gigabyte are loaded with extra features compared to the Titanium. I agree with the VRM cooling, but that impacts temp not power draw. I don't know if anyone here really has an answer, but it is something I am truly curious about.

I am also curious as to how Buildzoid came up with 252 amps for the Titanium VRM when the PK616BAs are rated at 50A each? Thats 300 amps. I watched one of his other reviews and he used the full rated current for that calculation. He also assumes only 300 Khz switching even though the mosfet is rated for 1 Mhz. I have been reading up a LOT on VRM's and from what I can find the Low-side is *much* more critical. He does note that running the two PK632BA's in parallel yields 1/2 the resistance but stops short of following through on that - 1.5 milliohms, which puts the effective resistance down to the level of the best (NextFET rated at 1.2) but a current capacity of 78 amps each - yielding nearly the effective efficiency with a higher package current capacity.

The response curves for all of these are non-linear and I keep seeing 125c assumptions. Since we aren't seeing anywhere near those temps on the better boards it just seems to me the electronic engineers may have known what they were doing and designed circuits to work within their sweet spot *even when overclocking*, yielding better than assumed performance; not just for the Titanium but for any of the better boards. It reminds of wire gauge and current. Where you may need 14 gauge solid wire for a given current load, 16 gauge may be better in some applications if using stranded wire because current flows on the surface...the devil is in the details...

This isn't an attempt to explain so much as to understand...kind of thinking through the process of understanding "out-loud". This may very well be beyond what most would bother with, but I do prefer to *really* understand what is going on rather than just accept over-simplified answers - but I am not an electronics engineer and my understanding remains superficial still.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> VRM's use up the most power of any subsystem by far, except the GPU. Neither the CH6 nor the Gigabyte are loaded with extra features compared to the Titanium. I agree with the VRM cooling, but that impacts temp not power draw. I don't know if anyone here really has an answer, but it is something I am truly curious about.
> 
> I am also curious as to how Buildzoid came up with 252 amps for the Titanium VRM when the PK616BAs are rated at 50A each? Thats 300 amps. I watched one of his other reviews and he used the full rated current for that calculation. He also assumes only 300 Khz switching even though the mosfet is rated for 1 Mhz. I have been reading up a LOT on VRM's and from what I can find the Low-side is *much* more critical. He does note that running the two PK632BA's in parallel yields 1/2 the resistance but stops short of following through on that - 1.5 milliohms, which puts the effective resistance down to the level of the best (NextFET rated at 1.2) but a current capacity of 78 amps each - yielding nearly the effective efficiency with a higher package current capacity.
> 
> The response curves for all of these are non-linear and I keep seeing 125c assumptions. Since we aren't seeing anywhere near those temps on the better boards it just seems to me the electronic engineers may have known what they were doing and designed circuits to work within their sweet spot *even when overclocking*, yielding better than assumed performance; not just for the Titanium but for any of the better boards. It reminds of wire gauge and current. Where you may need 14 gauge solid wire for a given current load, 16 gauge may be better in some applications if using stranded wire because current flows on the surface...the devil is in the details...
> 
> This isn't an attempt to explain so much as to understand...kind of thinking through the process of understanding "out-loud". This may very well be beyond what most would bother with, but I do prefer to *really* understand what is going on rather than just accept over-simplified answers - but I am not an electronics engineer and my understanding remains superficial still.


Buildzoid is using worst case scenario for temperatures and it makes sense as this way you can see what kind of current you can drive in the worst possible case scenario without the VRM dying, the 50A rating per mosfet on the NIKOs is at TCase temperature of 25C at TCase 100C that rating drops down to 31.5A at 125C that amperage rating is going to drop even lower. As for the switching frequency he is assuming what is typically used on Motherboards by most manufactures, as stated in the video he doesn't know for sure if that is the switching frequency since he doesn't have an actual sample board to test with, so he is letting the audience know this is what my assumption is.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Buildzoid is using worst case scenario for temperatures and it makes sense as this way you can see what kind of current you can drive in the worst possible case scenario without the VRM dying, the 50A rating per mosfet on the NIKOs is at TCase temperature of 25C at TCase 100C that rating drops down to 31.5A at 125C that amperage rating is going to drop even lower. As for the switching frequency he is assuming what is typically used on Motherboards by most manufactures, as stated in the video he doesn't know for sure if that is the switching frequency since he doesn't have an actual sample board to test with, so he is letting the audience know this is what my assumption is.


I get that, but on his other videos the current rating he gives is the rating at 25c, not 125c...

https://youtu.be/3xfLYLRsPZ0?t=303

He shows 40A at 125c, but the spec sheet shows that being the 25c current rating. Below the current rating they show an operating temp of 125c, but that is a different spec and they are not related. The top of the spec sheet clearly states t=25c unless otherwise noted. The current vs temp graph shows less than 30 amps at 85c...

http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf

(pg 5, Figure 4, second graph on the right hand side). And actually, figure 5 shows current dropping like a rock at 120c if using board temp instead of ambient. So it could be lower than 10A at 125c...but that would make that chip look really bad.

So he is inconsistent with his analysis... :-(

Hard to put too much faith in someone who cannot properly read a spec sheet.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I get that, but on his other videos the current rating he gives is the rating at 25c, not 125c...
> 
> https://youtu.be/3xfLYLRsPZ0?t=303
> 
> He shows 40A at 125c, but the spec sheet shows that being the 25c current rating. Below the current rating they show an operating temp of 125c, but that is a different spec and they are not related. The top of the spec sheet clearly states t=25c unless otherwise noted. The current vs temp graph shows less than 30 amps at 85c...
> 
> http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf
> 
> (pg 5, second graph on the right hand side).
> 
> So he is inconsistent with his analysis... :-(
> 
> Hard to put too much faith in someone who cannot properly read a spec sheet.


Still fighting for that overpriced MSI Titanium board I see?


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Still fighting for that overpriced MSI Titanium board I see?


Nope, just expecting *honest* comparisons, and a better *understanding* of what is really going on. Unlike many, I don't just like to accept whatever I am told or see on the internet. I *investigate*.

Not to mention, if the CH6 really can only push 120A (or less) at 125c, wouldn't you want to know that?

So, do you have anything intelligent to add to this discussion?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Nope, just expecting *honest* comparisons, and a better *understanding* of what is really going on. Unlike many, I don't just like to accept whatever I am told or see on the internet. I *investigate*.
> 
> Not to mention, if the CH6 really can only push 120A (or less) at 125c, wouldn't you want to know that?
> 
> So, do you have anything intelligent to add to this discussion?


It wouldn't be intelligent to get into a conversation with you in regards to that overpriced board.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> It wouldn't be intelligent to get into a conversation with you in regards to that overpriced board.


Hey, don't feel bad if you don't understand this. It's not simple. Most people want a simple answer they can just follow, like "this board has the best mosfets", without having to think about how effectively they are used or under what conditions they might actually be the best - such as when paired with poor cooling designs.

This has little to do with the Titanium. I have it and it performs as well or better than any other board, regardless of any "analysis".

This is about *understanding* the VRMs as well as the analysis of them. For one, the analysis between boards should be fair/accurate no matter which you pick. For another, there is more to VRM's than just the mosfets but focusing on that one aspect make it easy for people - to misjudge. Like when everyone focused on "Mhz" without taking into account IPC or other factors.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Believe what you want to believe. The rest of us will live in the real world.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Believe what you want to believe. The rest of us will live in the real world.


Holy crap that is a ignorant statement. Not sure what your "real" world like when you accept information you *believe* without question and dismiss information based on facts and research because you can't understand or prefer not to believe.

However, if you actually have *information* to share, please do. I simply pointed out the actual *specifications* from the manufacturer and how they do not even come close to what was presented in a review, showing either a bias, or a very blatant mistake. Either of which *should* be important to those who rely on *others telling them* what to understand (without citations)...which is way too many people.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Believe what you want to believe. The rest of us will live in the real world.


When it comes down to it, the board either performs or it doesn't - so far my Titanium is competitive with the boards I"ve seen in this forum.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> When it comes down to it, the board either performs or it doesn't - so far my Titanium is competitive with the boards I"ve seen in this forum.


Never said it didn't perform well enough. All I said is that it's overpriced, which it is. Some people get REALLY salty about it though.


----------



## chew*

I'd rather buy the asrock take the extra $100 apply that $$ to 32gb of ram the MSI *CAN NOT RUN* at optimal timings/speed.

Why can't it run?

It lacks a ref clock chip that gigabyte managed to shove on there K7 board for like less than $15 more than there gaming 5....while remaining competitive price wise with the majority of top tier boards.......


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I'd rather buy the asrock take the extra $100 apply that $$ to 32gb of ram the MSI *CAN NOT RUN* at optimal timings/speed.
> 
> Why can't it run?
> 
> It lacks a ref clock chip that gigabyte managed to shove on there K7 board for like less than $15 more than there gaming 5....while remaining competitive price wise with the majority of top tier boards.......


I have no qualms with ASRock other than their warranty, although I hear they use varying components on the same board revision (from this thread - which I think is still being invesitgated)

The Titanium 1.4 BIOS enables modifying the on-chip BCLK, so what is the difference? Except the ASROCK now has more components on it to fail and greater complexity.


----------



## chew*

Yah its stuck at 103....


----------



## JackCY

You want 5-10 years warranty on mobo? It comes with 3 years, which is 1 year over 2 year minimum in EU.
MSI Titanium, again 3 years.

Overall the x370 boards are being milked IMHO compared to Zx70 boards especially.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> He also assumes only 300 Khz switching even though the mosfet is rated for 1 Mhz.


For MSI this was very good.








In modern buck converters with switching frequencies (under load) >300kHz the switching losses are often higher than the losses in the on-states of the FETs.
NexFETs and PowIRstages are aiming for decreasing these high switching losses with standard MOSFETs like the NIKO parts on the XPower.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> He does note that running the two PK632BA's in parallel yields 1/2 the resistance but stops short of following through on that - 1.5 milliohms, which puts the effective resistance down to the level of the best (NextFET rated at 1.2) but a current capacity of 78 amps each - yielding nearly the effective efficiency with a higher package current capacity.


Forget about on-state losses and the on-resistance, switching losses are what makes a multiphase buck converter efficient or inefficient nowadays.

Switching losses are what "kills" the efficency of the VRMs of the XPower since there are six phases with three FETs each of the CPU VCC.
Also their Rise- and Fall-Times aren't as good as e.g. the Rise- and Fall-Times of the CSD87350s. Even when they are driven @12V VGS.

When this discusisson came up I just did the calculation of C6H vs. XPower for FET losses @50°C @1,4V @110A and the XPower was much more inefficient just caused by the switching losses.
Unfortunately I can't share the calcualtion now because I'll not have access to my computer for the next days.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Buildzoid is using worst case scenario for temperatures and it makes sense as this way you can see what kind of current you can drive in the worst possible case scenario without the VRM dying, the 50A rating per mosfet on the NIKOs is at TCase temperature of 25C at TCase 100C that rating drops down to 31.5A at 125C that amperage rating is going to drop even lower.


But 125°C are really unrealistic.
Also they'd have to upscale the on-resistance for temperature too when calcuating losses of a buck converter.
0.5% more on-resistance for 1°C more.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> As for the switching frequency he is assuming what is typically used on Motherboards by most manufactures, as stated in the video he doesn't know for sure if that is the switching frequency since he doesn't have an actual sample board to test with, so he is letting the audience know this is what my assumption is.


But 300kHz really is a pretty low frequency for controllers, drivers, doublers and FETs which usually are able to handle frequencies up to 1MHz or 1.5MHz.
Of courses switching losses can be minimized by that but for hardcore overclocking a manufaturer should better run the VRMs at their maximum switching frequency since the transient response performance is the best in this case.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Thanks br0da, this additional information is helpful (at least to me).

I knew this is all a lot more complicated than it might seem, at least for those of us lacking any formal education in this area. From what I read, the capacitors and chokes can also have an impact in that when they are well-designed they can mitigate some of the workload of the mosfets, reducing the strain upstream (again, I suspect I am way over-simplifying this).


----------



## CrazyElf

Thanks broda for this list:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html

That should be very helpful.

Hopefully the X390 rumors are true and hopefully we will see something soon from AMD.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Taichi PCB breakdown
> 
> https://youtu.be/_ic5d5qAhBU


Pretty much what we expected. RAM VRM too is very good (that's gravy on the good VRM so to speak). Probably the best of the X370 boards, VRM wise anyways.

The BIOS clearly needs work though - the LLC is very immature. I think it is best to wait a few months before buying right now.

Buildzoid has a video on this:





But it's a software issue, so we'll have to wait and see. In a few months we'll know.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Overpriced VRM design on the MSI Titanium? Ouch!


Pretty much a repeat of the things I've said this whole time.

Oh and capacity wise, Buildzoid believes that the VRM can only take about half as much (252A on X370 XPower vs 480A on X370 Taichi). Not to mention, at 252A, as Buildzoid highlights at around 12:30, it's much less efficient (64W of waste heat, assuming 1.4V and 252A @ 125C). While MSI's heatsink is probably the best design, the VRM is just not what you expect on a flagship grade board.

There's no way to fix this one, save with a Revision 2.0 hardware release.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I keep hearing how inefficient this design is and yet it performs better than the Gigabyte design he touts in comparison...and is only a *hair* behind the CH6. The wattage measurements were taken *at the wall*, not with software. Still waiting on an explanation. I know Chew's response, but *at the wall*...so I don't want to hear excuses about software or calibration...
> 
> http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/10/
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, my question is serious. Somebody must be missing something, and I think it is in everyone's interest to understand what it is...


As linked previously , even the KitGuru link, which you've linked calls MSI out for their poor VRM.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-motherboard-review/3/?PageSpeed=noscript

Quote:


> The 6+4-phase power delivery system will be split as six phases for the CPU and four for the SOC voltage rail. MSI uses an International Rectifiers IR35201 PWM controller which can manage up to eight phases. The presence of 3+2 (CPU+SOC) International Rectifiers IR3598 dual/doubler MOSFET drivers shows that MSI is leveraging phase doubling to drive the MOSFETs.
> 
> For the CPU power delivery section, six NIKOS PowerPAK PK616BA and twelve NIKOS PowerPAK PK632BA are combined. The SOC section gets four PK616BA MOSFETs and four PK632BA.
> 
> *MSI's power delivery system seems a little light for a flagship, overclocking-geared design.* ASRock and ASUS offer higher total phase counts on their competitors while also using efficient Texas Instrument NexFET power blocks (MOSFETs).


That was a review you linked.

As for the reason why it's only slightly higher at load is because Ryzen at load is not drawing near the limits. If it were, the Nikos would be in very serious trouble unless additional cooling (ex: waterblocks) was supplied. That's a testament to AMD"s power efficient architecture. That does not mean however that exonerates the MSI board. Flagship boards mean flagship VRMs, not VRMs fit for a board half its price. Yet another possibility is that there are other components on the motherboard that are drawing power (ROG boards do tend to have a lot of "stuff" on them from experience). We would need a very thorough breakdown of what specific components are using power in that test scenario.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> For MSI this was very good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In modern buck converters with switching frequencies (under load) >300kHz the switching losses are often higher than the losses in the on-states of the FETs.
> NexFETs and PowIRstages are aiming for decreasing these high switching losses with standard MOSFETs like the NIKO parts on the XPower.
> Forget about on-state losses and the on-resistance, switching losses are what makes a multiphase buck converter efficient or inefficient nowadays.
> 
> Switching losses are what "kills" the efficency of the VRMs of the XPower since there are six phases with three FETs each of the CPU VCC.
> Also their Rise- and Fall-Times aren't as good as e.g. the Rise- and Fall-Times of the CSD87350s. Even when they are driven @12V VGS.
> 
> When this discusisson came up I just did the calculation of C6H vs. XPower for FET losses @50°C @1,4V @110A and the XPower was much more inefficient just caused by the switching losses.
> Unfortunately I can't share the calcualtion now because I'll not have access to my computer for the next days.
> But 125°C are really unrealistic.
> Also they'd have to upscale the on-resistance for temperature too when calcuating losses of a buck converter.
> 0.5% more on-resistance for 1°C more.
> But 300kHz really is a pretty low frequency for controllers, drivers, doublers and FETs which usually are able to handle frequencies up to 1MHz or 1.5MHz.
> Of courses switching losses can be minimized by that but for hardcore overclocking a manufaturer should better run the VRMs at their maximum switching frequency since the transient response performance is the best in this case.


Buildzoid usually uses the worst case situations. Agree that 125C is way, way higher than normal, but it's a matter of making sure your hardware can perform .... in the worst case that will happen.

There are a few extreme cases where I have heard of this happening:

http://www.legitreviews.com/xfx-radeon-r9-290-double-dissipation-video-card-review_138612/12



Keep in mind that this was playing Crysis 3. Furmark or OCCT would easily push this to 150C and cause system shutdown. XFX did correct this for the 390 DD, but it's alarming that this even happened to begin with.

That said, 125C is used consistently (ex: Buildzoid uses it for his GPU calculations too to prove that the VRMs are adequate or inadequate in the case of reference boards and a few downgraded PCBs). It does provide an apples to apples comparison.

The problem here is that:

For 300 USD, MSI is offering a 6 stage NIKOS (2 low side, 1 high side)
For 200 USD, Asrock is offering a 12 stage (doubled 6 really) CSD87350 configuration
Asrock also offers 4 stages of CSD87350 for the SOC versus 2 on the MSI of Nikos and Asrock offers a very solid RAM VRM
From where I am standing, it is very difficult to justify the MSI board from a value point of view.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> From what I read, the capacitors and chokes can also have an impact in that when they are well-designed they can mitigate some of the workload of the mosfets, reducing the strain upstream (again, I suspect I am way over-simplifying this).


They aren't able to mitigate some of the MOSFETs workload but of course they are affecting the overall efficiency of a VRM.
Unfortunately usually there is no public datasheet for the chokes such as the datashets for the FETs so the saturation current and the inductance are the only informations we've got. Nobody knows how the power loss rises with the current flowing through the coil.

The power loss of the capacitors aren't a big deal nowadays, their resistance is such low that they don't heat up a lot.


----------



## chew*

Sometimes misinformation is worse than the lack of information...

I ask for 1.406 i get 1.41 @ socket loaded on my dmm which rounds up due to lack of fine grain...

I fail to see the problem here?

https://youtu.be/xuXIT_CHdcs

If i measure @ caps i get innacurate data....solution...do not measure where your not supposed to measure....


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> Thanks broda for this list:
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html
> 
> Oh and capacity wise, Buildzoid believes that the VRM can only take about half as much (252A on X370 XPower vs 480A on X370 Taichi). Not to mention, at 252A, as Buildzoid highlights at around 12:30, it's much less efficient (64W of waste heat, assuming 1.4V and 252A @ 125C). While MSI's heatsink is probably the best design, the VRM is just not what you expect on a flagship grade board.


Ah, but the spec sheet for the CSD87350 shows it is limited to only 10 amps at 110c so his comparisons at 125c are extremely faulty. So in a "worse case scenario", the Taichi is actually worse than the MSI. Sure the CSD part performs better up until 90c, but he is the one setting the criteria. I would argue that the 125c condition is a faulty comparison point in either case, but if he is going to use it he needs to be consistent and not arbitrarily favor one part over another ignoring it's actual performance at *his* reference point.


----------



## DADDYDC650

You should change your name to SaltyTitaniumGuru. Give it up already!


----------



## br0da

Go to the english forums they said. Discussions are filled with much more arguments there they said.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ah, but the spec sheet for the CSD87350 shows it is limited to only 10 amps at 110c so his comparisons at 125c are extremely faulty. So in a "worse case scenario", the Taichi is actually worse than the MSI. Sure the CSD part performs better up until 90c, but he is the one setting the criteria. I would argue that the *125c condition is a faulty comparison point in either case*, but if he is going to use it he needs to be consistent and not arbitrarily favor one part over another ignoring it's actual performance at *his* reference point.


I think some of us give the napkin math appropriate credit. As long as the bar tender keeps giving us credit..

He seems to generalize, so I don't agree that he's arbitrarily favoring one part over another. Being generously imprecise to all?

Man loves his reset switches etc . Figured he'd love the Titanium's big knob but nope. It really should go to 11!

Totally missing a marketing point MSI.

OH yeah, emphasis in quote mine. It's a faulty point everywhere if treating his napkin math as accurate .


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ah, but the spec sheet for the CSD87350 shows it is limited to only 10 amps at 110c so his comparisons at 125c are extremely faulty. So in a "worse case scenario", the Taichi is actually worse than the MSI. Sure the CSD part performs better up until 90c, but he is the one setting the criteria. I would argue that the 125c condition is a faulty comparison point in either case, but if he is going to use it he needs to be consistent and not arbitrarily favor one part over another ignoring it's actual performance at *his* reference point.


It's a fair comment. The Ti NextFETs do fall drastically past ~95C in terms of output. You would have system shutdown at 125C most likely. I'll concede that.

Now here's my response. Ok for your sake - let's say that 125C is faulty. The problem with the XPower though - If you have a less efficient Mosfet (Like in the XPower), you are _far more likely to get high temperatures at the Mosfets to begin with._

Keep in mind that on the Asrock, not only do you have a more efficient Mosfet, you also have 12 phases (6 doubled really), so it's less likely to reach 125C or even 95C. By contrast, at any given current draw, I'd expect the XPower's Mosfets to run at a higher temperature.

The other issue though remains unresolved. Why would I pay $300 USD for the XPower with an inefficient 6 phase more likely to get to the 125C in the first place, versus $200 USD for the 12 phase Asrock? The Asrock is not perfect. I even posted Buildzoid's video saying the BIOS was not mature. Then again, neither is the MSI X370 XPower; there are people with BIOS issues. Both are immature. Yet the point still stands. There's no perfect motherboard - but why pay more for a board that offers fewer phases and is more likely to reach higher temperatures? The Asrock can be fixed with a more mature BIOS. The MSI has 6 phases - there's no BIOS update that will make it 12 phases. It's a hardware issue.

I'll also note that you have double the inductors. One of the most frequent way Mosfets fail is to overload the chokes. In the Asrock's case, the 6 phases doubled into 12 gives you 60A chokes so 720A worth of inductor capacity. On the MSI you have 6 inductors for the CPU - unless you are telling me the Ti inductors MSI uses can hold 120A each (doubtful - likely 60A as well), the extra phases also means double the inductors.

It's like when the pads melted causing VRM failure on MSI's older boards - the problem was partly the pads yes, but had the Mosfets been efficient, then the pads would never have melted down to begin with. Why? There would be less waste heat from a more efficient Mosfet. Plus in a situation like this, with double the phases, you are far more likely to be at optimal efficiency point in a derating curve, which means that the waste heat output is likely to be far less because each phase is less stressed.

Earlier I noted that the MSI had been beaten by the Gigabyte X370 K7. A $300 X370 XPower lost to a $210 X370 Gaming K7 in VRM temperatures. The X370 Gaming K5 has the same VRMs as the K7 and goes for $195. So really we're saying the XPower at $300 loses to a $195 board. Also, in the thermals, it lost to an 8 phase Asus X370 Crosshair. The Asrock has 12 phases of that same Mosfet. It would run even cooler and likely without the problem of a hot RAM VRM.

The point I have repeatedly made is that the X370 XPower is not a good _value_ for the same reason that say, an Intel 6900K is not a good value now compared to the AMD 1700X. _It also does not have anything cool that might justify its price._ Older XPowers (Z87 and Z97) for example carried a PLX PEX 8747 which allowed for x16/x16 GPUs. Premium Intel Gigabyte boards still do, as does the Asus WS series, and I think the EVGA Classifieds do as well. They cost more, but _they have features that justify their extra cost._ An example of that would be the Gigabyte Z270X Gaming 9. Expensive, but with features that attempt to justify the costs. The X370 XPower does not have that. It does not have more phases than the competition, more SATA ports, anything like the PLX, no voltage checkpoints, and really not much to set it apart.

An expensive board is fine. There have always been halo products. An expensive board that does not justify its costs though is a terrible value.


----------



## bardacuda

You forgot that it has little black things on the sides of the PCI-E slots though.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> It's a fair comment. The Ti NextFETs do fall drastically past ~95C in terms of output. You would have system shutdown at 125C most likely. I'll concede that.
> 
> Now here's my response. Ok for your sake - let's say that 125C is faulty. The problem with the XPower though - If you have a less efficient Mosfet (Like in the XPower), you are _far more likely to get high temperatures at the Mosfets to begin with._
> 
> Keep in mind that on the Asrock, not only do you have a more efficient Mosfet, you also have 12 phases (6 doubled really), so it's less likely to reach 125C or even 95C. By contrast, at any given current draw, I'd expect the XPower's Mosfets to run at a higher temperature.
> 
> The other issue though remains unresolved. Why would I pay $300 USD for the XPower with an inefficient 6 phase more likely to get to the 125C in the first place, versus $200 USD for the 12 phase Asrock? The Asrock is not perfect. I even posted Buildzoid's video saying the BIOS was not mature. Then again, neither is the MSI X370 XPower; there are people with BIOS issues. Both are immature. Yet the point still stands. There's no perfect motherboard - but why pay more for a board that offers fewer phases and is more likely to reach higher temperatures? The Asrock can be fixed with a more mature BIOS. The MSI has 6 phases - there's no BIOS update that will make it 12 phases. It's a hardware issue.
> 
> It's like when the pads melted causing VRM failure on MSI's older boards - the problem was partly the pads yes, but had the Mosfets been efficient, then the pads would never have melted down to begin with. Why? There would be less waste heat from a more efficient Mosfet. Plus in a situation like this, with double the phases, you are far more likely to be at optimal efficiency point in a derating curve, which means that the waste heat output is likely to be far less because each phase is less stressed.
> 
> Earlier I noted that the MSI had been beaten by the Gigabyte X370 K7. A $300 X370 XPower lost to a $210 X370 Gaming K7 in VRM temperatures. The X370 Gaming K5 has the same VRMs as the K7 and goes for $195. So really we're saying the XPower at $300 loses to a $195 board. Also, in the thermals, it lost to an 8 phase Asus X370 Crosshair. The Asrock has 12 phases of that same Mosfet. It would run even cooler and likely without the problem of a hot RAM VRM.
> 
> The point I have repeatedly made is that the X370 XPower is not a good _value_ for the same reason that say, an Intel 6900K is not a good value now compared to the AMD 1700X. _It also does not have anything cool that might justify its price._ Older XPowers (Z87 and Z97) for example carried a PLX PEX 8747 which allowed for x16/x16 GPUs. The X370 XPower does not have that. It does not have more phases than the competition, more SATA ports, anything like the PLX, no voltage checkpoints, and really not much to set it apart.


The Taichi has very good thermals, but reports I am seeing show the CH6 with worse thermal performance then the MSI and the Gigabyte having worse overall efficiency (not certain about thermals). If all you are going by is the FLIR imaging, I have yet to see *VRM* temps with the FLIR. The TweakTown review is fraught with poor methodology in how they went about that. All I can find are board sensor reports which are still not apples to apples. I have seen power utilization reports, and the ones measuring from the wall are the best but still inconsistent, bringing into question the methodology. Until BIOS issues settle down, I find any numbers suspect in the absolute bit ALL reports show all top boards performing more than well enough for any need and the MSI still seems to be holding the overclocking record...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dbt_7FiD8hTo2uuOIKBE3ATCDRqVRpAHFsKnieEncv0/edit#gid=87938175


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> It's a fair comment. The Ti NextFETs do fall drastically past ~95C in terms of output. You would have system shutdown at 125C most likely. I'll concede that.
> 
> Now here's my response. Ok for your sake - let's say that 125C is faulty. The problem with the XPower though - If you have a less efficient Mosfet (Like in the XPower), you are _far more likely to get high temperatures at the Mosfets to begin with._
> 
> Keep in mind that on the Asrock, not only do you have a more efficient Mosfet, you also have 12 phases (6 doubled really), so it's less likely to reach 125C or even 95C. By contrast, at any given current draw, I'd expect the XPower's Mosfets to run at a higher temperature.


They are both 6 phases doubled. No edge to taichi on phase count to vcore or soc.
Running at higher temperature assumes the waste heat stays in the components. It's generated sure, but it's not staying there. Titanium seems to be doing better than competition at removing it.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> The Taichi has very good thermals, but reports I am seeing show the CH6 with worse thermal performance then the MSI and the Gigabyte having worse overall efficiency (not certain about thermals). If all you are going by is the FLIR imaging, I have yet to see *VRM* temps with the FLIR. The TweakTown review is fraught with poor methodology in how they went about that. All I can find are board sensor reports which are still not apples to apples. I have seen power utilization reports, and the ones measuring from the wall are the best but still inconsistent, bringing into question the methodology. Until BIOS issues settle down, I find any numbers suspect in the absolute bit ALL reports show all top boards performing more than well enough for any need and the MSI still seems to be holding the overclocking record...
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Dbt_7FiD8hTo2uuOIKBE3ATCDRqVRpAHFsKnieEncv0/edit#gid=87938175


I think the one you want is this one

http://valid.x86.fr/nmikb9

That was the highest, on a 1700x no less. might not be checked but I've seen other high oc's that weren't manually validated.

Swapped positions on the flir again? Welcome to the flir is inconclusive camp. I've been here all along.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I think the one you want is this one
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/nmikb9
> 
> That was the highest, on a 1700x no less. might not be checked but I've seen other high oc's that weren't manually validated.
> 
> Swapped positions on the flir again? Welcome to the flir is inconclusive camp. I've been here all along.


Thanks. I had heard about it holding the LN2 record but couldn't find it...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ah, but the spec sheet for the CSD87350 shows it is limited to only 10 amps at 110c so his comparisons at 125c are extremely faulty. So in a "worse case scenario", the Taichi is actually worse than the MSI. Sure the CSD part performs better up until 90c, but he is the one setting the criteria. I would argue that the 125c condition is a faulty comparison point in either case, but if he is going to use it he needs to be consistent and not arbitrarily favor one part over another ignoring it's actual performance at *his* reference point.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a fair comment. The Ti NextFETs do fall drastically past ~95C in terms of output. You would have system shutdown at 125C most likely. I'll concede that.
> 
> Now here's my response. Ok for your sake - let's say that 125C is faulty. The problem with the XPower though - If you have a less efficient Mosfet (Like in the XPower), you are _far more likely to get high temperatures at the Mosfets to begin with._
> 
> Keep in mind that on the Asrock, not only do you have a more efficient Mosfet, you also have 12 phases (6 doubled really), so it's less likely to reach 125C or even 95C. By contrast, at any given current draw, I'd expect the XPower's Mosfets to run at a higher temperature.
> 
> The other issue though remains unresolved. Why would I pay $300 USD for the XPower with an inefficient 6 phase more likely to get to the 125C in the first place, versus $200 USD for the 12 phase Asrock? The Asrock is not perfect. I even posted Buildzoid's video saying the BIOS was not mature. Then again, neither is the MSI X370 XPower; there are people with BIOS issues. Both are immature. Yet the point still stands. There's no perfect motherboard - but why pay more for a board that offers fewer phases and is more likely to reach higher temperatures? The Asrock can be fixed with a more mature BIOS. The MSI has 6 phases - there's no BIOS update that will make it 12 phases. It's a hardware issue.
> 
> I'll also note that you have double the inductors. One of the most frequent way Mosfets fail is to overload the chokes. In the Asrock's case, the 6 phases doubled into 12 gives you 60A chokes so 720A worth of inductor capacity. On the MSI you have 6 inductors for the CPU - unless you are telling me the Ti inductors MSI uses can hold 120A each (doubtful - likely 60A as well), the extra phases also means double the inductors.
> 
> It's like when the pads melted causing VRM failure on MSI's older boards - the problem was partly the pads yes, but had the Mosfets been efficient, then the pads would never have melted down to begin with. Why? There would be less waste heat from a more efficient Mosfet. Plus in a situation like this, with double the phases, you are far more likely to be at optimal efficiency point in a derating curve, which means that the waste heat output is likely to be far less because each phase is less stressed.
> 
> Earlier I noted that the MSI had been beaten by the Gigabyte X370 K7. A $300 X370 XPower lost to a $210 X370 Gaming K7 in VRM temperatures. The X370 Gaming K5 has the same VRMs as the K7 and goes for $195. So really we're saying the XPower at $300 loses to a $195 board. Also, in the thermals, it lost to an 8 phase Asus X370 Crosshair. The Asrock has 12 phases of that same Mosfet. It would run even cooler and likely without the problem of a hot RAM VRM.
> 
> The point I have repeatedly made is that the X370 XPower is not a good _value_ for the same reason that say, an Intel 6900K is not a good value now compared to the AMD 1700X. _It also does not have anything cool that might justify its price._ Older XPowers (Z87 and Z97) for example carried a PLX PEX 8747 which allowed for x16/x16 GPUs. Premium Intel Gigabyte boards still do, as does the Asus WS series, and I think the EVGA Classifieds do as well. They cost more, but _they have features that justify their extra cost._ An example of that would be the Gigabyte Z270X Gaming 9. Expensive, but with features that attempt to justify the costs. The X370 XPower does not have that. It does not have more phases than the competition, more SATA ports, anything like the PLX, no voltage checkpoints, and really not much to set it apart.
> 
> An expensive board is fine. There have always been halo products. An expensive board that does not justify its costs though is a terrible value.
Click to expand...

Linky?


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Go to the english forums they said. Discussions are filled with much more arguments there they said.


While the bickering can be entertaining at times, it can also get downright redundant.









On a related note. Is there any in-depth analysis on the MSI Gaming Pro Carbon's VRMs and/or compared it to any other boards? I'm actually more curious as to how it compares to the XPower.

I apologize if I had missed it somewhere.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Linky?


It's the review with flir images as additional "proof". Later adopted to "prove" opposing claim. We hates it my precious, filthy Baggins thermal...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Linky?
> 
> 
> 
> It's the review with flir images as additional "proof". Later adopted to "prove" opposing claim. We hates it my precious, filthy Baggins thermal...
Click to expand...

Ah ok thanks. I'd really like to see someone who knows how to properly operate quality flir equipment and understands how to interpret those images present a good comparison. Joe reviewer with a cell phone attachment doesn't qualify


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> While the bickering can be entertaining at times, it can also get downright redundant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a related note. Is there any in-depth analysis on the MSI Gaming Pro Carbon's VRMs and/or compared it to any other boards? I'm actually more curious as to how it compares to the XPower.
> 
> I apologize if I had missed it somewhere.


I haven't looked for one. For straight up components used and then a fun trip through spec sheet land you need look no further than Br0da's list on hardware luxx. Considerable effort has gone into keeping it accurate. OCN users have supplied photos and source information.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html&prev=search


----------



## realtomatoes

i keep reading about hardware luxx so that looks like a good site to go to but it's banned the autonomous system number (ASN) my IP address is in from accessing this website. but some how google translate got through. thanks for the link.


----------



## Medusa666

So what are the rankings for best VRM setup so far between the high end boards such as MSI X370 Titanium, Asus CH6, Gigabyte K5 and K7, Asrock Taichi and Pro, ASUS Prime?

So hard to know what board to pick, but the most important thing to me would be cool VRM during heavy loads and a strong power delivery overall for securing a long life of the motherboard and CPU.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> So what are the rankings for best VRM setup so far between the high end boards such as MSI X370 Titanium, Asus CH6, Gigabyte K5 and K7, Asrock Taichi and Pro, ASUS Prime?
> 
> So hard to know what board to pick, but the most important thing to me would be cool VRM during heavy loads and a strong power delivery overall for securing a long life of the motherboard and CPU.


The Taichi and Pro I'd say probably have the best VRM setup at this point the Pro is the pretty much the Taichi with additional features, with the CH6 just a smidgen behind, The K7 is probably on par with the CH6 or very slightly behind it, the K5 I'm not sure, the gaming 5 I believe has the same VRM setup as the K7. The MSI X370 Titanium is dead last by any account at its price point, thanks to its use of NIKOs


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> So what are the rankings for best VRM setup so far between the high end boards such as MSI X370 Titanium, Asus CH6, Gigabyte K5 and K7, Asrock Taichi and Pro, ASUS Prime?
> 
> So hard to know what board to pick, but the most important thing to me would be cool VRM during heavy loads and a strong power delivery overall for securing a long life of the motherboard and CPU.


If over-built VRM and cool temps are your only criteria, I would have to agree with Zhany and say the Taichi would be the board you want.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> If over-built VRM and cool temps are your only criteria, I would have to agree with Zhany and say the Taichi would be the board you want.


How does it compare for support for the highest speed RAM Zen has so far been shown to be able to handle?

I'm personally still waiting for a board with a hybrid water/air VRM sink.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> How does it compare for support for the highest speed RAM Zen has so far been shown to be able to handle?
> 
> I'm personally still waiting for a board with a hybrid water/air VRM sink.


I have heard at least some good results on the RAM speed for the Taichi, but all AM4's are still have some issues. If you buy RAM known to perform well on *that* board you should be fine.

Water cooling for the VRM's is overkill for AM4 for most of the X370 boards. You won't come close to heating those up on ANY of the top X370 boards.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> If over-built VRM and cool temps are your only criteria, I would have to agree with Zhany and say the Taichi would be the board you want.
> 
> 
> 
> How does it compare for support for the highest speed RAM Zen has so far been shown to be able to handle?
> 
> I'm personally still waiting for a board with a hybrid water/air VRM sink.
Click to expand...

I really don't think that would be necessary unless you are going to try to push 16 threads on a 4 phase board.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> The Taichi and Pro I'd say probably have the best VRM setup at this point the Pro is the pretty much the Taichi with additional features, with the CH6 just a smidgen behind, The K7 is probably on par with the CH6 or very slightly behind it, the K5 I'm not sure, the gaming 5 I believe has the same VRM setup as the K7. The MSI X370 Titanium is dead last by any account at its price point, thanks to its use of NIKOs


^ I have to second this opinion.

For most people at normal 24/7 voltages the difference between the CH VI Hero and Taichi isn't very large. The K7 is only going to lag behind once you push past safe voltages (1.4V or so) because up until the ~25A mark IR3553 are going to be > 90% efficient as long as you cool them. 25A x 6 phases = 150A , while in reality a 4GHz Ryzen 7 consumes roughly 100-110A and Ryzen 5 6 cores about 80A by correlation.

I do have to add : if you are looking to watercool with a monoblock (i.e. not a universal kit or AIO) I think the Crosshair VI Hero will provide you more headroom as far as power.

The Taichi / Fatal1ty Professional have that issue of not getting any vendor support from EK , Bitspower , and others as far as monoblocks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> While the bickering can be entertaining at times, it can also get downright redundant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a related note. Is there any in-depth analysis on the MSI Gaming Pro Carbon's VRMs and/or compared it to any other boards? I'm actually more curious as to how it compares to the XPower.
> 
> I apologize if I had missed it somewhere.


If it's the same VRM as theorized as the Krait Gaming, then it isn't the greatest but passable. http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index10.html

It's 4 phases doubled "the wrong way" without phase interleaving to 8 phases. Meanwhile the Asrock X370 K4 board uses IR3598 doublers to interleave (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html) so even though it is using worse parts in the review (PK618 instead PK632) it doubles them properly.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> They are both 6 phases doubled. No edge to taichi on phase count to vcore or soc.
> Running at higher temperature assumes the waste heat stays in the components. It's generated sure, but it's not staying there. Titanium seems to be doing better than competition at removing it.


Xpower doesn't have 12 chokes for CPU. It doesn't have 12 high side mosfets for CPU.

Also I think many people are forgetting a higher switching frequency leads to more losses. MSI could easily run the mosfets at half the switching frequency for lower performance but cooler VRM.

A TI CSD87350Q5D NexFET can handle 1.5MHz although data is given for 500kHz (from figure 5 you can normalize for higher _f__sw , i.e. 1.1x power loss for 800Mhz and ~1.2x for 1MHz), the IR3553 can do 1MHz (from figure 12 you can normalize vs 400kHz , i.e. 700kHz = 1.05x , 800kHz = 1.1x).

The PWM controller on the MSI board is *300kHz* http://en.richtek.com/Products/Vcore/Vcore%20Controller/RT8894A.

Low side losses are largely not dependent on switching frequency but high side losses are.

If you're going for a monoblock what VRM heatsinks the motherboard comes with is irrelevant. Titanium is used for corrosion resistance / anti thermal creep , it has poor thermal conductivity. I think they didn't want to name their motherboard Xpower NICKEL.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> ^ I have to second this opinion.
> 
> For most people at normal 24/7 voltages the difference between the CH VI Hero and Taichi isn't very large. *The K7 is only going to lag behind once you push past safe voltages (1.4V or so)* because up until the ~25A mark IR3553 are going to be > 90% efficient as long as you cool them. 25A x 6 phases = 150A , while in reality a 4GHz Ryzen 7 consumes roughly 100-110A and Ryzen 5 6 cores about 80A by correlation.
> 
> I do have to add : if you are looking to watercool with a monoblock (i.e. not a universal kit or AIO) I think the Crosshair VI Hero will provide you more headroom as far as power.
> 
> The Taichi / Fatal1ty Professional have that issue of not getting any vendor support from EK , Bitspower , and others as far as monoblocks.


Love my K7 but this part could become an issue with Ryzen 2/3.


----------



## Medusa666

Thanks for all the replies guys, so overall considering not only the VRM setup, but also BIOS support and general coverage and functions, the Asus Crosshair 6 would be the best way to go for functionality?

I like the Taichi, but Asrock seems behind ASUS when it comes to general spread and support in the community aswell as official channels.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> Thanks for all the replies guys, so overall considering not only the VRM setup, but also BIOS support and general coverage and functions, the Asus Crosshair 6 would be the best way to go for functionality?
> 
> I like the Taichi, but Asrock seems behind ASUS when it comes to general spread and support in the community aswell as official channels.


Yes ASUS has been stellar as far as end user support on the forums for new boards although the concern is for RMAs and later on (i.e. after X370 becomes older similar to AM3).


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I really don't think that would be necessary unless you are going to try to push 16 threads on a 4 phase board.


It's better than hearing extra noise (and dust cleaning) from a jury-rigged VRM fan or resorting to something silly like the 40mm fan ASUS designed the most recent Sabertooth board to have.

I spent money on a water loop to make use of it, to not have to put up with cumbersome, noisy, and dusty fan cooling solutions. I also think feature parity, particularly in terms of features available on Intel boards since 2013, is important.

It seems silly to worry about fancy VRMs and then not expect good cooling solutions for those VRMs. The AM4 spec is very tight so keeping temps down should be beneficial.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> The Taichi and Pro I'd say probably have the best VRM setup at this point the Pro is the pretty much the Taichi with additional features, with the CH6 just a smidgen behind, The K7 is probably on par with the CH6 or very slightly behind it, the K5 I'm not sure, the gaming 5 I believe has the same VRM setup as the K7. The MSI X370 Titanium is dead last by any account at its price point, thanks to its use of NIKOs
> 
> 
> 
> ^ I have to second this opinion.
> 
> For most people at normal 24/7 voltages the difference between the CH VI Hero and Taichi isn't very large. The K7 is only going to lag behind once you push past safe voltages (1.4V or so) because up until the ~25A mark IR3553 are going to be > 90% efficient as long as you cool them. 25A x 6 phases = 150A , while in reality a 4GHz Ryzen 7 consumes roughly 100-110A and Ryzen 5 6 cores about 80A by correlation.
> 
> I do have to add : if you are looking to watercool with a monoblock (i.e. not a universal kit or AIO) I think the Crosshair VI Hero will provide you more headroom as far as power.
> 
> The Taichi / Fatal1ty Professional have that issue of not getting any vendor support from EK , Bitspower , and others as far as monoblocks.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> While the bickering can be entertaining at times, it can also get downright redundant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On a related note. Is there any in-depth analysis on the MSI Gaming Pro Carbon's VRMs and/or compared it to any other boards? I'm actually more curious as to how it compares to the XPower.
> 
> I apologize if I had missed it somewhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it's the same VRM as theorized as the Krait Gaming, then it isn't the greatest but passable. http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index10.html
> 
> It's 4 phases doubled "the wrong way" without phase interleaving to 8 phases. Meanwhile the Asrock X370 K4 board uses IR3598 doublers to interleave (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html) so even though it is using worse parts in the review (PK618 instead PK632) it doubles them properly.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> They are both 6 phases doubled. No edge to taichi on phase count to vcore or soc.
> Running at higher temperature assumes the waste heat stays in the components. It's generated sure, but it's not staying there. Titanium seems to be doing better than competition at removing it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Xpower doesn't have 12 chokes for CPU. It doesn't have 12 high side mosfets for CPU.
> 
> Also I think many people are forgetting a higher switching frequency leads to more losses. MSI could easily run the mosfets at half the switching frequency for lower performance but cooler VRM.
> 
> A TI CSD87350Q5D NexFET can handle 1.5MHz although data is given for 500kHz (from figure 5 you can normalize for higher _f__sw , i.e. 1.1x power loss for 800Mhz and ~1.2x for 1MHz), the IR3553 can do 1MHz (from figure 12 you can normalize vs 400kHz , i.e. 700kHz = 1.05x , 800kHz = 1.1x).
> 
> The PWM controller on the MSI board is *300kHz* http://en.richtek.com/Products/Vcore/Vcore%20Controller/RT8894A.
> 
> Low side losses are largely not dependent on switching frequency but high side losses are.
> 
> If you're going for a monoblock what VRM heatsinks the motherboard comes with is irrelevant. Titanium is used for corrosion resistance / anti thermal creep , it has poor thermal conductivity. I think they didn't want to name their motherboard Xpower NICKEL.
Click to expand...




Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Prime blend 4125 mhz 1.464 volts under load VRM's at 49 C.... call it anything you like








Would really like to see other boards run the same volts/speeds so we could compare.




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I really don't think that would be necessary unless you are going to try to push 16 threads on a 4 phase board.
> 
> 
> 
> It's better than hearing extra noise (and dust cleaning) from a jury-rigged VRM fan or resorting to something silly like the 40mm fan ASUS designed the most recent Sabertooth board to have.
> 
> I spent money on a water loop to make use of it, to not have to put up with cumbersome, noisy, and dusty fan cooling solutions. I also think feature parity, particularly in terms of features available on Intel boards since 2013, is important.
> 
> It seems silly to worry about fancy VRMs and then not expect good cooling solutions for those VRMs. The AM4 spec is very tight so keeping temps down should be beneficial.
Click to expand...

To each their own I guess. AM3 +/FX made for some interesting vrm/socket cooling mods didn't it?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Looks good but the board still uses overpriced VRM components. You can find boards that will perform very well for $100 less.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Looks good but the board still uses overpriced VRM components. You can find boards that will perform very well for $100 less.


I wanted an Intel Titanium board for a long time - was very happy to see them have one in AM4 I'd love to see one for the rumored X399 platform but even if it came to fruition , I probably couldnt afford it







.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I wanted an Intel Titanium board for a long time - was very happy to see them have one in AM4 I'd love to see one for the rumored X399 platform but even if it came to fruition , I probably couldnt afford it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


I've wanted one as well but I was upset when I found out that it had no BCLK and the VRM components were average. I think it has BCLK now but it tops at around 103 which is nothing. With a name like Titanium, those looks and the high price, I want top everything.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> i keep reading about hardware luxx so that looks like a good site to go to but it's banned the autonomous system number (ASN) my IP address is in from accessing this website.


They've had problems with DDOS in the past so some IP regions might still be banned. Sorry for that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Meanwhile the Asrock X370 K4 board uses IR3598 doublers to interleave (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html) so even though it is using worse parts in the review (PK618 instead PK632) it doubles them properly.


I wouldn't expect them to be interleaved.
The IR3598 parts are used as dual drivers so each is fet with two PWM channels from the controller so each puts out a UGATE, a LGATE and a BOOT signal twice which are interleaved.
So what you get are signals for four interleaved phases since there are two IR3598 for the CPU VCC.
ASRock has to control eight phases with these signals so they need to use each output of the drivers twice so it's the same as for the MSI board.


----------



## realtomatoes

no problem. yeah, figured it was a DDOS thing.


----------



## chew*

I think one of the boards you guys are overlooking is biostar gt7.

Bios support is ehhh but seriously with ref clock not in the equasion. Pwm quality and just normal functionality.....

@ $179.99....you could certainly do worse....

There top board is competing price wise with x370 pro,carbon,gaming 5, killer and fatality k4.

Of all the above boards listed? This one probably offers the most solid pwm...IR 3555 confirmed vs giga IR 3553.


----------



## Medusa666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I think one of the boards you guys are overlooking is biostar gt7.
> 
> Bios support is ehhh but seriously with ref clock not in the equasion. Pwm quality and just normal functionality.....
> 
> @ $179.99....you could certainly do worse....
> 
> There top board is competing price wise with x370 pro,carbon,gaming 5, killer and fatality k4.
> 
> Of all the above boards listed? This one probably offers the most solid pwm...IR 3555 confirmed vs giga IR 3553.


Are you saying that the Biostar GT7 has better VRM than Asus CH6 and Asrock Taichi?


----------



## chew*

Nope just saying in its price range its vrm is certainly not lacking.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> They've had problems with DDOS in the past so some IP regions might still be banned. Sorry for that.
> I wouldn't expect them to be interleaved.
> The IR3598 parts are used as dual drivers so each is fet with two PWM channels from the controller so each puts out a UGATE, a LGATE and a BOOT signal twice which are interleaved.
> So what you get are signals for four interleaved phases since there are two IR3598 for the CPU VCC.
> ASRock has to control eight phases with these signals so they need to use each output of the drivers twice so it's the same as for the MSI board.


The IR3598 does list interleaving with 180° out of phase so it would just be Asrock's fault if they did not use the feature. It's unfortunate but understandable if they use PK618.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> Are you saying that the Biostar GT7 has better VRM than Asus CH6 and Asrock Taichi?


Arguably the only Biostar board worth buying on Am4 at this point.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Arguably the only Biostar board worth buying on Am4 at this point.


No argument from me I took a close look at the GT5 and ran away in fear lol........


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Arguably the only Biostar board worth buying on Am4 at this point.


More than most vendors there is a pretty wide gulf between their (usually select few) higher-end boards versus the rest of their lineup. Those few higher-end boards also receive the lion's share of BIOS support and active improvement. On Intel platforms it's not a big deal because running a SL/KL i3 on a H- or B- series board from them isn't going to hurt anything, but on more demanding sockets (in terms of power-delivery) and more widely unlocked platforms like AM3+, it was buy their best or avoid them. That uneven stack is what has hurt their reputation more than anything, as you'll find vastly different consumer experiences in terms of board quality, BIOS support, and reliability between people who bought their most expensive board versus those who bought budget from them with an unlocked chip.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The IR3598 does list interleaving with 180° out of phase so it would just be Asrock's fault if they did not use the feature.


What you've basically got is this:

The picture is stolen from the IR3598 datasheet.

As you can see with those 4 PWM signals from the controller and those two IR3598 in double driver mode you can only drive four phases interleaved.
The only way to control eight hardware phases with this setup without using more active components is to use the same LGATE und UGATE signals for two pairs of MOSFETs each.


----------



## yendor

Other than the gt7 the whole product stack has this:

ISL95712 (4 + 3) sm4377 and 2x SM4364A ..

The other vendors use their own preferred components in the same configurations on lower tiers, but not exclusively. For example

IS95712 (4+3) 4C10N and 2x 4C06N

ISL95712 (3 + 3) PZ0903BK and PK618BA

..
It makes it difficult, for me at least, to point out vrm as a feature considered in pricing. Which thankfully I will rarely have to do. If asked about the less expensive boards though.

I'll feel like a car salesman. "lets forget about gas mileage for a moment, all these will get about the same"....


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> What you've basically got is this:
> 
> The picture is stolen from the IR3598 datasheet.
> 
> As you can see with those 4 PWM signals from the controller and those two IR3598 in double driver mode you can only drive four phases interleaved.
> The only way to control eight hardware phases with this setup without using more active components is to use the same LGATE und UGATE signals for two pairs of MOSFETs each.


As I said before it makes sense they would use it in that mode rather than interleaved due to the current limit on the PK618.

The IR3598 does have an alternate application as seen on page 5.



Either way, we know for sure the random mosfet + PK618 on asrock's X370 K4 implementation is an inferior mosfet yet it performs as well as the PK616+ PK632 on the Krait Gaming

The Richtek one only accepts one PWM Input:

http://www.richtek.com/Products/MOSFET%20Driver/RT9624F


----------



## Zhany

Is it just me or is the VRM on all the Micro ATX boards a bit on the meh side of things? MSI seems to be using NIKOs across the board for B350 and X370 regardless of ATX or mATX, ASRock appears to be using Nikos as well on thier Micro ATX offerings

Gigabyte is using ON Semiconductor, anyone know anything about them? I haven't really seen them mentioned before

ASRock, Gigabyte, and Biostar are all using the ISL95712 controller

I can't seem to find anything as far as a Datasheet on the Asus offerings in the mATX format on the controller or the mosfets.

With the mATX is a pretty much pick what features you like and the VRMs are all just meh?


----------



## chris89

http://www.ebay.com/itm/361253756416?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> As I said before it makes sense they would use it in that mode rather than interleaved due to the current limit on the PK618.


They can't use it in interleaved mode.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The Richtek one only accepts one PWM Input:
> 
> http://www.richtek.com/Products/MOSFET%20Driver/RT9624F


Yeah it's a single driver. The IR3598 in dual driver mode is just the same thing twice in one IC.


----------



## SteelBox

Is VRM on Giga x370 K3 same as the b350 gaming 3?


----------



## br0da

Only difference seems to be the clock gen on the K3 for BCLK OC.


----------



## SteelBox

Is the K3 worth it over B350 gaming 3? It also seems that K3 have better VRM cooling. Some users said that gaming 3 has 2 mosfets on the back side, is that a problem?


----------



## sakae48

how hot is safe for VRM actually?.. i got 60~70C on my board here.. kinda toasty IMO


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteelBox*
> 
> Is the K3 worth it over B350 gaming 3? It also seems that K3 have better VRM cooling. Some users said that gaming 3 has 2 mosfets on the back side, is that a problem?


It's right that two of the lowside FETs are on the backside of the board.
Actually I don't know any reports about the cooling of the K3.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> i got 60~70C on my board here..


That isn't a problem, less than 70 degrees should be safe on any board.


----------



## Nighthog

The issue with The Gaming 3 is Bios.

Voltage options are minimal.
cpu vcore offset.
cpu soc offset
dram voltage

*THAT IS ALL!*

I have no idea what options the K3 and K5 have but I would surely hope they have something more in common with the Gaming 5/K7 options wise!

Either way 4Ghz is probably not recommended for these 4 phase boards. The likelihood is you will trash your board sooner rather than later.
You would need to water cool these VRM's... (I've been thinking about that for my Gaming 3 but then I'm limited by BIOS and can't push more voltage or tweak it either way)


----------



## SteelBox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> The issue with The Gaming 3 is Bios.
> 
> Voltage options are minimal.
> cpu vcore offset.
> cpu soc offset
> dram voltage
> 
> *THAT IS ALL!*
> 
> I have no idea what options the K3 and K5 have but I would surely hope they have something more in common with the Gaming 5/K7 options wise!
> 
> Either way 4Ghz is probably not recommended for these 4 phase boards. The likelihood is you will trash your board sooner rather than later.
> You would need to water cool these VRM's... (I've been thinking about that for my Gaming 3 but then I'm limited by BIOS and can't push more voltage or tweak it either way)


What is your current OC? If I buy Gaming 3 I was thinking of holding R5 1600 on 3,6-3,7Ghz. I think that VRM temp shouldn `t be to high (below 80C) for that OC. I am only worried of that mosfets on backside, they won`t have any cooling.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> I have no idea what options the K3 and K5 have but I would surely hope they have something more in common with the Gaming 5/K7 options wise!


That's a UEFI screenshot from an early UEFI version of a K5 / K3: http://www.tweakpc.de/forum/844066-post4.html
Not even BCLK OC was implemented. Hopefully it's not the same nowadays...


----------



## Nighthog

I would say all up to 3.8Ghz is safe on these boards.(8 core, 16 threads)

3.9Ghz is optional if you know what you are doing and keep check on temperatures and don't plan to keep it 100% loaded at all times. Like folding or whatnot.

4Ghz is suicide runs. Your board will probably die soon. Don't stress it. And you have a golden chip that requires little voltage to be even stable with the voltage this board can provide.

I'm settled with 3.95Ghz and max voltage the board can provide for the moment. +0.300V offset for 1.488volts. I don't plan to stress the system any more than what was necessary to know if it was stable or not for this clock. It's not 100% stable. I would have needed 1 or 2 extra clicks on that voltage for 100% I think 1.5V would have done it.

I've passed IBT AVX Maximum but I've found a few stress tests that will still give issues but everyday usage it's all fine.

I can say my CPU is a turd or the board is a issue and can't provide stable power for the higher clocks. We are talking about 110+ C VRM.

Even that 3.8Ghz clock needs something to cool that VRM a little extra. Passive probably won't do unless you run nothing stressful.


----------



## antorugg

I follow with interest


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> I've wanted one as well but I was upset when I found out that it had no BCLK and the VRM components were average. I think it has BCLK now but it tops at around 103 which is nothing. With a name like Titanium, those looks and the high price, I want top everything.


VRM's may be "average" to some, yet the Titanium hold the record for LN2 OC and the top OC with water cooling here on OCN...so they seem to have done something right. But people here don't seem to care about real world performance as much as VRM specs...


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> VRM's may be "average" to some, yet the Titanium hold the record for LN2 OC and the top OC with water cooling here on OCN...so they seem to have done something right. But people here don't seem to care about real world performance as much as VRM specs...


Can you link me to the world record?


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Can you link me to the world record?


http://valid.x86.fr/nmikb9


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> VRM's may be "average" to some, yet the Titanium hold the record for LN2 OC and the top OC with water cooling here on OCN...so they seem to have done something right. But people here don't seem to care about real world performance as much as VRM specs...


Correction i hold to top oc here on air @ 4.3 with quite a bit less voltage on the cheapest ryzen chip there is...

Preety sure hwbot recently posted a 5.9 gig valid on ln2.

Neither were done on MSI.

Now that those 2 things have been ripped away...i will say this.

It is the chip and driver of the system not the board...

Btw record OC is the highest ever imo. That was done on bd not ryzen...also not MSI.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> http://valid.x86.fr/nmikb9


What about this one though? http://wccftech.com/ryzen-7-1800x-overclocked-58ghz-ln2/


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Correction i hold to top oc here on air @ 4.3 with quite a bit less voltage on the cheapest ryzen chip there is...
> 
> Preety sure hwbot recently posted a 5.9 gig valid on ln2.
> 
> Neither were done on MSI.
> 
> Now that those 2 things have been ripped away...i will say this.
> 
> It is the chip and driver of the system not the board...
> 
> Btw record OC is the highest ever imo. That was done on bd not ryzen...also not MSI.


Thanks for setting it straight. Nice try SaltyTitaniumGuru.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> What about this one though? http://wccftech.com/ryzen-7-1800x-overclocked-58ghz-ln2/


Not on any cpu-z valid list that I know off.

Here is the top 15 valid scores for the 1800X: http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e20372031383030582045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72

I do not give much credence to LN2 scores to be perfectly honest. I see it as some sort of extreme sport, not for "humans"









Top 15 1700x: http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e20372031373030582045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72

Top 15 1700 http://valid.x86.fr/top-cpu/414d442052797a656e203720313730302045696768742d436f72652050726f636573736f72


----------



## chew*

http://hwbot.org/submission/3518342_der8auer_cpu_frequency_ryzen_5_1600x_5905.64_mhz

5.9 wins...

And guess what im not bragging what board did it.

derdauer is a great driver of a system...


----------



## chris89

So for Ryzen to hit 4.5Ghz needs epic VRM solution huh? So much heat from board VRM... or if ASUS Releases the ASUS X370 RAMPAGE ATX & mATX Genie then no problem.. maybe they use 50mm delta on heatpipe connected VRM/ Northbridge/ Southbridge? Or just vrm + southbridge haha Ryzen Northbridge is integrated right? What if the single beasty 1/4" Heatpipe was cooling it all? That would be awesome haha


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> So for Ryzen to hit 4.5Ghz needs epic VRM solution huh? So much heat from board VRM... or if ASUS Releases the ASUS X370 RAMPAGE ATX & mATX Genie then no problem.. maybe they use 50mm delta on heatpipe connected VRM/ Northbridge/ Southbridge? Or just vrm + southbridge haha Ryzen Northbridge is integrated right?


More like a good board like the Taichi, K7 or CH6 and some LN2 + good chip.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3518342_der8auer_cpu_frequency_ryzen_5_1600x_5905.64_mhz
> 
> 5.9 wins...
> 
> And guess what im not bragging what board did it.
> 
> derdauer is a great driver of a system...


Those do not appear in the list because they were made with engineering samples it seems


----------



## chris89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> More like a good board like the Taichi, K7 or CH6 and some LN2.


Well ya know non-temporary solution ... a great big 1/4" heatpipe running from VRM(s) to Southbridge... with 50mm Delta cooling them that would be sufficient haha


----------



## chew*

https://valid.x86.fr/4lgzbl


----------



## chris89

Viglink redirect ftw hahaha


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> Viglink redirect ftw hahaha


Fixxed. Done by me...

But anyway. Your best valid on this forum ammunition is gone now....you kept using it so i got annoyed and removed it from equasion just like that...

Please stop using that..

I did it with less voltage and on air vs water.

I am not claiming board got it there.

Im claiming i drove it properly...

If it get beat ill smash it again and again and again and i will do it on a.different board everytime...just not an msi since you like to wave it around like a flag...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> More like a good board like the Taichi, K7 or CH6 and some LN2 + good chip.


This wasn't a bad bit of work.







NAMEGT is repping the GT7 well for a seat at the table.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> This wasn't a bad bit of work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NAMEGT is repping the GT7 well for a seat at the table.


Very nice. Always been interested in a Biostar. One day...


----------



## chew*

Btw 5414 is record for suicide? The current cinebench record was done higher lol on retail chip...

No one cares about valids on ryzen to even do it....

Heres your cpu-z record...its cinebench stable ROFL...

http://hwbot.org/submission/3488143_mr_db_cinebench___r11.5_ryzen_7_1800x_27.51_points


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> VRM's may be "average" to some, yet the Titanium hold the record for LN2 OC and the top OC with water cooling here on OCN...so they seem to have done something right. But people here don't seem to care about real world performance as much as VRM specs...


Vrm thread? ? design acceptable, heat sinks may be superior, component selection baffles. Also, there are cpu-z validations that aren't manually submitted, would take record claims with dose of salt for now. Early yet. That titanium did ok though eh? Might even still be near top of list


----------



## chew*

The lack of it being on ln2 and no benchmarks like cinebench makes you go hmmmm....

So he spent time to prep board spent money on ln2...

And all he did was go after a validation when he could have clocked a bd to same speed on air...

Definitely a hmmmmm









http://hwbot.org/user/ren_kei_yang/


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The lack of it being on ln2 and no benchmarks like cinebench makes you go hmmmm....


Manual submission , probably no net. Transferred saved validation for submission. Would expect to see that one again, unless he/she fell in love with cheap little 3 phase board. /headdesk


----------



## chew*

No i have a theory since it has happened to me...

We went after a valid on msi on deneb.

Then did some light 3d 05...then we got dumb and started running cpu tests in 06. Poof gone..dead chip popped fet.

Since ryzen is good at cinebench...you find max of chip maybe valid it that gives you a baseline to back off and run cinebench around 5.3 to 5.2.

Lack of more results? You do not go run ryzen on ln2 just to do a valid...

That guy benches 3 things cpu-z, mem frequency, cinebench....thats all he has ever submitted.

I will let your imaginations figure it out.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Fixxed. Done by me...
> 
> But anyway. Your best valid on this forum ammunition is gone now....you kept using it so i got annoyed and removed it from equasion just like that...
> 
> Please stop using that..
> 
> I did it with less voltage and on air vs water.
> 
> I am not claiming board got it there.
> 
> Im claiming i drove it properly...
> 
> If it get beat ill smash it again and again and again and i will do it on a.different board everytime...just not an msi since you like to wave it around like a flag...


Not as impressive overclocking *fewer cores*. I was referring to the Ryzen 7 series. Lets compare apples to applies.


----------



## sakae48

so... what i thought VRM temp is actually the PCH temp.. my VRM stays around 40-ish (could it be "motherboard" temp?







).. no worry at all


----------



## yendor

You're not alone. It must be one of them, right?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Not as impressive overclocking *fewer cores*. I was referring to the Ryzen 7 series. Lets compare apples to applies.


Lol seriously? Lower skus are all ryzen 7 failed chips...if anything the are harder to oc...

1400 was an 1800x core at one point that failed...

Grow up and downcore a 1800x

Less tears please. You dont dictate the rules for cpu-z franc at canard pc and hwbot does.

WR fwiw is one core..

Actually you know what ill play along.

Oh well that guy needed water.

Not as impressive as air.

Apples to apples i use your bad analogy against you.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Lol seriously? Lower skus are all ryzen 7 failed chips...if anything the are harder to oc...
> 
> 1400 was an 1800x core at one point that failed...
> 
> Grow up and downcore a 1800x
> 
> Less tears please. You dont dictate the rules for cpu-z franc at canard pc and hwbot does.
> 
> WR fwiw is one core..


Can you please explain to everyone why you think silicon that has cores disabled is likely to clock worse?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skyl3r*
> 
> I'm not gonna lie though, I just think it's hilarious that people are referencing my validation as a reason why the Titanium is great. I've been complaining about a lack of bclock and subpar VRMs and meanwhile behind my back people are worshipping it because of me lol


Heres what the owner off that result had to say.

Priceless

And to answer your question. Core disabling was to decrease heat. Im air he was water i lvled the playing field.

Does not make my chip any better just cooler..

Ocing raising volts then cooling..


----------



## xioros

Was about to buy a Crosshair.... until I saw it's a 4-phase board. Is this really wat ROG has become? (aside from the milking in previous gens, at least there was one decent board - Ryzen doesn't have a decent ASUS board -_-)


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Skyl3r*
> 
> I'm not gonna lie though, I just think it's hilarious that people are referencing my validation as a reason why the Titanium is great. I've been complaining about a lack of bclock and subpar VRMs and meanwhile behind my back people are worshipping it because of me lol
> 
> 
> 
> Heres what the owner off that result had to say.
> 
> Priceless
> 
> And to answer your question. Core disabling was to decrease heat. Im air he was water i lvled the playing field.
> 
> Does not make my chip any better just cooler..
> 
> Ocing raising volts then cooling..
Click to expand...

Still waiting to see any other board prime stable at 4 ghz cl 14 3200 mhz on stock voltage settings with one of the 16 thread chips.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Was about to buy a Crosshair.... until I saw it's a 4-phase board. Is this really wat ROG has become? (aside from the milking in previous gens, at least there was one decent board - Ryzen doesn't have a decent ASUS board -_-)


It's 4 phases doubled to 8 for the CPU via IR3599 & they're using the same parts as in ROG Maximus boards.

Unlike for Intel they needed the two phases from the PWM controller for SOC.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Still waiting to see any other board prime stable at 4 ghz cl 14 3200 mhz on stock voltage settings with one of the 16 thread chips.


You mean what you think is stock volts.

Prime and prime blend custom 90% ram...

Apples to oranges in what can be done at xx volts.

Not to mention golden chips clock good on any board...


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Not as impressive overclocking *fewer cores*. I was referring to the Ryzen 7 series. Lets compare apples to applies.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol seriously? Lower skus are all ryzen 7 failed chips...if anything the are harder to oc...
> 
> 1400 was an 1800x core at one point that failed...
> 
> Grow up and downcore a 1800x
> 
> Less tears please. You dont dictate the rules for cpu-z franc at canard pc and hwbot does.
> 
> WR fwiw is one core..
> 
> Actually you know what ill play along.
> 
> Oh well that guy needed water.
> 
> Not as impressive as air.
> 
> Apples to apples i use your bad analogy against you.
Click to expand...

Freakazoid is a prankster and also insane. You're bein' pranked.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Still waiting to see any other board prime stable at 4 ghz cl 14 3200 mhz on stock voltage settings with one of the 16 thread chips.


..... What did you do for that 15 minutes? boot to bios. flip multi, slap docp... 1 minute tops. after

14 minutes of dark satanic sacrifice?


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skyl3r*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Skyl3r*
> 
> So... PCIe slots pop off pretty easy...
> Time to get a new motherboard...
> 
> 
> 
> OMG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Was dis da MSI Titanium?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah. Not too happy about that.
> 
> I remember first seeing those plated PCIe ports and thinking "Man, that's weird. How could you pull out a PCIe slot?"
> Well, I've discovered how and I'm here to tell you, it's pretty easy to do.
> 
> I'm thinking I'll get some wire cutters and cut off the pins and just use it with 2 PCIe slots and get an additional board for continuing to do 3-way XFire.
Click to expand...


----------



## yendor

Unfortunate. At least it didn't happen to @Zhany.


----------



## chew*

Damn that sux. Skyler seems like a cool level headed dude. We were both complaining about our boards last night no fanboy stuff just honest complaints.

I do obviously find this amusing to however.

Not many straws left to grab at now.

Cpu-z ripped away on ln2 and air

Those awsome overbuilt reinforced kevlar bomb shelter pci slots/build quality gone from the equasion.

Lets go back to that flir imaging and the golden stock volts chip


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Lol seriously? Lower skus are all ryzen 7 failed chips...if anything the are harder to oc...
> 
> 1400 was an 1800x core at one point that failed...
> 
> Grow up and downcore a 1800x
> 
> Less tears please. You dont dictate the rules for cpu-z franc at canard pc and hwbot does.
> 
> WR fwiw is one core..
> 
> Actually you know what ill play along.
> 
> Oh well that guy needed water.
> 
> Not as impressive as air.
> 
> Apples to apples i use your bad analogy against you.


I had respect for you, but you are losing it FAST. Fewer cores require less power and generate less heat. The cores that were disabled were more likely disabled due to defects on the die. The reason is irrelevant. It simply takes less power to do what you did, end of story. To try to claim otherwise is ignorance.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> I had respect for you, but you are losing it FAST. Fewer cores require less power and generate less heat. The cores that were disabled were more likely disabled due to defects on the die. The reason is irrelevant. It simply takes less power to do what you did, end of story. To try to claim otherwise is ignorance.


Power has nothing to do with cpu-z....a crappy 4 phase junk micro atx can do a validation just fine...if not better.

Heat has everything to do with it, cooler chip higher clock..

Your losing respect for me? I don't care tbh.

I kiss no companies rear...and i will not mislead people into thinking any product is better than it is.

That earns respect from those that matter.

Im sorry but this is how the cpu-z validation game has always been played.

Its a suicide bench.

Smart people validate on best core or minimal amount of cores at the least...

Im waiting to here your response on the msi ln2 cpuz being beat by cinebench stable speeds however. This excuse should be good....


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Unfortunate. At least it didn't happen to @Zhany.


Huh glad I didn't go through with buying the Titanium, although I seem to be having some rather bad luck with my builds. My ASRock board is on its way back to newegg due to an issue that cropped up with it. Ended up having to get a new case too, power button decided to break off completely. So I won't be back up and running until Monday.


----------



## chew*

Btw i don't hate any company if this guy was worshipping asus he would get the same treatment.

I care about only one thing.

Not misleading end users.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Btw i don't hate any company if this guy was worshipping asus he would get the same treatment.
> 
> I care about only one thing.
> 
> Not misleading end users.


I can agree with that easily







I have no real brand loyalty, I've had good and bad experiences with pretty much any manufacture it just really seems to depend on the platform. Even the same manufacture might be fantastic on Intel but end up being horrific on AMD.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Not as impressive overclocking *fewer cores*. I was referring to the Ryzen 7 series. Lets compare apples to applies.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol seriously? Lower skus are all ryzen 7 failed chips...if anything the are harder to oc...
> 
> 1400 was an 1800x core at one point that failed...
> 
> Grow up and downcore a 1800x
> 
> Less tears please. You dont dictate the rules for cpu-z franc at canard pc and hwbot does.
> 
> WR fwiw is one core..
> 
> Actually you know what ill play along.
> 
> Oh well that guy needed water.
> 
> Not as impressive as air.
> 
> Apples to apples i use your bad analogy against you.
Click to expand...

I've had quite a different experience with chips that have disabled cores : http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4020922 or this http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2467876 2 different 960T's the one on the MSI 790FX GD 70 was on an AIO in 70F - fired it up one evening - forgot it was at that setting , played games , browsed all my normal activities for about 6 hours, got ready to go to bed checked the clocks - ooopsie - 4.6 amazing







.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Damn that sux. Skyler seems like a cool level headed dude. We were both complaining about our boards last night no fanboy stuff just honest complaints.
> 
> I do obviously find this amusing to however.
> 
> Not many straws left to grab at now.
> 
> Cpu-z ripped away on ln2 and air
> 
> Those awsome overbuilt reinforced kevlar bomb shelter pci slots/build quality gone from the equasion.
> 
> Lets go back to that flir imaging and the golden stock volts chip


I'd love to . IF the Titanium is indeed sending more volts to the cpu than it is reporting, wouldn't the VRM's that everyone seems to think are substandard be running hotter than the other boards do?

IF that is also the case , how does it manage this



or this




IF anyone is willing/able to run their rig with ANY AM4 motherboard cpu combination at the same clockspeeds/corevoltage - same loads/ duration on the stock vrm cooling solution at normal ambient temps so we can compare VRM temps it would be greatly appreciated.

Even my 1800X is golden pushing those volts at that speed under 100% load how does it keep vrm's so cool? 49C? 70F ambient temps - stock heatsinks with a low speed 120 fan directed at the cpu socket area.

No straw grabbin here


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Power has nothing to do with cpu-z....a crappy 4 phase junk micro atx can do a validation just fine...if not better.
> 
> Heat has everything to do with it, cooler chip higher clock..
> 
> Your losing respect for me? I don't care tbh.
> 
> I kiss no companies rear...and i will not mislead people into thinking any product is better than it is.
> 
> That earns respect from those that matter.
> 
> Im sorry but this is how the cpu-z validation game has always been played.
> 
> Its a suicide bench.
> 
> Smart people validate on best core or minimal amount of cores at the least...
> 
> Im waiting to here your response on the msi ln2 cpuz being beat by cinebench stable speeds however. This excuse should be good....


What does this have to do with CPU-Z? That is just ONE product that does validation. You claimed a higher clock speed, but with a CPU running fewer cores. Excuse me for not being impressed since it is NOT the same chip and it uses less power which means less heat and less strain on the VRM. I assume you know this and are just being an ass. That, or you really don't know what the hell you are talking about.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Btw i don't hate any company if this guy was worshipping asus he would get the same treatment.
> 
> I care about only one thing.
> 
> Not misleading end users.


Right...and claiming a top OC in a discussion about Ryzen 7 OC when you didn't even use the same chip isn't misleading. Dream on...

I have not mislead about anything. I have pointed out numerous *factual* errors and have not been found to be wrong. Buildzoid is only one example, but there are others. So until someone can present *facts*, these empty opinions are just getting a little pathetic.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> What does this have to do with CPU-Z? That is just ONE product that does validation. You claimed a higher clock speed, but with a CPU running fewer cores. Excuse me for not being impressed since it is NOT the same chip and it uses less power which means less heat and less strain on the VRM. I assume you know this and are just being an ass. That, or you really don't know what the hell you are talking about.


CPU-Z would be the one product used to validate the board 'with less expensive components' you referenced. It's relatively easy to validate high if that's your only goal.

Fewer cores does not necessarily mean less power consumption. I admit I'm cherrypicking a sample here but it's not isolated.

https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/04/11/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-review/6

One other reviewer noted that power consumption hinted that the disabled cores still have power running through them, which negates a potentially varying amount of thermal headdroom on the chip, likewise strain on vrm. Add in the fact that you won't get symmetrically disabled cores in each ccx all the time and you may have some interesting times with wild variance between two chips. It could be more challenging without limiting the highest clock obtainable. .

But I didn't go deep into testing methodology. Other things could account for power consumption and sample size is still way too low.

It would take testing to confirm the state of disabled cores, ryzen master can see them. OS does not. Ditto effect of non symmetrically located disabled cores in each ccx. Get yer tin foil hat ready or just admit ti's a possibility , not a certainty, if you want to save time. At the very least it would resemble overclocking another chip with disabled defective cores. If only there had been a few of those and someone had experience with them.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> CPU-Z would be the one product used to validate the board 'with less expensive components' you referenced. It's relatively easy to validate high if that's your only goal.
> 
> Fewer cores does not necessarily mean less power consumption. I admit I'm cherrypicking a sample here but it's not isolated.
> 
> https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/04/11/amd-ryzen-5-1600x-review/6
> 
> One other reviewer noted that power consumption hinted that the disabled cores still have power running through them, which negates a potentially varying amount of thermal headdroom on the chip, likewise strain on vrm. Add in the fact that you won't get symmetrically disabled cores in each ccx all the time and you may have some interesting times with wild variance between two chips. It could be more challenging without limiting the highest clock obtainable. .
> 
> But I didn't go deep into testing methodology. Other things could account for power consumption and sample size is still way too low.
> 
> It would take testing to confirm the state of disabled cores, ryzen master can see them. OS does not. Ditto effect of non symmetrically located disabled cores in each ccx. Get yer tin foil hat ready or just admit ti's a possibility , not a certainty, if you want to save time. At the very least it would resemble overclocking another chip with disabled defective cores. If only there had been a few of those and someone had experience with them.


If it truly was fewer cores based on the same architecture it would mean less power. What you are showing is that the cores do not appear to be truly disabled but rather made non-functioning.

That is odd. I can somewhat understand at idle given the common cache architecture and infinity Fabric, but would be expecting a greater difference under load. In the past AMD used a laser to disable cores (after even earlier methods were easily circumvented). It would seem unusual for them to logically disable cores, unless something in the architecture (maybe related to the intelli sense, or whatever they call it) can't be easily segmented and disabled...

There are other sites showing similar results, so that may not be that cherry picked.

But there is a difference under load, just not nearly as much as should be expected if the cores were truly/completely disabled.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I've had quite a different experience with chips that have disabled cores : http://www.3dmark.com/fs/4020922 or this http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2467876 2 different 960T's the one on the MSI 790FX GD 70 was on an AIO in 70F - fired it up one evening - forgot it was at that setting , played games , browsed all my normal activities for about 6 hours, got ready to go to bed checked the clocks - ooopsie - 4.6 amazing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> I'd love to . IF the Titanium is indeed sending more volts to the cpu than it is reporting, wouldn't the VRM's that everyone seems to think are substandard be running hotter than the other boards do?
> 
> IF that is also the case , how does it manage this
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IF anyone is willing/able to run their rig with ANY AM4 motherboard cpu combination at the same clockspeeds/corevoltage - same loads/ duration on the stock vrm cooling solution at normal ambient temps so we can compare VRM temps it would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Even my 1800X is golden pushing those volts at that speed under 100% load how does it keep vrm's so cool? 49C? 70F ambient temps - stock heatsinks with a low speed 120 fan directed at the cpu socket area.
> 
> No straw grabbin here


We were overdue, sacrificing the necessary creatures to keep your chip and board running no doubt









Actually when I see your results I wonder what the volts are at the cpu. not because I think titanium is bad. Software is demonstrably not accurate. Could be overreporting. Then your voltage for clocks is better than you think.

It's not mutually exclusive with the position that the mosfets are 'less expensive'. Isolate them and test vs competitor for electrical loss. Or trust spec sheet. Test thermals without the excellent cooling MSI has given them.

I still think more power has to go into those fets to get the same power out, it does not change the fact that they get the same power out with the caveat that software won't accurately report what's getting to the cpu but that's not the mosfets fault. Nature of the business.

Assume, and I don't, that those are the worst mosfets the planet has ever seen, then it makes the rest of the design stand out more for power efficiency, thermal management. if they're only "average" the rest is still good. Better than what the spec sheet seems to show? Wonderful. Conclusively provable.. If only we knew someone with a titanium. >.>

Still envious of the thermals.


----------



## SuperZan

It's a good board. I stand by my advice elsewhere that if you buy the top board from any of the vendors you're just fine for 4.0GHz assuming proper cooling, airflow, and a compliant chip. My criticism of the board has always been that it doesn't offer me anything for which I want to pay a premium. My GT7 will take a chip to the same place for less money, and honestly Orkin, you're skilled and experienced enough (more than me, for certain) to take any of the high-end boards to where you want to go. If somebody asks me specifically what boards to look at based on their needs, the Titanium can certainly come up. If somebody has similar needs to my own, the Titanium is a pass just because it's not offering an advantage commensurate with the price difference. I'll never say it's not a good board or not sufficient to the task.


----------



## chris89

This isn't Ryzen but just wanted to show my VRM cooling solution... under load I unplugged the CPU fan to let the CPU and VRM heat up to 75C and plugged back in cooling down... Then did that over and over again so it cures and adheres quicker... These VRM temps seem low right?

By the way thought it was interesting... checkbox Cache and CPU & VRM drops by 10C... 10C less than shown nearly that 41C minimum at load.


----------



## chew*

I can say you clearly dont understand downcore or instability it incurs or ryzen in general.

You have much to learn.

Interestingly enough r1700 has 65w tdp

Whats r5 1400 have?

So a 4 core chip has tdp of a 8 core.....

Like i said much to learn...

And you think i don't know anything?

What have you brought that is usefull to the community with ryzen so far except for drama over an overpriced board?

What have i brought?

Cheers. I'm through with wasting my time with you.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I can say you clearly dont understand downcore or instability it incurs or ryzen in general.
> 
> You have much to learn.
> 
> Interestingly enough r1700 has 65w tdp
> 
> Whats r5 1400 have?


You do know downcore isn't the same as disabling a core (as would be done by the manufacturer)? It's just a form of core parking...

You do know tdp isn't power draw?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> You do know downcore isn't the same as disabling a core (as would be done by the manufacturer)? It's just a form of core parking...
> 
> You do know tdp isn't power draw?
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2


I said im done with you.

Run your system not your mouth.

Show the community your vast actual applied knowledge and not your abilty to copy paste knowledge


----------



## chew*

For the others who want to learn...

A 4 core gives you quite a few options.

3 optimal ones in the case of cpu-z

0+2 2+0 and 1+1.

Juggling these around until you find your best cores will get you the best results.

In my case it was 1+1.

Oh i might add keep your mem clocks very low...case in point as i noted in the past the biosstar bricks itself down cored with optimal mem speeds .

Ref clock boards cant even go over 103 like this and generally imc stability is shaky at best.

Enjoy.


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> i keep reading about hardware luxx so that looks like a good site to go to but it's banned the autonomous system number (ASN) my IP address is in from accessing this website. but some how google translate got through. thanks for the link.


HardwareLuxx does have pretty solid reviews.

They do take apart their boards and go into a component breakdown, unlike the majority of websites which I appreciate. Tweaktown also does here. Kitguru has detailed reviews as does Ocaholic. I believe that there is a Russian site that also does very solid reviews.

There are also quite a few Korean sites that do component breakdowns as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Medusa666*
> 
> So what are the rankings for best VRM setup so far between the high end boards such as MSI X370 Titanium, Asus CH6, Gigabyte K5 and K7, Asrock Taichi and Pro, ASUS Prime?
> 
> So hard to know what board to pick, but the most important thing to me would be cool VRM during heavy loads and a strong power delivery overall for securing a long life of the motherboard and CPU.



Asrock X370 Taichi = Asrock X370 Fata1ty Gaming Professional (12 + 4 NextFet; 480A + 160A)
Asus X370 Crosshair Hero (320A) - 8 phase TI NextFET (so 320A + 160A)
Gigabyte X370 K7 - (so 240A + 160A) with IR3553
These 3 all have clock generators although with the AGESA upgrade that might be a non-issue.

I guess that's a basic ranking. Behind these, I think the Biostar X370 GT7 (4x IR3555M) and X370 XPower (6x Nikos) would be behind these 3. I'd put the Biostar ahead even though the MSI might have more ability because of price and the low efficiency of the Nikos.

5/4/2017 Edit:
Edit: Actually with the Biostar GT7, I am thinking with 8 + 4 IR3555M, it might be better than the X370s from Asrock.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> ^ I have to second this opinion.
> 
> For most people at normal 24/7 voltages the difference between the CH VI Hero and Taichi isn't very large. The K7 is only going to lag behind once you push past safe voltages (1.4V or so) because up until the ~25A mark IR3553 are going to be > 90% efficient as long as you cool them. 25A x 6 phases = 150A , while in reality a 4GHz Ryzen 7 consumes roughly 100-110A and Ryzen 5 6 cores about 80A by correlation.
> 
> 
> I do have to add : if you are looking to watercool with a monoblock (i.e. not a universal kit or AIO) I think the Crosshair VI Hero will provide you more headroom as far as power.
> 
> The Taichi / Fatal1ty Professional have that issue of not getting any vendor support from EK , Bitspower , and others as far as monoblocks.
> If it's the same VRM as theorized as the Krait Gaming, then it isn't the greatest but passable. http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index10.html
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> It's 4 phases doubled "the wrong way" without phase interleaving to 8 phases. Meanwhile the Asrock X370 K4 board uses IR3598 doublers to interleave (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html) so even though it is using worse parts in the review (PK618 instead PK632) it doubles them properly.
> Xpower doesn't have 12 chokes for CPU. It doesn't have 12 high side mosfets for CPU.
> 
> 
> Also I think many people are forgetting a higher switching frequency leads to more losses. MSI could easily run the mosfets at half the switching frequency for lower performance but cooler VRM.
> 
> Low side losses are largely not dependent on switching frequency but high side losses are.
> 
> If you're going for a monoblock what VRM heatsinks the motherboard comes with is irrelevant. Titanium is used for corrosion resistance / anti thermal creep. I think they didn't want to name their motherboard Xpower NICKEL.


I think that for the Asrock X370 Taichi, it's powerful enough that I have to ask, why would you want a VRM waterblock? Is it just for the looks? You don't need much with the stock heatsink.

If so then the Asus X370 Crosshair is the next best option if waterblock is a must. However, the Taichi is "good enough" that it can be run without a waterblock.

In regards to switching losses on the MSI, the competition could reduce switch speed as well. I don't see why they would though for a flagship. That would be embarrassing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> So for Ryzen to hit 4.5Ghz needs epic VRM solution huh? So much heat from board VRM... or if ASUS Releases the ASUS X370 RAMPAGE ATX & mATX Genie then no problem.. maybe they use 50mm delta on heatpipe connected VRM/ Northbridge/ Southbridge? Or just vrm + southbridge haha Ryzen Northbridge is integrated right? What if the single beasty 1/4" Heatpipe was cooling it all? That would be awesome haha


You won't be able to hit 4.5 GHz on air or water - period. You need subzero cooling for that. Ryzen seems to be stuck at 4.1 GHz and that's on the best silicon lottery samples for "safe" 24-7 voltages.

Oh and power consumption goes way up after 4.1 GHz.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xioros*
> 
> Was about to buy a Crosshair.... until I saw it's a 4-phase board. Is this really wat ROG has become? (aside from the milking in previous gens, at least there was one decent board - Ryzen doesn't have a decent ASUS board -_-)


Technically with the doubling it is 8+4 and the second best VRM (Asrock's X370 Taichi and Fata1ty Pro being the top 12 + 4; same TI NextFET Mosfet with the IR3599 . RAM Mosfets are surprisingly hot (warmer than the CPU).

Agree though that at times ROG has milked off its brand. Right now it seems a lot of companies these days rest on their old reputation I'm afraid.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> How does it compare for support for the highest speed RAM Zen has so far been shown to be able to handle?
> 
> I'm personally still waiting for a board with a hybrid water/air VRM sink.


Right now all of the BIOS are immature so it's really hard to give a straight answer. The AGESA update in May is expected to address a lot of the issues.

We need to be able to adjust RAM multipliers and timings. It's imperative that we have that too because Ryzen seems to like faster RAM a great deal.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Btw i don't hate any company if this guy was worshipping asus he would get the same treatment.
> 
> I care about only one thing.
> 
> Not misleading end users.


For $ 300 I expect to have one of the best fets set in the market.

I've seem some MSI B350M boards getting to 90ºC on the VRMs in a matter of seconds with 3.8GHz.

Maybe its just MSI trying to make history again ?
http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ylNV_H2uXUBD6wlvzkWVJJyrYWZuNBVFBvY3omiU5yg/pub?amp;output=html&widget=true


----------



## JasonMZW20

I think the Titanium is overpriced for what it offers and I have one (only because the Taichi was out of stock for a month or so). I got it for a decent price at $260, but I still think that's too much. I've rarely spent more than $200 for a mobo.

Anyway, it looks like MSI is going to pull a fast one on us, likely because they know the rev. 1.0 boards are **** compared to the competition (maybe someone saw this VRM thread?).

See my image here: http://imgur.com/CJKuG9H

Why are there already -002 and -02S models? These are distinct model numbers for new boards (at least, I think they are; do set me straight on that; B350 Mortar is 7A37-001, Mortar Arctic is -002, but the image shows the same Titanium name for all 3 models ... hmm). I know mine is a -001. I was reporting some temp and voltage reporting oddities to MSI when I stumbled upon this.

My VRMs are staying under 60C (with 2 200mm fans, top and side with 120mm exhaust) at 3.9GHz/1.35v, but still, was I disappointed? Yep. It's like they allocated all of their good VRM stock for Z270 Titanium boards. Lame. At the MSRP of $299, it better have the best components on the market.

If you're curious about the oddities I was reporting on, see them here: http://imgur.com/9WqWJXx

Lovely, right? Occurs after long idle overnight, since "stable" BIOS 1.4. CPU temp has completely dropped signal to mobo, thankfully it can be read directly. Fan signals are coming up at random when I only have 1 fan (CPU sense only). A lot of other voltage readings have dropped out at one point, and there are even some I haven't seen before. WITAF is this mess? So sloppy.


----------



## chris89

I find the primary limitation of these AMD Chips is the boards/ and hotspots all over... VRM sitting all over uncooled and crazy hot... Higher the voltage higher they get... power consumption goes sky high


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I said im done with you.
> 
> Run your system not your mouth.
> 
> Show the community your vast actual applied knowledge and not your abilty to copy paste knowledge


Ah, so you are an *******. Some people understand that providing citations help show they aren't just spewing worthless *opinions*. If someone challenges me, I will *verify* what I recall to be correct is in fact correct. If you are too lazy to do so, so be it. That is *your* shortcoming, not mine. Get used to it. On the other hand, when I check and find I am wrong I will admit as much. Unlike many others...

I will continue to provide *citations* so other can verify what I say rather than relying on personal arrogance.

Shooting the messenger is a fallacy of arguing and simply shows an underlying weakness in your position. But at least you are not alone here...


----------



## Nighthog

... Still going on I see. ^

Well Seems the Gigabyte Gaming 3 does have a little extra to give.

Seems I can pass Realbench with 4.0Ghz with 1.500V . @35min on 1 hour run.

I adjusted my VRM FAN and getting a little better temps.
Realbench 86C MAX.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> I think the Titanium is overpriced for what it offers and I have one (only because the Taichi was out of stock for a month or so). I got it for a decent price at $260, but I still think that's too much. I've rarely spent more than $200 for a mobo.
> 
> Anyway, it looks like MSI is going to pull a fast one on us, likely because they know the rev. 1.0 boards are **** compared to the competition (maybe someone saw this VRM thread?).
> 
> See my image here: http://imgur.com/CJKuG9H
> 
> Why are there already -002 and -02S models? These are distinct model numbers for new boards (at least, I think they are; do set me straight on that; B350 Mortar is 7A37-001, Mortar Arctic is -002, but the image shows the same Titanium name for all 3 models ... hmm). I know mine is a -001. I was reporting some temp and voltage reporting oddities to MSI when I stumbled upon this.
> 
> My VRMs are staying under 60C (with 2 200mm fans, top and side with 120mm exhaust) at 3.9GHz/1.35v, but still, was I disappointed? Yep. It's like they allocated all of their good VRM stock for Z270 Titanium boards. Lame. At the MSRP of $299, it better have the best components on the market.
> 
> If you're curious about the oddities I was reporting on, see them here: http://imgur.com/9WqWJXx
> 
> Lovely, right? Occurs after long idle overnight, since "stable" BIOS 1.4. CPU temp has completely dropped signal to mobo, thankfully it can be read directly. Fan signals are coming up at random when I only have 1 fan (CPU sense only). A lot of other voltage readings have dropped out at one point, and there are even some I haven't seen before. WITAF is this mess? So sloppy.


That will occur on a good many motherboards when they go into powersaving modes - my ASUS CHV-Z and Asrock 990 Extreme 3 for examples.

I'd only be upset if the revisions were of poorer quality - like the Gigabyte did with their 990 UD3's

I see the Tiachi and the Gigabyte K5's both showing higher VRM temperatures during prime 95 than my Titanium does, with lower voltages/clocks to boot. About the only way I could be happier with the Titanium is if it had an option for baseclock overclocking, which may be in the works.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> [/U]
> 
> That will occur on a good many motherboards when they go into powersaving modes - my ASUS CHV-Z and Asrock 990 Extreme 3 for examples.
> 
> I'd only be upset if the revisions were of poorer quality - like the Gigabyte did with their 990 UD3's
> 
> I see the Tiachi and the Gigabyte K5's both showing higher VRM temperatures during prime 95 than my Titanium does, with lower voltages/clocks to boot. About the only way I could be happier with the Titanium is if it had an option for baseclock overclocking, which may be in the works.


Until you use the same chip in a variety of boards it can be rather inconclusive.

All silicon is unique.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Ah, so you are an *******. Some people understand that providing citations help show they aren't just spewing worthless *opinions*. If someone challenges me, I will *verify* what I recall to be correct is in fact correct. If you are too lazy to do so, so be it. That is *your* shortcoming, not mine. Get used to it. On the other hand, when I check and find I am wrong I will admit as much. Unlike many others...
> 
> I will continue to provide *citations* so other can verify what I say rather than relying on personal arrogance.
> 
> Shooting the messenger is a fallacy of arguing and simply shows an underlying weakness in your position. But at least you are not alone here...


Never claimed im not an ahole.

Quite the contrary. Im a major ahole but i am damn good at what i do.

My personality has no impact on my skill.

Facts remain.

Over priced.

Cheaper quality parts. Lets forget about all other vendors and just compare titanium to titanium.

This one can not hold a candle to the rest of them in the vrm department.

This is an undeniable fact.

Msi makes great products. Lightning for example. If they made a lightning fury x and slapped a lightning sticker on a stock ref card i would be complaining about that to.

Lightning moniker means x anything less is disappointing.

Since i have worked with in the past and been one of the few sponsored by multi top tier all at the same time i cant tell you this.

Keeping the status quo stagnates.

Making waves innovates.

Want a better product? Then don't act satisfied with sub par quality.

Also i should add. I have the liberty of knowing behind closed doors info.While i may not be able to comment about it...once you know...kind of hard to forget the info.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Never claimed im not an ahole.
> 
> Quite the contrary. Im a major ahole but i am damn good at what i do.
> 
> My personality has no impact on my skill.
> 
> Facts remain.
> 
> Over priced.
> 
> Cheaper quality parts. Lets forget about all other vendors and just compare titanium to titanium.
> 
> This one can not hold a candle to the rest of them in the vrm department.
> 
> This is an undeniable fact.
> 
> Msi makes great products. Lightning for example. If they made a lightning fury x and slapped a lightning sticker on a stock ref card i would be complaining about that to.
> 
> Lightning moniker means x anything less is disappointing.
> 
> Since i have worked with in the past and been one of the few sponsored by multi top tier all at the same time i cant tell you this.
> 
> Keeping the status quo stagnates.
> 
> Making waves innovates.
> 
> Want a better product? Then don't act satisfied with sub par quality.


On top of that it seems MSI used cheaper parts across the board for the AM4 Platform, and on some of the lower end stuff no heat-sink on the SOC VRM with NIKOs is rather concerning.
Also on the ASRock AB350M Pro4 from the number of chokes it appears to have a 6 phase VCore VRM however the reality is its only a three phase so that is kinda sneaky in my opinion.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> ... Still going on I see. ^
> 
> Well Seems the Gigabyte Gaming 3 does have a little extra to give.
> 
> Seems I can pass Realbench with 4.0Ghz with 1.500V . @35min on 1 hour run.
> 
> I adjusted my VRM FAN and getting a little better temps.
> Realbench 86C MAX.


How are the SOC VRM Temps?


----------



## chew*

Most importantly perspective matters.

For what you do? The board is probably more than acceptable.

For what i do?










Bet your hiney that i need to be concerned with every vendors vrm...

Like i said. I am really the only one here that has any stakes or right to complain in this thread at this point in time...


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> How are the SOC VRM Temps?


Have had to do a few vcore increases as the 1hour fails. I did 59min and then I managed to stop the bench some way.
With some retries I've seen black screen fails at various points.

SoC VRM max @ 48C
Core VRM max @ 89C
Tdie max @ 73.5C (avg ~65-66C)

1.2125V + 0.300V offset = 1.500V under load. still have 30min left to go.

edit: passed 1hour. though fudged and the "data" for a screenshot went away.

cpu-z atleast: https://valid.x86.fr/vrh61z

Cinebench:


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Never claimed im not an ahole.
> 
> Quite the contrary. Im a major ahole but i am damn good at what i do.
> 
> My personality has no impact on my skill.
> 
> Facts remain.
> 
> Over priced.
> 
> Cheaper quality parts. Lets forget about all other vendors and just compare titanium to titanium.
> 
> This one can not hold a candle to the rest of them in the vrm department.
> 
> This is an undeniable fact.
> 
> Msi makes great products. Lightning for example. If they made a lightning fury x and slapped a lightning sticker on a stock ref card i would be complaining about that to.
> 
> Lightning moniker means x anything less is disappointing.
> 
> Since i have worked with in the past and been one of the few sponsored by multi top tier all at the same time i cant tell you this.
> 
> Keeping the status quo stagnates.
> 
> Making waves innovates.
> 
> Want a better product? Then don't act satisfied with sub par quality.
> 
> Also i should add. I have the liberty of knowing behind closed doors info.While i may not be able to comment about it...once you know...kind of hard to forget the info.


I actually have no issue with someone who can be an a-hole. Honestly, I find people who are advanced in a technical field tend to fall into that category more often, and I don't exclude myself.

What bothers me are unsubstantiated claims. Also mixing of terminology - "quality", "sub par", "performance". Do you need a Corvette engine in a VW Bug? I have not argued the Nikkos are the most efficient or "best", but I have made appropriate counter-claims related to their use in this design.

Buildzoid rated a number of AM4 VRM's but misquoted specs. His criteria (125c) is arbitrary and the "better" VRMs actually fail miserably at that temp. They simply aren't designed to run that hot. At lower temps they are much better. At 125c the *Nikkos are much better*. You can't take a single part outside of the design specs and properly consider it. I conceded that 125c was a poor and arbitrary temp, but that was *his* choice. When making a comparison at a given spec you need to be fair and consistent. But then this raised the question of how these parts are evaluated and the criteria being used.

At 50c (give or take) ANY of these VRM's should last forever. MSI obviously has a lot of experience with Nikkos. They had a lot of failures on their Z270 series boards based on some RMA reports. They may have simply decided to step back and design a VRM they *knew* would last while they worked out other issues. I really don't know. But at the price point you and everyone else is correct that they *could* have used any parts they wanted. I doubt they would intentionally under-design their flagship board. They opted for this design for a reason - and it happens to be working quite well. If it continues to achieve top overclocks AND remains reliable AND keeps temps below 40c around idle, low 50's in normal load and only hit 60c under extreme testing, what is the issue? That they could have used more expensive parts? Who the hell cares *if it works as intended*? That has been my point. I would complain *if I or others had actual issues* with the VRMs. If they do fail, I will complain loudly. I don't care for WiFi, dual audio subsystems, or most of that other crap. I simply want a board that will do as I ask of it and will last. Whether it will last remains to be seen. It's simply too early to judge. But if you google 'MSI X370 titanium failure' you just don't get much. "Issues" shows mostly BIOS growing pains. Do the same for any other board...

And as I mentioned, I prefer to provide citations so people don't have to take me at my word. I also prefer to cite specifications or research papers when I can find them, but some topics rely on other reviews - and you and I know those can be suspect and I will usually point that out as well.

People sneer at "Mil Spec", but MSI uses parts they have tested (or claim to at least) for longevity under tough conditions (there are actual Mil Spec guidelines for the ratings they claim to meet). Yes, so far I have to take them at their word. But that was a reason as well. Unless they simply lie, the components and build is intended for 7x24 use under tough conditions for an extended period. It may very well be why they haven't added as many "extras" like WiFi - maybe those ship sets won't cut it. You found your WiFi cuts out with a modest BLCK jump. Will it matter, I already said I don't know. Only time will tell.

I also already stated I think the Titanium is more reasonable around $260-275. Some would claim that is still too pricey, but I do place value on the build quality. Who cares about more layers in a PCB? Maybe those who mount large air coolers? I already mentioned numerous other benefits *with citations*.

If anyone wants to complain, provide something *real* you can demonstrate or cite specific to this board that is an issue. That shouldn't be difficult if there is an issue, should it? If you want to complain about the price, fine. Nothing wrong with that. But beyond that, *show me, don't tell me*.

If you can provide the pin outs for voltage measurement I would be more than happy to take actual reading with my DMM (it's a quality unit). I plan to pick up a laser-targeted IR thermometer to verify temps at multiple *specifically identified* locations - mosfets, chokes, caps, heatsinks, the board to put the temp doubts to bed. I agree the sensors could be off and I don't think any of us can confirm exactly what they are reporting on. I am all for sharing of information and getting to the truth. If temps end up being worse than reported, the truth will come out. If I can verify voltages, then maybe we can put that to rest as well. More information is *good*...

(edited for typos)


----------



## chew*

The on paper specs tbh never matter under the abuse i deliver.

Im brutal to hardware. I take precautions to eliminate user error which voids any chance of a legitimate rma unlike most who vaseline boards kill it with condensation anyway toss in a dishwasher to clean then rma...i dunno i was on air...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Have had to do a few vcore increases as the 1hour fails. I did 59min and then I managed to stop the bench some way.
> With some retries I've seen black screen fails at various points.
> 
> SoC VRM max @ 48C
> Core VRM max @ 89C
> Tdie max @ 73.5C (avg ~65-66C)
> 
> 1.2125V + 0.300V offset = 1.500V under load. still have 30min left to go.
> 
> edit: passed 1hour. though fudged and the "data" for a screenshot went away.
> 
> cpu-z atleast: https://valid.x86.fr/vrh61z
> 
> Cinebench:


Thank you


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> ......I doubt they would intentionally under-design their flagship board. They opted for this design for a reason - and it happens to be working quite well...


The Titanium design decision could simply just be due to bulk purchasing contracts with Nikos. Since they are using that on their AM4s.

Also, we are all early adopters here, and on the same boat as far as uncovering issues and components used. Most of the MSI owners bought the boards during launch, prior to the VRM being uncovered, and now are just speaking out about actual good results they are getting. I tried buying a C6H from Frys and compared it side by side with the Ti, however the C6H did not have enough internal headers for my needs, and the Ti had been working flawlessly Overclocked on Air, so I ended up returning the C6H and keeping the Ti. I did get the Ti at a good price ($250) from Microcenter; so I support the argument that the price should be lower.


----------



## JasonMZW20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> [/U]
> 
> That will occur on a good many motherboards when they go into powersaving modes - my ASUS CHV-Z and Asrock 990 Extreme 3 for examples.
> 
> I'd only be upset if the revisions were of poorer quality - like the Gigabyte did with their 990 UD3's
> 
> I see the Tiachi and the Gigabyte K5's both showing higher VRM temperatures during prime 95 than my Titanium does, with lower voltages/clocks to boot. About the only way I could be happier with the Titanium is if it had an option for baseclock overclocking, which may be in the works.


I don't know. I've never seen a board completely lose CPU temp signal, which is the most important temp output. If I close Hwinfo and reopen, it will not reappear. The signal is completely gone from motherboard temp data. Debug LED still outputs though, which is good, and temps can be read from other sources with more data points.

I updated to BIOS 1.52 beta, and I'm still seeing random fan outputs while using my PC. Right now, system 3 fan output has shown up within 20 minutes of running (65,280rpm is one mighty fan), and VIN10 is back with 0.000v. I've also completely lost AUXTIN1 output, which I used to have. Speaking of which, while typing this, AUXTIN1 has come back with a 0.000v output.

I'm tempted to go back to BIOS 1.1 just to make sure my board isn't a dud.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> I think the Titanium is overpriced for what it offers and I have one (only because the Taichi was out of stock for a month or so). I got it for a decent price at $260, but I still think that's too much. I've rarely spent more than $200 for a mobo.
> 
> Anyway, it looks like MSI is going to pull a fast one on us, likely because they know the rev. 1.0 boards are **** compared to the competition (maybe someone saw this VRM thread?).
> 
> See my image here: http://imgur.com/CJKuG9H
> 
> Why are there already -002 and -02S models? These are distinct model numbers for new boards (at least, I think they are; do set me straight on that; B350 Mortar is 7A37-001, Mortar Arctic is -002, but the image shows the same Titanium name for all 3 models ... hmm). I know mine is a -001. I was reporting some temp and voltage reporting oddities to MSI when I stumbled upon this.
> 
> My VRMs are staying under 60C (with 2 200mm fans, top and side with 120mm exhaust) at 3.9GHz/1.35v, but still, was I disappointed? Yep. It's like they allocated all of their good VRM stock for Z270 Titanium boards. Lame. At the MSRP of $299, it better have the best components on the market.
> 
> If you're curious about the oddities I was reporting on, see them here: http://imgur.com/9WqWJXx
> 
> Lovely, right? Occurs after long idle overnight, since "stable" BIOS 1.4. CPU temp has completely dropped signal to mobo, thankfully it can be read directly. Fan signals are coming up at random when I only have 1 fan (CPU sense only). A lot of other voltage readings have dropped out at one point, and there are even some I haven't seen before. WITAF is this mess? So sloppy.


One point - I am not sure how well the Corsair software supports the MSI sensors. I did a little digging on this and MSI uses a Nuvoton NCT6795D "Super I/O" chip which is custom made for MSI and doesn't have published specs. There are a number of posts out on this issue. Developers have had to reverse engineer it from what I can tell, and there were some post about Corsair Link support (or lack of it) for that chip that are fairly recent. HWinfo64 seems to support it properly. If you haven't already (I apologize if you already mentioned as much), see if you get the same behavior with HWinfo64's sensor monitor...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> I think the Titanium is overpriced for what it offers and I have one (only because the Taichi was out of stock for a month or so). I got it for a decent price at $260, but I still think that's too much. I've rarely spent more than $200 for a mobo.
> 
> Anyway, it looks like MSI is going to pull a fast one on us, likely because they know the rev. 1.0 boards are **** compared to the competition (maybe someone saw this VRM thread?).
> 
> See my image here: http://imgur.com/CJKuG9H
> 
> Why are there already -002 and -02S models? These are distinct model numbers for new boards (at least, I think they are; do set me straight on that; B350 Mortar is 7A37-001, Mortar Arctic is -002, but the image shows the same Titanium name for all 3 models ... hmm). I know mine is a -001. I was reporting some temp and voltage reporting oddities to MSI when I stumbled upon this.
> 
> My VRMs are staying under 60C (with 2 200mm fans, top and side with 120mm exhaust) at 3.9GHz/1.35v, but still, was I disappointed? Yep. It's like they allocated all of their good VRM stock for Z270 Titanium boards. Lame. At the MSRP of $299, it better have the best components on the market.
> 
> If you're curious about the oddities I was reporting on, see them here: http://imgur.com/9WqWJXx
> 
> Lovely, right? Occurs after long idle overnight, since "stable" BIOS 1.4. CPU temp has completely dropped signal to mobo, thankfully it can be read directly. Fan signals are coming up at random when I only have 1 fan (CPU sense only). A lot of other voltage readings have dropped out at one point, and there are even some I haven't seen before. WITAF is this mess? So sloppy.


I've seen this before with other monitoring software . I was going to ask where you got those fans








It would not surprise me to see revisions of the Xpower. After all it SOLD.

Try , as others suggested, hwinfo. It's not as pretty but it does provide a wealth of information that others lack.


----------



## NightAntilli

After reading, I can understand both sides of the argument regarding the Titanium. The VRMs are not exactly the highest of quality, thus the board is overpriced. But I can also get the argument that if power consumption is less in practice, why does the VRM need to be so beefed up? I mean...;





Source; https://tweakers.net/productreview/159123/gigabyte-ga-ax370-gaming-5.html

The trashing of the VRM of the Titanium seems a bit exaggerated. I still don't think it justifies paying $300 for the Titanium though. Might as well go for the Prime X370 Pro from Asus, which is almost half the price ($160 at the time of writing).


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NightAntilli*
> 
> After reading, I can understand both sides of the argument regarding the Titanium. The VRMs are not exactly the highest of quality, thus the board is overpriced. But I can also get the argument that if power consumption is less in practice, why does the VRM need to be so beefed up? I mean...;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source; https://tweakers.net/productreview/159123/gigabyte-ga-ax370-gaming-5.html
> 
> The trashing of the VRM of the Titanium seems a bit exaggerated. I still don't think it justifies paying $300 for the Titanium though. Might as well go for the Prime X370 Pro from Asus, which is almost half the price ($160 at the time of writing).


From what I've seen -the armchair engineers seem to be missing something.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NightAntilli*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source; https://tweakers.net/productreview/159123/gigabyte-ga-ax370-gaming-5.html
> 
> 
> 
> Test methodology must be different. At the wall in kitguru's. I wasn't able to ascertain how tweaker's was measured.
> 
> Why beefier vrm? Better power delivery. Presumably more reliability under load. Some are more capable than others. Better able to function at temps one never wants to see vrms at for example.


----------



## JasonMZW20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> One point - I am not sure how well the Corsair software supports the MSI sensors. I did a little digging on this and MSI uses a Nuvoton NCT6795D "Super I/O" chip which is custom made for MSI and doesn't have published specs. There are a number of posts out on this issue. Developers have had to reverse engineer it from what I can tell, and there were some post about Corsair Link support (or lack of it) for that chip that are fairly recent. HWinfo64 seems to support it properly. If you haven't already (I apologize if you already mentioned as much), see if you get the same behavior with HWinfo64's sensor monitor...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I've seen this before with other monitoring software . I was going to ask where you got those fans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It would not surprise me to see revisions of the Xpower. After all it SOLD.
> 
> Try , as others suggested, hwinfo. It's not as pretty but it does provide a wealth of information that others lack.


Are you guys missing the HWiNFO64 panel to the right of the image? It's right there.

It happens in both, so the correlation is interesting. These issues no longer only occur during long idle, but occur during use as well (on 1.52 beta). I'm tempted to go all the way back to BIOS 1.1 just to make sure I don't have a board issue.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> Are you guys missing the HWiNFO64 panel to the right of the image? It's right there.
> 
> It happens in both, so the correlation is interesting. These issues no longer only occur during long idle, but occur during use as well (on 1.52 beta). I'm tempted to go all the way back to BIOS 1.1 just to make sure I don't have a board issue.


For some reason the right half was cut-off when I viewed the full-sized image. I would say you have a defective MB and should RMA it. You certainly shouldn't be getting those drop outs.


----------



## JasonMZW20

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NightAntilli*
> 
> After reading, I can understand both sides of the argument regarding the Titanium. The VRMs are not exactly the highest of quality, thus the board is overpriced. But I can also get the argument that if power consumption is less in practice, why does the VRM need to be so beefed up? I mean...;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source; https://tweakers.net/productreview/159123/gigabyte-ga-ax370-gaming-5.html
> 
> The trashing of the VRM of the Titanium seems a bit exaggerated. I still don't think it justifies paying $300 for the Titanium though. Might as well go for the Prime X370 Pro from Asus, which is almost half the price ($160 at the time of writing).


I suppose it'll come down to what the BIOS auto-sets the NB voltage at. Some boards seem to start at 1.0v. Stock on the Titanium is 0.800v, which goes up to 0.850v (extra LLC) at 2933 (A-XMP disabled). If they retested with newer BIOS revisions and A-XMP on, power consumption would rise quite a bit as it bumps the NB to 1.0v at 2933 and 1.2v at 3200. It just depends.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Why beefier vrm? Better power delivery. Presumably more reliability under load. Some are more capable than others. Better able to function at temps one never wants to see vrms at for example.


As I noted elsewhere, those "beefier" VRMs on the CH6 and TAICHI fail miserably at a much lower temp than the NIKKOs. It's in their spec sheet for those who bother to look. The reality is you shouldn't be hitting 90c+ at you VRMs but that is when those start to hit a wall and drop to only 10 amps at a max temp of 120c.

http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf

So they are not beefier, they are more efficient at lower temps but have a more limited operating range.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> I suppose it'll come down to what the BIOS auto-sets the NB voltage at. Some boards seem to start at 1.0v. Stock on the Titanium is 0.800v, which goes up to 0.850v (extra LLC) at 2933 (A-XMP disabled). If they retested with newer BIOS revisions and A-XMP on, power consumption would rise quite a bit as it bumps the NB to 1.0v at 2933 and 1.2v at 3200. It just depends.


True, but less so for tests with overclocks as those voltages would be manually set.

I'll use current reviews as a general counter claim, but I don't yet think any review is indicative of the optimal capability of any of these motherboards yet. I would think that level of assurance is a few months out still...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> Are you guys missing the HWiNFO64 panel to the right of the image? It's right there.
> 
> It happens in both, so the correlation is interesting. These issues no longer only occur during long idle, but occur during use as well (on 1.52 beta). I'm tempted to go all the way back to BIOS 1.1 just to make sure I don't have a board issue.
> 
> 
> 
> For some reason the right half was cut-off when I viewed the full-sized image. I would say you have a defective MB and should RMA it. You certainly shouldn't be getting those drop outs.
Click to expand...

It's just a glitch - hardware is most likely just fine - had it happen on several motherboards , most often caused by power saving features. My titanium will do it too, if I enable CNQ C6 and use a power plan other than hp.


----------



## TheOldTechGuru

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> It's just a glitch - hardware is most likely just fine - had it happen on several motherboards , most often caused by power saving features. My titanium will do it too, if I enable CNQ C6 and use a power plan other than hp.


Ah. I have been OC'd since day one and always disable both CNQ and C6 as my first steps when overclocking, so I would never see this behavior. Still seems odd these would drop in any situation other than a sleep mode, but I must defer for the aforementioned reasons...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> As I noted elsewhere, those "beefier" VRMs on the CH6 and TAICHI fail miserably at a much lower temp than the NIKKOs. It's in their spec sheet for those who bother to look. The reality is you shouldn't be hitting 90c+ at you VRMs but that is when those start to hit a wall and drop to only 10 amps at a max temp of 120c.
> 
> http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf
> 
> So they are not beefier, they are more efficient at lower temps but have a more limited operating range.


Eh, post you're replying to here says nothing about whose vrms are beefier. Though a higher temperature range might be considered beefy.

So what i was wondering is why the kitguru consumption is so different from the tweakers consumption. Idle is half of the kitguru numbers. And load? prime drawing less power than cinebench?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheOldTechGuru*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> It's just a glitch - hardware is most likely just fine - had it happen on several motherboards , most often caused by power saving features. My titanium will do it too, if I enable CNQ C6 and use a power plan other than hp.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah. I have been OC'd since day one and always disable both CNQ and C6 as my first steps when overclocking, so I would never see this behavior. Still seems odd these would drop in any situation other than a sleep mode, but I must defer for the aforementioned reasons...
Click to expand...

Boards like my 990 Extreme 3 or CHV-Z will show insanely high temps ( amonge other things) on HWINFO ( 190C) if the monitor goes to sleep while running p 95 etc.

EDIT: when @yendor wakes up...he will see I am in agreement.


----------



## chew*

Last of the ref clock boards snagged...got this one in LI NY.

Torture will happen soon. Socket voltage and 32g ram testing are top of the list



Btw no clue what you guys are seeing....but my ch6 is sitting @ 27c vrmwith 1.6v cpu @ 4.6....

Still believe software?


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Last of the ref clock boards snagged...got this one in LI NY.
> 
> Torture will happen soon. Socket voltage and 32g ram testing are top of the list
> 
> 
> 
> Btw no clue what you guys are seeing....but my ch6 is sitting @ 27c vrmwith 1.6v cpu @ 4.6....
> 
> Still believe software?


Looking forward to see your results, I have this board but will probably return it and get a C6H, VRM temps are way too high (I mean heatsink BURNS)


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Looking forward to see your results, I have this board but will probably return it and get a C6H, VRM temps are way too high (I mean heatsink BURNS)


Yep i noted that in launch day review of ryzen but it was a ryzen review not a board review.

Needs active cooling in stress tests or at least gaming 5 did.

This board is my dime so i really have no qualms about ruffling gigas feathers now.


----------



## Medusa666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Last of the ref clock boards snagged...got this one in LI NY.
> 
> Torture will happen soon. Socket voltage and 32g ram testing are top of the list
> 
> 
> 
> Btw no clue what you guys are seeing....but my ch6 is sitting @ 27c vrmwith 1.6v cpu @ 4.6....
> 
> Still believe software?


So is it software reporting this or was it the actual temp?


----------



## chew*

No thrills just facts unbox and compare.

https://youtu.be/WzpekD3mbFo


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's 4 phases doubled to 8 for the CPU via IR3599 & they're using the same parts as in ROG Maximus boards.
> 
> Unlike for Intel they needed the two phases from the PWM controller for SOC.


ASUS offers a hybrid water/air VRM cooler in their higher-end Intel boards and has since 2013. Gigabyte also has one of those on Intel.

So, "the same parts" is only a subset of what's available on Intel.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NightAntilli*
> 
> After reading, I can understand both sides of the argument regarding the Titanium. The VRMs are not exactly the highest of quality, thus the board is overpriced. But I can also get the argument that if power consumption is less in practice, why does the VRM need to be so beefed up? I mean...;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source; https://tweakers.net/productreview/159123/gigabyte-ga-ax370-gaming-5.html
> 
> The trashing of the VRM of the Titanium seems a bit exaggerated. I still don't think it justifies paying $300 for the Titanium though. Might as well go for the Prime X370 Pro from Asus, which is almost half the price ($160 at the time of writing).


I'm under the impression, based on what ASUS said with the Crosshair, for instance - that power consumption increases with things like turning up the intensity, and capability, of the power delivery system (e.g. switching frequency and LLC level). So, having a lower consumption could just mean a less responsive lower-performance power system or settings, eh? Other factors, though, could also be involved.

Without knowing what factors are responsible for power consumption level it's not necessarily a very useful metric for board comparison.


----------



## yendor

Two tests, doing well somehow, maybe it should be black and yellow, like bumblebees. I hear they can't fly....


----------



## chew*

I know you read this thread gigabyte so here you go.

The shortcomings of IR3553 and not making an AM4 specific heatsink tuned and tailored to your vrm with load on r7.....

SOC sink is acceptable.......vcore vrm sink is far from acceptable.......73c with a fan over vrm peak so far...

shall I take the fan off vrm and keep testing or do you get it now?


----------



## Artikbot

1.436V for 4GHz? Jesus Christ you really drew the short straw with that chip.

Edit: I was meaning to comment on temperatures but completely forgot to do it.

I did notice Gigabyte used a reasonably thick thermal pad for the heatsink - however, at around 1.35V mine stays pretty much cool to the touch. I've not put a probe on it, but what I estimate to be a 30C case-heatsink delta seems quite huge on such a low heat output device.


----------



## chew*

3.9 lol.

That is peak voltage like fps avg matters not peak. Plus its software so....avg is 1.415 and has not budged..

Chip does 3.9 @ 1.41. And still does after extensive abuse.

Its not my only or best chip just one i have used across multiple boards so have a ton of data on it.

Using a golden chip does not stress a board properly...

Far more likely to find out what a board is made of stressing a lemon...

IR just said 45c on a light iteration....plus no elec tape so reflective.....

When im ready ill stick tape on sink and also flip board test pcb backside..

Hard ieration just hit...IR is over 52c now.....


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I know you read this thread gigabyte so here you go.
> 
> The shortcomings of IR3553 and not making an AM4 specific heatsink tuned and tailored to your vrm with load on r7.....
> 
> SOC sink is acceptable.......vcore vrm sink is far from acceptable.......73c with a fan over vrm peak so far...
> 
> shall I take the fan off vrm and keep testing or do you get it now?


Not bad. Anything under 80c is good and it's not like people will run P95 daily. I agree that they should have taken the time to include a better suited heatsink for AM4.


----------



## Artikbot

Oh - misread that as 3999









I'm not a fan of IR thermometers for heatsinks and the likes (in other words - relatively clean metals) - the emissivity isn't in line with what cheapo thermometers are calibrated for, and good ones need to be calibrated to be accurate.

Still - you might get a reasonable measurement depending on circumstances.

I actually have some spare PTCs, should probably test this.


----------



## AlphaC

Gigabyte should pull an EVGA move (see early Pascal thermal problems) and send people new heatsinks for X370 K7 , or offer a swap up to a new revision.

From chew* 's video it seems like the heatsink's heatpipe space is now empty so it is a lame heatsink.


----------



## Artikbot

There's no thermal problems on Gigabyte boards unless you go full stupid on the voltages.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> There's no thermal problems on Gigabyte boards unless you go full stupid on the voltages.


It's their top tier board and Gigabyte reps have said no higher boards will be coming. I don't think having their top board unable to suffer abuse of 4GHz conditions is acceptable , even if US/EU pricing makes it less hard to stomache.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> There's no thermal problems on Gigabyte boards unless you go full stupid on the voltages.


My unit is defective then...










[email protected] and 86C on VRM, and believe me the heatsink was really really hot. All my fans were at max speed.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Not bad. Anything under 80c is good and it's not like people will run P95 daily. I agree that they should have taken the time to include a better suited heatsink for AM4.


He's literally benching and stating he has a fan direct on the vrm.

I have a much cheaper board, again literally on a bench and running prime my vrm temps are possibly better than that. Should have ss'd it. Actually. Wth are the vrm sensors on this less expensive board... /headscratch


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> My unit is defective then...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [email protected] and 86C on VRM, and believe me the heatsink was really really hot. All my fans were at max speed.


Wow, mine doesn't get anywhere near that at 1.37V (what I need to hit 4GHz roughly). All the airflow it gets is from the rear fan blowing in. It's sort of direct-ish, but it's not on top of it or anything.

E: It's not clocked at 4GHz now because it puts out too much heat to justify the extra performance - but at 3.82GHz and 1.25V, the rear fan at around 60% (voltage control so I can't really tell - it's running at 8V and it's a 2100rpm fan), VRM temperatures seem to have plateau'd at 60 degrees C according to HWiNFO. Heatsink is a bit warm. I've not got a temp probe on it - if I had to gauge with my finger, I'd say 40-42C.

It would seem like there's a lot of room for improvement TIM-wise, and the plastic shroud doesn't do it any favours either.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Wow, mine doesn't get anywhere near that at 1.37V (what I need to hit 4GHz roughly). All the airflow it gets is from the rear fan blowing in. It's sort of direct-ish, but it's not on top of it or anything.


My VRMs don't have any direct airflow either, I have two front fans intake, one rear fan exhaust and two top fans mounted on the radiator that I inverted to intakes but it didn't help much :/

I am returning this motherboard because of this, I don't want to think what kind of temps would I get on summer. I think I'll go with the Taichi.


----------



## Artikbot

If you ask me - I can definitely see this improving a lot just by taking out the plastic shroud. This board was totally not designed for my use case.

I blow in air from the rear and the front, exhaust it out the top. The FET heatsink gets no airflow over it other than indirect turbulence from the rear fan. The shroud is right in the way of any air.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> He's literally benching and stating he has a fan direct on the vrm.
> 
> I have a much cheaper board, again literally on a bench and running prime my vrm temps are possibly better than that. Should have ss'd it. Actually. Wth are the vrm sensors on this less expensive board... /headscratch


Board is just fine. According to tweaktown, "Anything under 60C is great, 60-80C is acceptable, and anything above 80C is a bit worrisome (*if at stock*)."

"The AX370-Gaming 5's thermal performance is great; the VRM get warm, but not too hot. The heat sink cooling the VRM does a decent job."


----------



## Artikbot

One thing is at stock voltage, the other is when running at or near the chip limits.

The thermal solution could be better, obviously. The SoC heatsink can take well over its rated capacity, while the core VRM heatsink is a bit on the lean side.

A heatpipe (which the heatsink has room for) would've definitely helped even things out. But the biggest culprit by far is the plastic shroud thing over it.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> One thing is at stock voltage, the other is when running at or near the chip limits.
> 
> The thermal solution could be better, obviously. The SoC heatsink can take well over its rated capacity, while the core VRM heatsink is a bit on the lean side.
> 
> A heatpipe (which the heatsink has room for) would've definitely helped even things out. But the biggest culprit by far is the plastic shroud thing over it.


I believe those VRM's have an operating limit of 125c. So unless you are running p95 all day and every day, I don't see an issue. Wish temps were better but the board should be fine for most folks.


----------



## Artikbot

It's not the MOSFET temperature only what is a problem - all that heat gets to the capacitors and inductors, reducing lifespan, and it also creeps to the peripheral ICs potentially causing failure points.

That they can operate at 125C doesn't mean they should at all times.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> It's not the MOSFET temperature only what is a problem - all that heat gets to the capacitors and inductors, reducing lifespan, and it also creeps to the peripheral ICs potentially causing failure points.
> 
> That they can operate at 125C doesn't mean they should at all times.


Guess we'll have to see how the board performs over the next few years before we come to any conclusions.


----------



## Artikbot

Fine.

Only a very very small amount of users will ever push the board far enough for the thermals to become a problem. And most will hit a processor temperature limit before the board will run out of room to breathe.

And out of those, most would've gotten a higher end board (X370 Taichi, Crosshair VI) but couldn't or didn't want to afford it so they (myself included) settled for a less expensive unit.

But in fairness - at 4GHz Ryzen is far beyond its peak efficiency point and the increased heat output, cooling requirements and power consumption hardly justify the extra 150 or so MHz you get out of it.

I measured a 4% performance increase at 4GHz over my current clock speed (3.82GHz), while recording a power consumption increase of 69W -+11W.

Really not worth it at all.


----------



## bloot

Taichi and K7 cost more or less the same here (245€ vs 252€), I bought the K7 because I had an Asrock Killer and wanted to try another brand. I'm also catalan @Artikbot


----------



## Artikbot

I got the Gaming 5 because I saw zero reason to get the K7 (other than a BCLK clockgen that is well... hardly worth it if you ask me, I'd rather keep the extra 35 EUR in my pocket).


----------



## NightAntilli

Apparently Ryzen 7 uses around ~125A at most after overclocking... There really is no VRM on any X370 that can't cope with that.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Board is just fine. According to tweaktown, "Anything under 60C is great, 60-80C is acceptable, and anything above 80C is a bit worrisome (*if at stock*)."


We seem to disagree what stock is. Pretty sure chew's not using 'stock' by most definitions there.

I would not be happy with vrm's in excess of 80 when pushing beyond "stock" no matter what definition we use. 'reasons'.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> We seem to disagree what stock is. Pretty sure chew's not using 'stock' by most definitions there.
> 
> I would not be happy with vrm's in excess of 80 when pushing beyond "stock" no matter what definition we use. 'reasons'.


pfttt im at stock with 15 min setup time.










14 of those min was reading manual to find power button.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NightAntilli*
> 
> Apparently Ryzen 7 uses around ~125A at most after overclocking... There really is no VRM on any X370 that can't cope with that.


Gigabyte X370 K3 and K5 are basically B350 VRM

----

Main reason why the IR3553 is pushing these temperatures besides the heatsink is the 1.1X power loss @ 1.4V compared to 1.2V.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Gigabyte X370 K3 and K5 are basically B350 VRM
> 
> ----
> 
> Main reason why the IR3553 is pushing these temperatures besides the heatsink is the 1.1X power loss @ 1.4V compared to 1.2V.


Tbh i think software is wrong.

Got some black tape to block reflective metal issue with flir or ir guns..

Those trained to use them properly are told to use electrical tape.

But anyway 50c + im sure of...74c?

Not sure yet.


----------



## AlphaC

The 20-25A it is pushing (per phase) suggests it should put out about 3-4W of heat at each mosfet if all 6 phases are used.

Thermal resistance to top of package is 23.2 °C/W ; 22.2 °C/W to ambient. (lower resistance to ambient than 50°C/W of TI NexFETs)

http://www.irf.com/technical-info/appnotes/an-994.pdf
Quote:


> ΔT = RTH X PD
> where:
> ΔT = Temperature difference (C) between junction temperature and reference temperature (TJ - TRef); TRef is the ambient, package case or package lead temperature
> RTH = Thermal resistance (C/W) between junction and reference point (package case or package lead)
> PD = Power dissipated (W)


(So it's possible to have it hit 115°C , which is less than the 150°C limit, if the heatsinks are garbage and/or nonexistent.)


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NightAntilli*
> 
> Apparently Ryzen 7 uses around ~125A at most after overclocking... There really is no VRM on any X370 that can't cope with that.


The problem isn't the ability of the switching stage to cope with the current, but with the heat.

On a side note, I wonder what temperature limit did Gigabyte use?

E: as per their datasheet, if it is heatsunk and with direct airflow, there's no derating needed to account for up until ~60C ambient, which is quite encouraging I must say.

But yeah, the derating with output voltage is a downfall of the solution chosen. It shouldn't be huge in most cases, as under air or water nobody will ever reach the 1.2x factor... but still to be taken into account.


----------



## NightAntilli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> *The problem isn't the ability of the switching stage to cope with the current, but with the heat.*
> 
> On a side note, I wonder what temperature limit did Gigabyte use?
> 
> E: as per their datasheet, if it is heatsunk and with direct airflow, there's no derating needed to account for up until ~60C ambient, which is quite encouraging I must say.
> 
> But yeah, the derating with output voltage is a downfall of the solution chosen. It shouldn't be huge in most cases, as under air or water nobody will ever reach the 1.2x factor... but still to be taken into account.


Well yeah. Of course. But the higher the current the more heat, obviously. And well, if your VRMs are made for 300+A and you're using 125A, well, the heat should be more than manageable. At least, to reasonable clock speeds of up to 4.1 GHz. After that things ramp up quickly, but Ryzen isn't that stable anymore anyway at that point.


----------



## chew*

No speculation no thrills. Just facts and data..K7

https://youtu.be/aN124-DNpQA


----------



## AlphaC

Seems voltages are pretty much dead on, that's good

60-69°C seems pretty decent for that high voltage , so Gigabyte could have used a higher amperage PowIRStage

Swapping to a 60 IR3550 / IR3555 would be ~ 1.6W power loss per phase at 20A (less than the ~2.5W loss of the IR3553) and also less thermal resistance to the top of the mosfet (larger surface area).


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I got the Gaming 5 because I saw zero reason to get the K7 (other than a BCLK clockgen that is well... hardly worth it if you ask me, I'd rather keep the extra 35 EUR in my pocket).


I had the Asrock Fatal1ty Pro and ended up returning it for the K7. I got the K7 for free using my perks at work credit that I had. Figured I'd use it on a board that performs decently and looked great. Asrock Pro was a nice board though. Just wish the color scheme was neutral. Taichi was also an option but it looks ugly and not enough RGB's.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No speculation no thrills. Just facts and data..K7
> 
> https://youtu.be/aN124-DNpQA


Great video. I've been thinking of putting my mobo on a spit....
I'd rather not leant it on the side to get to the back. Maybe if I gut an old case or drop some.money on mountain mods. My knees are also getting old.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Great video. I've been thinking of putting my mobo on a spit....
> I'd rather not leant it on the side to get to the back. Maybe if I gut an old case or drop some.money on mountain mods. My knees are also getting old.


Plan on cooking the motherboard or cooking hotdogs with the vrm?










All jokes aside on ln2 i dont have to worry about freezing vrm..

To cold clocks start to degrade when pwm freezes. The switching actually slows down a bit.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Plan on cooking the motherboard or cooking hotdogs with the vrm?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All jokes aside on ln2 i dont have to worry about freezing vrm..
> 
> To cold clocks start to degrade when pwm freezes. The switching actually slows down a bit.


I've been using the matx asus b350. the little hooker with out heatsinks.
Think they have some oem only versions of the same board .
Would not sell this as iit stands in any premade configuration with unlocked oc available.
They've been up around 70-75 under prime if software is right.. and for that matter if the sensors are even for vrms. this I do not know. Only temps in hwinfo showing up under board section.
I've got a spare case fan parked on top of them so I'm pretty damn sure this board has little hope of magically being cooler in a typical case...

On the other hand there's that bios for the hp ryzen flavor someone is getting to play with. Lucky guy .. .


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I've been using the matx asus b350. the little hooker with out heatsinks.
> Think they have some oem only versions of the same board .
> Would not sell this as iit stands in any premade configuration with unlocked oc available.
> They've been up around 70-75 under prime if software is right.. and for that matter if the sensors are even for vrms. this I do not know. Only temps in hwinfo showing up under board section.
> I've got a spare case fan parked on top of them so I'm pretty damn sure this board has little hope of magically being cooler in a typical case...
> 
> On the other hand there's that bios for the hp ryzen flavor someone is getting to play with. Lucky guy .. .


Everything can be unlocked with a soldering iron....the question is not can it be done but should it be done...

Other than a 2933 stability limitation i like that little b350.... Which btw my more expensive prime pro same limitation...one more fet in memory vrm but same pwm otherwise...coincidence?

Bios is way more mature than this K7 bios.


----------



## yendor

The release bios had more options? The llc is ver ANNOYING. stupid auto. OFF. Give me OFF verdamnt.

While we couldn't change them SEEING all the timings was


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> The release bios had more options? The llc is ver ANNOYING. stupid auto. OFF. Give me OFF verdamnt.
> 
> While we couldn't change them SEEING all the timings was


With the Taichi you must pick a number, no auto or off. But hey, the LLC there is *really* good.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Fine.
> 
> Only a very very small amount of users will ever push the board far enough for the thermals to become a problem. And most will hit a processor temperature limit before the board will run out of room to breathe.


Despite the existence of a severe BIOS bug that was never fixed, thermals are the clearly the limiting factor on the Gigabyte AM3+ board I have (UD3P 2.0). The VRM sink gets very hot very easily, running at a level of heat that The Stilt's stated specifications show is unsafe. The solutions are to blast a noisy fan partially onto and through the sink and restrict clocks. Not impressive. I replaced the thermal pad and the situation didn't improve. The sink is just too small for the VRM system.

After dealing with kludge and thermal restriction my wallet is staying closed until a board maker decides to offer feature parity with 2013 Intel boards (hybrid water/air sink).


----------



## chris89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Despite the existence of a severe BIOS bug that was never fixed, thermals are the clearly the limiting factor on the Gigabyte AM3+ board I have (UD3P 2.0). The VRM sink gets very hot very easily, running at a level of heat that The Stilt's stated specifications show is unsafe. The solutions are to blast a noisy fan partially onto and through the sink and restrict clocks. Not impressive. I replaced the thermal pad and the situation didn't improve. The sink is just too small for the VRM system.
> 
> After dealing with kludge and thermal restriction my wallet is staying closed until a board maker decides to offer feature parity with 2013 Intel boards (hybrid water/air sink).


That's funny you say that. I agree. I find though sure the VRM are hot, but go ahead and feel the non monitorable "Black Boxes" I suppose they are called Chokes? They I would say are 2x as hot as the VRM themselves. Tremendous power coming in and performance is lost because of thermal-loss. Which tells me with everything AMD, what we see is not as good as it could be or seems to be.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Despite the existence of a severe BIOS bug that was never fixed, thermals are the clearly the limiting factor on the Gigabyte AM3+ board I have (UD3P 2.0). The VRM sink gets very hot very easily, running at a level of heat that The Stilt's stated specifications show is unsafe. The solutions are to blast a noisy fan partially onto and through the sink and restrict clocks. Not impressive. I replaced the thermal pad and the situation didn't improve. The sink is just too small for the VRM system.
> 
> After dealing with kludge and thermal restriction my wallet is staying closed until a board maker decides to offer feature parity with 2013 Intel boards (hybrid water/air sink).


But that's an AM3+ board you're talking about and not an AX370 Gaming5/K7, the subject of this discussion.


----------



## Karagra

I never understood why in this forum we hear the "Well over 90c the CH6". Since I have owned my board I have not been able to push my vrms past 45c no matter how I pushed my board in the past. I doubt this board would ever see 90c unless I put it inside my kitchen oven turned it on and started to overclock xD. (These are all testing OC's I have played around with in the past few months, Last one is my pc on for 5 days straight with a game open doing AFK stuff while I sleep.)


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## DADDYDC650

Well, your CPU is at stock voltage and you aren't running a very CPU intensive app like P95 so of course you aren't going to see more than 50c.I understand where you are coming from though. VRM components won't run very hot running our computers like we normally would BUT this is the VRM thread so we're here to discuss performance under major stress.


----------



## Karagra

My CPU is only around stock voltage due to the chip and board allowing that for 3.9ghz. Also Im guessing I should just run a Small FFTs test for a few hours then repost?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> My CPU is only around stock voltage due to the chip and board allowing that for 3.9ghz. Also Im guessing I should just run a Small FFTs test for a few hours then repost?


No point. Most of the info has already been posted. Your board won't be any different than anyone else's.

My Gigabyte K7 hits about 65c running the latest version of P95 blend test. Board performs just fine but it's nice for folks like chew to post great informative vids.


----------



## Karagra

Alright I just came back to ask how long I should run it after noticing its still only at 47c after 10 minutes of running Small FFTs. Saves me hours I guess xD.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> No point. Most of the info has already been posted. Your board won't be any different than anyone else's.
> 
> My Gigabyte K7 hits about 65c running the latest version of P95 blend test. Board performs just fine but it's nice for folks like chew to post great informative vids.


I'm fairly sure my vrms are not that good. I'd assumed that the temp readings I have in hwinfo are vrms.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> Alright I just came back to ask how long I should run it after noticing its still only at 47c after 10 minutes of running Small FFTs. Saves me hours I guess xD.


What are you running small fets for? Temp check? It doesn't make the heat that blend custom with 90% ram allocated. That will rise and fall as you go between differing work loads. I haven't seen temps rise much in that after an hour .


----------



## chew*

Not to mention is more real world as in bang load then ehh some load but stress hell out of ram.

Toss some well know 3d app on top of it and you got yourself a real stability test. Heaven , dirt2,3 can be used to..its pretty brutal.

Anyway i am armed to the teeth with betas now...lets see if we can get a tune out of this trombone by the weekend....this one is going to require quite a few tricks to get an optimized cpu oc if and thats a big if atm...one of these betas have some secret sauce in them for 32g...

The good news is....i have confirmed 120 ref clock to be stable on it. Guess some overlooked some stuff...thought 107 was the limit


----------



## bloot

I wish my vrms stayed below 70C


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I'm fairly sure my vrms are not that good. I'd assumed that the temp readings I have in hwinfo are vrms.


That's the reading I get from the VRM's on my board after running P95 blend for 30 minutes. Haven't tried other stress test. What temps are you getting when running P95 blend?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Not to mention is more real world as in bang load then ehh some load but stress hell out of ram.
> 
> Toss some well know 3d app on top of it and you got yourself a real stability test. Heaven , dirt2,3 can be used to..its pretty brutal.
> 
> Anyway i am armed to the teeth with betas now...lets see if we can get a tune out of this trombone by the weekend....this one is going to require quite a few tricks to get an optimized cpu oc if and thats a big if atm...one of these betas have some secret sauce in them for 32g...
> 
> The good news is....i have confirmed 120 ref clock to be stable on it. Guess some overlooked some stuff...thought 107 was the limit


Very nice. I really should push my RAM some more but I'm more of a set it and forget it guy these days. Glad to see you're pushing these boards hard.


----------



## bloot

So because I like the K7 so much I tried to put a 120mm fan directly on the VRM zone (case open, the fan isn't attached to anything as I have no way to do it)

After 20 minutes of prime 2.91 custom test max vrm mos temp is 66C, but was generally staying between 60 to 65. Still not great temperatures if you ask me, but they're better than before.



The fan used is the one labeled as "system pump fan 5" at 1200rpm

It's pretty clear my major problem is the poor airflow vrm area is getting, despite the heatsink Gigabyte provided is absolute garbage, so I ordered this little thing hoping it helps cool it down https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B005JSA4K4


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> So because I like the K7 so much I tried to put a 12" fan directly on the VRM zone (case open, the fan isn't attached to anything as I have no way to do it)
> 
> After 20 minutes of prime 2.91 custom test max vrm mos temp is 66C, but was generally staying between 60 to 65. Still not great temperatures if you ask me, but they're better than before.
> 
> 
> 
> The fan used is the one labeled as "system pump fan 5" at 1200rpm
> 
> It's pretty clear my major problem is the poor airflow vrm area is getting, despite the heatsink Gigabyte provided is absolute garbage, so I ordered this little thing hoping it helps cool it down https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B005JSA4K4


What's the point if temps stay below 80c? Do you stress the hell out of ur rig at all times?


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> So because I like the K7 so much I tried to put a 12" fan directly on the VRM zone (case open, the fan isn't attached to anything as I have no way to do it)
> 
> After 20 minutes of prime 2.91 custom test max vrm mos temp is 66C, but was generally staying between 60 to 65. Still not great temperatures if you ask me, but they're better than before.
> 
> 
> 
> The fan used is the one labeled as "system pump fan 5" at 1200rpm
> 
> It's pretty clear my major problem is the poor airflow vrm area is getting, despite the heatsink Gigabyte provided is absolute garbage, so I ordered this little thing hoping it helps cool it down https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B005JSA4K4


Huh didn't know they still sold the spot cool, interesting results on the VRM, I'll be curious to see how the spotcool does compared to your direct fan approach right now.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> What's the point of temps stay below 80c? Do you stress the hell out of ur rig at all times?


Yes I want it to stay as cool as possible whenever I do stress it, encoding, compiling and such things that I do regularly that gets my vrm pretty hot right now. I don't like high temperatures and summer is yet to come.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Yes I want it to stay as cool as possible whenever I do stress it, encoding, compiling and such things that I do regularly that gets my vrm pretty hot right now. I don't like high temperatures and summer is yet to come.


How hot does your board get when you encode and compile vs P95?


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> How hot does your board get when you encode and compile vs P95?


Compiling is a pretty tough task, I guess it's comparable to prime 95. It pushes the CPU to the limit.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Compiling is a pretty tough task, I guess it's comparable to prime 95. It pushes the CPU to the limit.


I'm guessing encoding and such doesn't heat up the board as much as P95. Wish someone did a comparison.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> I'm guessing encoding and such doesn't heat up the board as much as P95. Wish someone did a comparison.


Rendering with sony vegas after 10 minutes


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Rendering with sony vegas after 10 minutes


Not bad. Thanks for that. I still don't think there's a need to place a fan on top of the VRM's but that's just me. Guess it's better to be safe than sorry.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Not bad. Thanks for that. I still don't think there's a need to place a fan on top of the VRM's but that's just me. Guess it's better to be safe than sorry.


Thing is this is with 21C room temperature, summer is pretty hot here it can get to 30 to 34C without problem.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Thing is this is with 21C room temperature, summer is pretty hot here it can get to 30 to 34C without problem.


Let us know what your temps are during the summer if you remember.


----------



## DADDYDC650

MSI B350m PCB breakdown.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Let us know what your temps are during the summer if you remember.


Sure no problem, just to clarify temps rendering were without direct cooling and case closed.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> So because I like the K7 so much I tried to put a 12" fan directly on the VRM zone (case open, the fan isn't attached to anything as I have no way to do it)
> 
> After 20 minutes of prime 2.91 custom test max vrm mos temp is 66C, but was generally staying between 60 to 65. Still not great temperatures if you ask me, but they're better than before.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fan used is the one labeled as "system pump fan 5" at 1200rpm
> 
> It's pretty clear my major problem is the poor airflow vrm area is getting, despite the heatsink Gigabyte provided is absolute garbage, so I ordered this little thing hoping it helps cool it down https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B005JSA4K4


Wait you have a 12" fan that runs at 1200rpm and connects to a mobo header? The biggest one I can find is 230mm (9")..and those only run at 900rpm and draw I think 0.4A. Where do you buy such a fan?


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Wait you have a 12" fan that runs at 1200rpm and connects to a mobo header? The biggest one I can find is 230mm (9")..and those only run at 900rpm and draw I think 0.4A. Where do you buy such a fan?


It's a pretty old papst no pwm fan, I bought it several years ago, but I also have a noiseblocker b12-p that runs fine at 2000 rpm. I thought almost every fan should run at its rated speed tbh.


----------



## bardacuda

Well a b12-p is a 120mm fan so not the same thing. The smaller ones can run faster. I've never heard of a papst fan, I'll have to look into it.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Well a b12-p is a 120mm fan so not the same thing. The smaller ones can run faster. I've never heard of a papst fan, I'll have to look into it.


Sorry I meant 120mm not 12" my mistake


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> MSI B350m PCB breakdown.


Just finished watching that video, basically it came down to it probably won't catch on fire







and buy something better

4 Core Ryzen and 6 Core nothing to really worry about but 8 core on it is....not recommended.


----------



## bardacuda

Ah ok









Has anyone tried remounting the VRM heatsink on their Gigabyte boards? Maybe with some arctic thermal paste on the vrm side of the new pad?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Ah ok
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone tried remounting the VRM heatsink on their Gigabyte boards? Maybe with some arctic thermal paste on the vrm side of the new pad?


I already pulled mine to check contact.

Reality is the pads paste are only as good as the sink.

Crap water block (aio) versus a ek...same paste...etc etc.

You get the idea.

As far as temps go lower temps ( within reason ) = longevity with anything silicon related.


----------



## bardacuda

So remounting didn't help any? What about removing the shroud?


----------



## chew*

1c when i tested last night. My sunon is no slouch and wired to psu not a fan header.

My two 290x vrms run cooler...then again they are on awesome water blocks.


----------



## bardacuda

Wow. Hard to believe the sink could be that bad though. The ones on the X370 Gaming boards don't really look any different than the one on my board, and I think the hottest temp I've seen is 63°C in IBT Max @ 1.4V with a 24°C ambient. Did they forget to use metal for the material? lol.
I guess the 'fets just run that much hotter.

EDIT: Wait, though, didn't you measure them with IR and were seeing 40-something when software was reporting 60-something? Maybe the Gigabyte boards are actually measuring choke temp instead of mosfet.


----------



## chew*

Did a video. Peak temps were within 2c with ir back of board..


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> Pretty much. As you can see from every datasheet out there, vrms are rated for current, not power


Power is a function of amps and volts. So the two are directly related given that we know the voltage range for the chips because current times voltage equals power.

Ryzen does not seem to be able to scale with voltage to the point where the VRM will be the main limiting point. Very high 3ghz OC's are possible with the eight core chips on four phase (4+2) boards without much issue.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Wow. Hard to believe the sink could be that bad though. The ones on the X370 Gaming boards don't really look any different than the one on my board, and I think the hottest temp I've seen is 63°C in IBT Max @ 1.4V with a 24°C ambient. Did they forget to use metal for the material? lol.
> I guess the 'fets just run that much hotter.
> 
> EDIT: Wait, though, didn't you measure them with IR and were seeing 40-something when software was reporting 60-something? Maybe the Gigabyte boards are actually measuring choke temp instead of mosfet.


Heatsink surface temperature is greatly different to package temperature.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Heatsink surface temperature is greatly different to package temperature.


Exactly.

@chew*

I watched the video but it looked like you were measuring the back of the chokes or caps. If your IR thermometer is anything like mine, it actually measures the temp about 3/4" "below" where the laser is, but you had the unit rotated to the left, so I think it was measuring the temp to the right of the laser.

Maybe I just find it hard to believe the heatsink could be that ineffective. I could see if there were fets on the low side that didn't have a sink/airflow on them but that wasn't the case for that board as far as I could tell. I really think the sensor might be reporting choke temps.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Karagra*
> 
> My CPU is only around stock voltage due to the chip and board allowing that for 3.9ghz. Also Im guessing I should just run a Small FFTs test for a few hours then repost?


No, Prime is not REALLY pushing Ryzen's.

Run OCCT configured with 10 minutes or more + Linpack+ AVX + Idle time=0.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> That's the reading I get from the VRM's on my board after running P95 blend for 30 minutes. Haven't tried other stress test. What temps are you getting when running P95 blend?


During prime test runs there are sections that produce a lot less heat. temp drops are easily ~10c or more quickly. For me right now that's with open air, not a case and there's a 120mm fan on the vrm area cranked to 2000rpm. Ambients are mostly seasonal weather in the "temperate" rain forest of the PNW. (bah!) Fans at full I can tell when the load is lighter because of the temp drop, if on pwm curve other than full speed they get quieter. chew* noted he was on a quieter /less heat producing part of prime test run during his video. Run prime often enough I expect one comes to recognize it.

So depending on where I am in the test, after 30 minutes of prime these vrm's can be anywhere from 60-75c ish.. Or rather the anonymous sensors 3, 4, 5 and 6 are.
Motherboard sensor does not follow them. They go up when cpu gets load, do not match cpu, come down when cpu load drops.

I kinda wonder where temp sensors are. Like mine specifically. Workin on it but it's not a priority. Fighting with timings at 3200 dropping cpu to lower speeds. test. run prime. watch temps and cpu utilization less than 100% tells me my test is over.

I'm really doubtful my less expensive wee board has 4 unnamed sensors. But maybe if my motherboard sensor looks like the crosshair motherboard sensor and lives in roughly the same place there will be something that looks 'close enough' or 4 of them. Not a lot of places to look on mATX. It'll turn up. if I put enough effort into it. Course that's only good for me, the board I have in front of me and hopefully it's near kin. The other asus prime b350m variants living in prebuilt machines . Maybe those get heatsinks or something.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> No, Prime is not REALLY pushing Ryzen's.
> 
> Run OCCT configured with 10 minutes or more + Linpack+ AVX + Idle time=0.


Prime works if you set it right but for overall stability small ffts nope.

occt linpack avx with idle 0 at ten minutes or more. sounds brutally long.


----------



## KarathKasun

Well, just ordered a motherboard with the worst VRM possible on AM4. The MSI B350M Gaming Pro, because it was on sale for $70 USD.

Going to be using it with an R5 1400, will put up some results after it comes in and I can get to testing it. Expecting 3.8-3.9ghz with no problems considering the 4c/8t chips are likely a bit around 60% of the VRM load presented by the 8c/16t chips.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Well, just ordered a motherboard with the worst VRM possible on AM4. The MSI B350M Gaming Pro, because it was on sale for $70 USD.
> 
> Going to be using it with an R5 1400, will put up some results after it comes in and I can get to testing it. Expecting 3.8-3.9ghz with no problems considering the 4c/8t chips are likely a bit around 60% of the VRM load presented by the 8c/16t chips.


It's been paired with R7's but I'm afraid to look for the results.
I saw the design, looked twice. Decided the lack of heatsinks on the asus board weren't such a horrible drawback in comparison.... After all the OTHER two asus wonderboards without heatsinks worked so well for me


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> It's been paired with R7's but I'm afraid to look for the results.
> I saw the design, looked twice. Decided the lack of heatsinks on the asus board weren't such a horrible drawback in comparison.... After all the OTHER two asus wonderboards without heatsinks worked so well for me


VCore has a heatsink on that board. VSOC doesn't, but without powering an iGPU it should not be a problem.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> During prime test runs there are sections that produce a lot less heat. temp drops are easily ~10c or more quickly. For me right now that's with open air, not a case and there's a 120mm fan on the vrm area cranked to 2000rpm. Ambients are mostly seasonal weather in the "temperate" rain forest of the PNW. (bah!) Fans at full I can tell when the load is lighter because of the temp drop, if on pwm curve other than full speed they get quieter. chew* noted he was on a quieter /less heat producing part of prime test run during his video. Run prime often enough I expect one comes to recognize it.
> 
> So depending on where I am in the test, after 30 minutes of prime these vrm's can be anywhere from 60-75c ish.. Or rather the anonymous sensors 3, 4, 5 and 6 are.
> Motherboard sensor does not follow them. They go up when cpu gets load, do not match cpu, come down when cpu load drops.
> 
> I kinda wonder where temp sensors are. Like mine specifically. Workin on it but it's not a priority. Fighting with timings at 3200 dropping cpu to lower speeds. test. run prime. watch temps and cpu utilization less than 100% tells me my test is over.
> 
> I'm really doubtful my less expensive wee board has 4 unnamed sensors. But maybe if my motherboard sensor looks like the crosshair motherboard sensor and lives in roughly the same place there will be something that looks 'close enough' or 4 of them. Not a lot of places to look on mATX. It'll turn up. if I put enough effort into it. Course that's only good for me, the board I have in front of me and hopefully it's near kin. The other asus prime b350m variants living in prebuilt machines . Maybe those get heatsinks or something.
> Prime works if you set it right but for overall stability small ffts nope.
> 
> occt linpack avx with idle 0 at ten minutes or more. sounds brutally long.


I can get 100% utilization with both tests but obviously they do not run the same on Ryzen... In my experience the OCCT in the before mentioned settings ( pick your time, that was just an example ) is putting my Ryzen to sweat a little more if compared to prime95, no matter FFT sizes I set.

I've been using prime95 for way more than a decade now but I sure can still learn some tricks about it. Mind to teach me ?


----------



## bardacuda

Not all 100%s are created equal.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I can get 100% utilization with both tests but obviously they do not run the same on Ryzen... In my experience the OCCT in the before mentioned settings ( pick your time, that was just an example ) is putting my Ryzen to sweat a little more if compared to prime95, no matter FFT sizes I set.
> 
> I've been using prime95 for way more than a decade now but I sure can still learn some tricks about it. Mind to teach me ?


Nyet, I poke fun of ten minute test. Length of reply was to other user asking about my temps after blender for 30.
Best prime? Probably blend custom 90% ram allocated, staggered start to eliminate synchronous load reduction.would add some variety to watching per core power useage. Small ffts exclusively tested skips out on ram testing. Not entirely but eh it does not push any large cache arch enough. Not just ryzen. My way I get some specificity in errors returned that can point toward ram vs cpu and retest with other software, settings accordingly. I'm open to other general tests though, think my notes have a couple edge cases that took longer runs to show instability and of course to make it even I will flip it around and try ... whatever the recommended flavor was. Tablet sucks for reviewing. Is there anything it is especially good at finding fast? I mean if it turns up more specificity like ram needing a touch more love in ten minutes that'd be awesome.


----------



## hojnikb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Power is a function of amps and volts. So the two are directly related given that we know the voltage range for the chips because current times voltage equals power.
> 
> Ryzen does not seem to be able to scale with voltage to the point where the VRM will be the main limiting point. Very high 3ghz OC's are possible with the eight core chips on four phase (4+2) boards without much issue.


Except vrms itself don't care for voltage.

VRMs can be limiting in high OCs not because of current rating, but rather heat output. If you have a poor 3+2 mobo without any heatsinks on the vrms, you might not hit the current limit of the vrms, but you could cook them because of insufficient cooling.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> Except vrms itself don't care for voltage.
> 
> VRMs can be limiting in high OCs not because of current rating, but rather heat output. If you have a poor 3+2 mobo without any heatsinks on the vrms, you might not hit the current limit of the vrms, but you could cook them because of insufficient cooling.


Its a 3+2 with a heatsink on the VCore phases (this item). And the 3 phases are sufficiently efficient to push ~70-80A while only dumping ~15w of heat, which should be perfectly fine with even a tiny heatsink. The only real problem of a 3 phase board is that the power delivery will be noisier, requiring slightly higher voltages to hit the same speeds that a true 6+ phase board would need.

To put that current capability in perspective... the R7 8 core pulls around 100A (~140w) @ 4ghz, R5 1600 and its X variant pull around 70-80A (~105w) @ 4ghz, and R5 1400/1500x pull 55-65A (~84w) @ 4ghz. With an R5 1400/1500x, a bare 4 phase VRM would be fine for even chip destroying voltages and overclocks.

Ryzen simply does not scale far enough with voltage for VRM's to be a problem, it is the polar opposite of Bulldozer. Likely due to the heritage of its 14nm process.

Also, higher voltages require more on time in the FETs. Which can massively increase temps, meaning that they absolutely respond to desired output voltage. Power is a measure of the whole FET throughput situation and is a much better way to look at real world capability than simply looking at amperage IMHO.


----------



## chew*

I use prime because 90% of stability on amd is and has been directly related to imc since integrated imc was first introduced. Amds imc has always been rather finicky compared to intel.

Using tests that stress core just dont exhibit the issues im looking for.

Blend-'->custom runs iterations not possible to hit under any of the presets. 85%-90% ram allocated is a must...or your wasting your time.
The other advantage is various load on/off. On/off load can find gremlins that sustained load can not. That itself effects boards more than cpu and llc but...board not stable...cpu not stable...on/off heavy load is also more real world. Example idle solidwork task...idle game...etc etc..

For extra measure tossing some 3d in once your finally stable is a good idea. Especially if you understand what soc actually does and controls on the chip.


----------



## chris89

It is finicky but once you find the ideal stable timings for the ram then it's golden, performance and stability is way way up there and enjoyable. Yeah the IMC is picky on AMD but it's a strong performer when the timings/ speed and modules are dialed in just right. Samsung memory seems to provide the highest stability and performance, headache free operation.

Sometimes Auto is ideal, auto timings... Compare to your modules timings but also compare with Auto timings... Auto is actually the fastest as long as the clock/ memory multi is just right.

For increasing the overclocked stability further is to turn up the voltages except the memory and the southbridge a couple ticks... This helps a lot.

The one picky thing about the ram is even know it passes a stress test or passes 5 hours of MemTest86, it could easily still be unstable for applications. That's when I found that Kingston was the issue. With Samsung everything works great. As far as I know Corsair are possibly the only manufacturer using Samsung modules, correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## chew*

everyone is using Samsung, gskill,geil,corsair,crucial.

there is more to the memory tuning than just the 5 timings.

If you have ref clock you have access to sub timing tuning.

This is why I have been testing ref clock 120.

so far every board at 2666 strap is faster with 3200 than 3200 strap.

prime95 when used right picks up those instabilities instantly.

it drops threads its IMC/memory...it crashes/bsod its core


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> @chew*
> 
> I watched the video but it looked like you were measuring the back of the chokes or caps. If your IR thermometer is anything like mine, it actually measures the temp about 3/4" "below" where the laser is, but you had the unit rotated to the left, so I think it was measuring the temp to the right of the laser.
> 
> Maybe I just find it hard to believe the heatsink could be that ineffective. I could see if there were fets on the low side that didn't have a sink/airflow on them but that wasn't the case for that board as far as I could tell. I really think the sensor might be reporting choke temps.


If you noticed parts of the vrm run hotter. It seems that the reference point for temps is...peak hottest.

I noticed similar on taichi....parts of the vrm run hotter. Its not even all the way around albeit cooler there are hotter areas.

Taichi was hotter near the doubler where the soc/vcore heatsinks meet. 2 of the vcore fets actually sit under soc heatsink i believe...

K7 hotter completely opposite at the very end of vcore vrm sink.

My biggest concern since i run on a bench is some user with poor airflow in a case with no active cooling on vrm..

I always have to keep this is mind versus how i test.

I have yet to pop a fet on any board but at this point if i did on ln2 i could 90% nail which fet popped while benching on ln2 before removing sink to verify.

This is normal procedure for me.

I hammer boards extensively on air prior to cold testing to see if they are worth my time.

If i have to rma something it needs to be pre cold...once i prep board rma is not an option.. only a person of poor character rmas a board they ran on ln2...

I have connections and can ask...but im honest...hey i ran on ln2 it died....can you replace it? Yes/no if no go buy another.

Many times answer has been yes but write this on rma slip....

Currently the only board worth the time cold is ch6.

Taichi and k7 have to many bios issues.

Hardware wise i am not to concerned...both should hold up....current bios on both would make benching infuriating however and a waste of ln2.

When you see the board under my phase change unit....its ready...


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> If you noticed parts of the vrm run hotter. It seems that the reference point for temps is...peak hottest.
> 
> I noticed similar on taichi....parts of the vrm run hotter. Its not even all the way around albeit cooler there are hotter areas.
> 
> Taichi was hotter near the doubler where the soc/vcore heatsinks meet. 2 of the vcore fets actually sit under soc heatsink i believe...
> 
> K7 hotter completely opposite at the very end of vcore vrm sink.
> 
> My biggest concern since i run on a bench is some user with poor airflow in a case with no active cooling on vrm..
> 
> I always have to keep this is mind versus how i test.


Is Taichi vrm area hotter than the K7?


----------



## chris89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> everyone is using Samsung, gskill,geil,corsair,crucial.
> 
> there is more to the memory tuning than just the 5 timings.
> 
> If you have ref clock you have access to sub timing tuning.
> 
> This is why I have been testing ref clock 120.
> 
> so far every board at 2666 strap is faster with 3200 than 3200 strap.
> 
> prime95 when used right picks up those instabilities instantly.
> 
> it drops threads its IMC/memory...it crashes/bsod its core


Yeah? That's saying the IMC isn't meant to run that fast but can be done by increasing the Northbridge/ CPU NB/ CPU voltages a slight bit. I notice this on Opteron 1389, it's IMC is really loving 1333 and nothing higher but can go up near 1500Mhz and can boot at 1600Mhz. Just out of it's range of compatibility. Though to get these memory speeds stable needs extra voltage on the CPU IMC and Northbridge/ Southbridge.

Basically to even boot 1600Mhz on a 1333 IMC is to using timings from 1-3 multi's higher on your desired memory multi, make sense? Needs looser timings than the speed is said to work at is the only way it can handle higher speeds.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> If you noticed parts of the vrm run hotter. It seems that the reference point for temps is...peak hottest.
> 
> I noticed similar on taichi....parts of the vrm run hotter. Its not even all the way around albeit cooler there are hotter areas.
> 
> Taichi was hotter near the doubler where the soc/vcore heatsinks meet. 2 of the vcore fets actually sit under soc heatsink i believe...
> 
> K7 hotter completely opposite at the very end of vcore vrm sink.
> 
> My biggest concern since i run on a bench is some user with poor airflow in a case with no active cooling on vrm..
> 
> I always have to keep this is mind versus how i test.


Another concern that comes to mind is although the VRM mosfets might be able to take some serious heat, I doubt the capcaitors are fond of all the heat floating around if someone has a poor airflow case/no direct VRM cooling.

I went a totally different route than my original plan for my setup and ended up getting a Node 804 case with a Gigabyte Gaming 3 AB350M when my GPU and CPU were both under full load my Vcore VRM hit 94C before I stopped folding, I added two fans to exhaust air out of the top of the case and temps dropped down to 83c max with both the GPU and CPU going full. 74C with CPU only.

Under gaming loads so far the VCore VRM stays in the 50's

Here is my HWinfo with CPU only folding


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> Yeah? That's saying the IMC isn't meant to run that fast but can be done by increasing the Northbridge/ CPU NB/ CPU voltages a slight bit. I notice this on Opteron 1389, it's IMC is really loving 1333 and nothing higher but can go up near 1500Mhz and can boot at 1600Mhz. Just out of it's range of compatibility. Though to get these memory speeds stable needs extra voltage on the CPU IMC and Northbridge/ Southbridge.
> 
> Basically to even boot 1600Mhz on a 1333 IMC is to using timings from 1-3 multi's higher on your desired memory multi, make sense? Needs looser timings than the speed is said to work at is the only way it can handle higher speeds.


Im not doing 2666 strap for stability.

Im stable at 3200 strap.

Im doing it for performance reasons only. Give me a few minutes and i will post an example...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Is Taichi vrm area hotter than the K7?


No but the area is significantly hotter than the rest of taichis vcore vrm.


----------



## Zhany

@chew*

What would you consider the max safe 24/7 temps for the VRMs on the AM4 Platform in general?


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No but the area is significantly hotter than the rest of its vcore vrm.


Interesting, a video showing vrm temps as you did with the K7 would be nice if you don't mind and have some time, I'm thinking of buying the Taichi and don't want to find out its vrm are super hot too


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Interesting, a video showing vrm temps as you did with the K7 would be nice if you don't mind and have some time, I'm thinking of buying the Taichi and don't want to find out its vrm are super hot too


I will do one and a mock unboxing...seems people liked my blunt no thrills unboxing video and want more. Its been unboxed but only thing opened is wifi antennas...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> @chew*
> 
> What would you consider the max safe 24/7 temps for the VRMs on the AM4 Platform in general?


Zhany to be honest i do not think i am qualified technically speaking to answer that question. The Stilt would be a better candidate for that question.


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I will do one and a mock unboxing...seems people liked my blunt no thrills unboxing video and want more. Its been unboxed but only thing opened is wifi antennas...


Appreciated, looking forward to it


----------



## Zhany

@The Stilt Hoping for your input on below regarding max safe AM4 VRM temps in your opinion.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Zhany to be honest i do not think i am qualified technically speaking to answer that question. The Stilt would be a better candidate for that question.


----------



## chew*

Ok so first off figured out a workaround for at least the 1700 on this board with ref clock.



And then to explain my obsession with ref clock and why we want it.

Both are boot from bios only....aida has a bug with windows overclocks on some boards........

ignore latency as its completely random sauce between runs. read write and copy are very consistent however........

120 ref 2666 strap


100 ref 3200 strap


Now if that is the case why not run 2400 or lower?

well simple if you can do 3200...120 is the highest I recommend for stability reasons.......if you can only do 2933 then sure drop down same with max of 2666....drop it. just don't exceed 120 for 24/7 use......


----------



## chris89

Nice... looks like hardly a difference from 100-120... maybe couple fps.. but hardly.. 100 for stability unless issues? haha I need ryzen to know anything


----------



## chew*

Well fps wise there are drawbacks...if can run gen 2 pci...break even in games gain in cpu/mem performance.

There is a happy balance to be maintained.


----------



## chew*

Mock taichi unboxing due to request...no thrills just opinions and facts.

https://youtu.be/8PmSPaJO10Q


----------



## realtomatoes

@chew*
thanks for the taichi vid.
do you think that backplate is compatible with am4 waterblocks?


----------



## chew*

No clue. It just blocks caps behind socket other than that its same as all other am4 backplates.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> -snip-


My results with 100MHz base clock and 48:3 ratio are equal to your faster ones... I do run 14-13-13-28, but that alone shouldn't even make single digit differences.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> My results with 100MHz base clock and 48:3 ratio are equal to your faster ones... I do run 14-13-13-28, but that alone shouldn't even make single digit differences.


Aida is pretty sensitive to clock speed...motherboard timings.

Just swapping a board can plus or minus by 1000 read or write..

My asus seems higher read/write...the giga seems to do better latency.

Keep in mind this is a general abuse OS i made for ryzen review. Its had at least 50 boards swaps driver changes.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> @The Stilt Hoping for your input on below regarding max safe AM4 VRM temps in your opinion.


Probably should send him a PM.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chris89*
> 
> It is finicky but once you find the ideal stable timings for the ram then it's golden, performance and stability is way way up there and enjoyable. Yeah the IMC is picky on AMD but it's a strong performer when the timings/ speed and modules are dialed in just right. Samsung memory seems to provide the highest stability and performance, headache free operation.
> 
> Sometimes Auto is ideal, auto timings... Compare to your modules timings but also compare with Auto timings... Auto is actually the fastest as long as the clock/ memory multi is just right.
> 
> For increasing the overclocked stability further is to turn up the voltages except the memory and the southbridge a couple ticks... This helps a lot.
> 
> The one picky thing about the ram is even know it passes a stress test or passes 5 hours of MemTest86, it could easily still be unstable for applications. That's when I found that Kingston was the issue. With Samsung everything works great. As far as I know Corsair are possibly the only manufacturer using Samsung modules, correct me if I'm wrong.


This may or may not be correct:

If Auto is faster it can be because timings were set incorrectly. If RAM timings are set incorrectly the board can revert to default spec for that timing, rather than whatever auto might provide when RAM timings are being determined at boot. I don't remember which timing it is, but people often suggest setting it lower than the math indicates for the minimum timing. The board will boot but the timing will be changed by the board to make things stable. Or, it might loosen some other timing to compensate.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The only real problem of a 3 phase board is that the power delivery will be noisier, requiring slightly higher voltages to hit the same speeds that a true 6+ phase board would need.
> 
> Also, higher voltages require more on time in the FETs. Which can massively increase temps, meaning that they absolutely respond to desired output voltage. Power is a measure of the whole FET throughput situation and is a much better way to look at real world capability than simply looking at amperage IMHO.


It seems like any board maker that will offer a board that skips the doublers and which offers feature parity with a 2013 Intel board (the hybrid air/water sink) could have a sales winner. I think my old Lynnfield board is a doubled 6 ("12 phases") and it has a quite beefy-looking sink. We're supposed to get excited about doubled 3 and 4 boards now? We can't expect anything better anymore?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> It seems like any board maker that will offer a board that skips the doublers and which offers feature parity with a 2013 Intel board (the hybrid air/water sink) could have a sales winner. I think my old Lynnfield board is a doubled 6 ("12 phases") and it has a quite beefy-looking sink. We're supposed to get excited about doubled 3 and 4 boards now? We can't expect anything better anymore?


The VRM is not of much importance to Ryzen according to many of the extreme overclockers.

The MSI X370 Tai-Chi has a VRM that is ludicrous considering what the CPU actually uses. It can pump out something like 480A from a doubled 6 phase setup. In actual testing under water the R7 chips have been shown to only pull around 100A at max OC and max load. With LN2 you would be extremely lucky to push over 200A.

4 phase boards have been shown to be capable of pushing R7 to 4ghz. Just let that sink in. A 4 phase board can push the top chip to within 100-200Mhz of its absolute max.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The VRM is not of much importance to Ryzen according to many of the extreme overclockers.
> 
> The MSI X370 Tai-Chi has a VRM that is ludicrous considering what the CPU actually uses. It can pump out something like 480A from a doubled 6 phase setup. In actual testing under water the R7 chips have been shown to only pull around 100A at max OC and max load. With LN2 you would be extremely lucky to push over 200A.
> 
> 4 phase boards have been shown to be capable of pushing R7 to 4ghz. Just let that sink in. A 4 phase board can push the top chip to within 100-200Mhz of its absolute max.


The quality is still meh. I have 4 phase b350's. Not impressed, less impressed knowing 3 phase b350's are out there and 4 is a step up?
"Good enough" is not an acceptable stopping point. Especially when the presumably superior product is priced/marketed as better. Why? Sure ain't the vrm.


----------



## AlphaC

Well the way I see it , the MSI B350 Pro Carbon is $135 / ~ € 140 (plus it has the VRM of the X370 Pro Carbon) ; Gigabyte's B350 Gaming 3 is $110 / € 110. Those have ALC1220 audio.

There's very little reason for the garbage pricing for the MSI X370 SLI PLUS, MSI X370 Krait Gaming to be between $140-150 (they could've been decent if they weren't so stripped down), Gigabyte X370 Gaming K3 / K5 to be $150+ (they're LED gimmick boards).

For ASUS/Asrock there's a large tangible difference between a B350 board and a X370 board. They segment VRM + ALC1220 and Intel LAN. In Europe the Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 costs slightly more ~ €10 than the ASUS X370 Prime Pro so it's a fairly weak featureset offering.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The VRM is not of much importance to Ryzen according to many of the extreme overclockers.
> 
> The MSI X370 Tai-Chi has a VRM that is ludicrous considering what the CPU actually uses. It can pump out something like 480A from a doubled 6 phase setup. In actual testing under water the R7 chips have been shown to only pull around 100A at max OC and max load. With LN2 you would be extremely lucky to push over 200A.
> 
> 4 phase boards have been shown to be capable of pushing R7 to 4ghz. Just let that sink in. A 4 phase board can push the top chip to within 100-200Mhz of its absolute max.


Most extreme overclockers are sponsored, that being the case all they want is the MB VRM to peak with the CPU, they have 0 concerns about the hardware integrity plus, with LN2 even the most cheap fets ( NIKOs ) based VRMs will not be running 120ºC.

Now Back to the real world with real world usage and temperatures. There is not even a single B350 at the $ 100 really capable of 100A without skyhigh VRM temps. Why that ? Not necessary a phase count problem, but rather the fact that they all have cheap/crap fets on the VRM.

MSI has the cheapcrapselfignited NIKOS all around their line. Beautiful boards, but that's it. These fets sell for $ 0.30/piece, now imagine the bulk purchase prices.









ASUS B350 - Yeah, you are dealing with one 4C09B high side and one 4C06B low side.

AsRock B350 - With luck you may have 2x SM4377 2x SM4336 instead. Not lucky you end up with msi crap PZ0903BK and PK618B.

Gigabyte B350 - one 4C10N two 4C06N per phase.

Sure all of them are capable of 4GHz+ with LN2, now go figure how to handle 100A in yhe real world with a MSI B350M Mortar.


----------



## chew*

Im an ln2 ocer. I dont need you to speak for me...

I will speak for me.

I want a board that works first and foremost.

Ln2 $2.00 liter...

board that is premature period = waste of ln2.

The only one ready for ln2...with refclock as no ln2 bencher is going to fight a losing battle without it...

Anyway only one ready sort of...is ch6.

When a board is on my bench under phase...its a sign that ln2 is next...

Not on phase...not ready..


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Most extreme overclockers are sponsored, that being the case all they want is the MB VRM to peak with the CPU, they have 0 concerns about the hardware integrity plus, with LN2 even the most cheap fets ( NIKOs ) based VRMs will not be running 120ºC.
> 
> Now Back to the real world with real world usage and temperatures. There is not even a single B350 at the $ 100 really capable of 100A without skyhigh VRM temps. Why that ? Not necessary a phase count problem, but rather the fact that they all have cheap/crap fets on the VRM.
> 
> MSI has the cheapcrapselfignited NIKOS all around their line. Beautiful boards, but that's it. These fets sell for $ 0.30/piece, now imagine the bulk purchase prices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS B350 - Yeah, you are dealing with one 4C09B high side and one 4C06B low side.
> 
> AsRock B350 - With luck you may have 2x SM4377 2x SM4336 instead. Not lucky you end up with msi crap PZ0903BK and PK618B.
> 
> Gigabyte B350 - one 4C10N two 4C06N per phase.
> 
> Sure all of them are capable of 4GHz+ with LN2, now go figure how to handle 100A in yhe real world with a MSI B350M Mortar.


I could swear I have 2 on my asus b350 lowside...

It's right over here. just have to move fan. LUCKILY NO HEATSINKS ARE IN THE WAY....

Looks like 2. Real world though.

At 4+ my vrms are rockin 80+. under prime.

hwinfo showed ~110amps . maybe a skitch more. Enough to make me wonder where I put the napkin math for this b350's outer limit.

Bios limits the voltage on this board to 1.3875 and whatever the heck you can get ouf of llc "extreme" or maybe black magic in the "auto" setting. 1.42ish for me Another user got more, earlier bios

Pretty sure that's it for what I can get out of this board and bios for clocks but even with heatsinks 24/7? Not unless it stays on the bench with more than passive vrm cooling and unicorns dance around it all the time.

https://valid.x86.fr/wxr2ee


----------



## chew*

Keep in mind....i am a brilliant idiot...do as i say not as i do..


----------



## yendor

I'd been looking for your b350 results.

ryzen master to go around bios limit?
cpu-z showing vid instead of vcore.








I got some 4.1 plus love with earlier bios. Did not think to save results.

Might flash back. It's gonna be a cold in the morning.

Trying to get timings down but was stuck at 14 11 11 11 ...30? 32. I forget.
.
I guess there's a little more fun left in this.

But other unimpressive boards are calling my name.

Some of them have heatsinks and extra fan headers.

That less expensive biostar x370 board. How much fun could that thing have in it?

Anything with a 5050 fun zone has to be good right?


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Anything with a 5050 fun zone has to be good right?


5050 fun zone?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Most extreme overclockers are sponsored, that being the case all they want is the MB VRM to peak with the CPU, they have 0 concerns about the hardware integrity plus, with LN2 even the most cheap fets ( NIKOs ) based VRMs will not be running 120ºC.
> 
> Now Back to the real world with real world usage and temperatures. There is not even a single B350 at the $ 100 really capable of 100A without skyhigh VRM temps. Why that ? Not necessary a phase count problem, but rather the fact that they all have cheap/crap fets on the VRM.
> 
> MSI has the cheapcrapselfignited NIKOS all around their line. Beautiful boards, but that's it. These fets sell for $ 0.30/piece, now imagine the bulk purchase prices.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS B350 - Yeah, you are dealing with one 4C09B high side and one 4C06B low side.
> 
> AsRock B350 - With luck you may have 2x SM4377 2x SM4336 instead. Not lucky you end up with msi crap PZ0903BK and PK618B.
> 
> Gigabyte B350 - one 4C10N two 4C06N per phase.
> 
> Sure all of them are capable of 4GHz+ with LN2, now go figure how to handle 100A in yhe real world with a MSI B350M Mortar.


Why would you put a R7 on a cheap mATX board and expect max OC's to begin with? It would have no problems at 3.8-3.9 with an R7 or 4+ Ghz with any R5. 80A is enough to pretty much max out any R5 chip.

The three phase boards can comfortably push ~75A in real world scenarios. 15w of heat from a VRM is nothing to dissipate, 20w is still doable with consideration for airflow, and 25w would likely be 24/7 stable with a bit of custom heatsink and some fans. The three phase boards are not intended to be used with R7, they are aimed at R5. And for those SKUs, they are fine for ~4ghz OC's.

Once again, Ryzen is NOTHING like BD when it comes to VRM demand. BD could pull 100A @ STOCK. Most $100 boards could not even support the full fat BD chips at stock on launch. This situation is a massive improvement for the AMD ecosystem compared to their last launch.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I could swear I have 2 on my asus b350 lowside...
> 
> It's right over here. just have to move fan. LUCKILY NO HEATSINKS ARE IN THE WAY....
> 
> Looks like 2. Real world though.
> 
> At 4+ my vrms are rockin 80+. under prime.
> 
> hwinfo showed ~110amps . maybe a skitch more. Enough to make me wonder where I put the napkin math for this b350's outer limit.
> 
> Bios limits the voltage on this board to 1.3875 and whatever the heck you can get ouf of llc "extreme" or maybe black magic in the "auto" setting. 1.42ish for me Another user got more, earlier bios
> 
> Pretty sure that's it for what I can get out of this board and bios for clocks but even with heatsinks 24/7? Not unless it stays on the bench with more than passive vrm cooling and unicorns dance around it all the time.
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/wxr2ee


My bad, 1x 4C09B 2x 4C06B/phase.

OCCT: Lickpack will get your VRM beyond 100ºC'+ with 4GHz









I had some guy trying to teach me on the MSI B350M Gaming Pro doing [email protected] with VRMs barely reaching 60ºC.







People are so delusional now days... it seems like if you stamp "Military Grade Components" and do some nice then everything will be all good. Way to make them believe !
Oh, and I would totally go for a board with dancing unicorns, even if it had only Nikos bellow the VRM's heatsink !

http://i.imgur.com/cSZX3g4.png


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Keep in mind....i am a brilliant idiot...do as i say not as i do..


What voltage did you have to run?

With my "stable" 4.0Ghz 1.500V settings

Cinebench instantly crashed at 4.1Ghz and managed to render 50% with 4.05Ghz before crash.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> My bad, 1x 4C09B 2x 4C06B/phase.
> 
> OCCT: Lickpack will get your VRM beyond 100ºC'+ with 4GHz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had some guy trying to teach me on the MSI B350M Gaming Pro doing [email protected] with VRMs barely reaching 60ºC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People are so delusional now days... it seems like if you stamp "Military Grade Components" and do some nice then everything will be all good. Way to make them believe !
> Oh, and I would totally go for a board with dancing unicorns, even if it had only Nikos bellow the VRM's heatsink !
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/cSZX3g4.png


There have been reports of the integrated hardware amperage loads being off by ~40% on the core. Measured at the CPU 12v connector someone was getting 150A for CPU, SOC, and VDDR combined and the software monitor reported the CPU VRM alone was pulling 145A by itself.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> What voltage did you have to run?
> 
> With my "stable" 4.0Ghz 1.500V settings
> 
> Cinebench instantly crashed at 4.1Ghz and managed to render 50% with 4.05Ghz before crash.


1.5v (measured at the socket) is supposedly where degradation starts happening after ~100hrs or so, be careful.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Why would you put a R7 on a cheap mATX board and expect max OC's to begin with? It would have no problems at 3.8-3.9 with an R7 or 4+ Ghz with any R5. 80A is enough to pretty much max out any R5 chip.
> 
> The three phase boards can comfortably push ~75A in real world scenarios. 15w of heat from a VRM is nothing to dissipate, 20w is still doable with consideration for airflow, and 25w would likely be 24/7 stable with a bit of custom heatsink and some fans. The three phase boards are not intended to be used with R7, they are aimed at R5. And for those SKUs, they are fine for ~4ghz OC's.
> 
> Once again, Ryzen is NOTHING like BD when it comes to VRM demand. BD could pull 100A @ STOCK. Most $100 boards could not even support the full fat BD chips at stock on launch. This situation is a massive improvement for the AMD ecosystem compared to their last launch.


Expect max oc's? I can get max oc's? sweet. I will start chasing them instead of trying to find out the boards limitations.

There's no difference between the cheap mATX board vrm and the more expensive atx boards, literally none in the case of many of the b350's and some of them even have the same vrm as their x370 counterparts.
That's not how I want to see the ecosystem differentiate itself.

4 phases doesn't have to mean "good enough" . low cost components with equally unimpressive capabilities not including the low amperage ceiling. Arguing that we should all find it good enough as consumers? Nah. I don't. You get what you pay for when it comes to motherboards.. except I don't seem to have the option to pay for better vrm til at least x370 and not even there for the most part.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Expect max oc's? I can get max oc's? sweet. I will start chasing them instead of trying to find out the boards limitations.
> 
> There's no difference between the cheap mATX board vrm and the more expensive atx boards, literally none in the case of many of the b350's and some of them even have the same vrm as their x370 counterparts.
> That's not how I want to see the ecosystem differentiate itself.
> 
> 4 phases doesn't have to mean "good enough" . low cost components with equally unimpressive capabilities not including the low amperage ceiling. Arguing that we should all find it good enough as consumers? Nah. I don't. You get what you pay for when it comes to motherboards.. except I don't seem to have the option to pay for better vrm til at least x370 and not even there for the most part.


The mATX boards are mostly 3+2 with ~75A capability. The 4+2 & 4+3 boards look to be good for a bit over 110A. The cheap '6 phase' boards are not much better than the 3 phase boards, if at all because they tend to use even cheaper parts.

If you expect a sub $150 board to ship with $50 of VRM components at a platform launch, you are expecting too much. AM3+ is a good example, there wasn't a single mid-range quality VRM to be had on the 970 chipset until LONG after the initial platform launch. The best 970 launch boards couldn't reliably run the FX-8000 series at stock clocks, and that seems to be where the paranoia about VRMs came from. Well, that and MSI back around the Phenom I launch.

Actually, the only reason 970 chipset boards ever got good VRM's was because a $150 CPU requiring a $200+ motherboard makes no sense. And the FX 8000 series was working its way down into that price range at the time those boards came out.

With the Ryzen CPU's a stout VRM is a luxury, not a necessity. If you want something that is "above and beyond" you are going to have to pay for it because the hardware does not dictate that it be designed that way.

The ASRock X370 Taichi has 16 total phases (6+2 doubled) worth of TI mosfets (4x overspeced on current) and costs around $200. The VRM components alone come out to around $60, which means that $90-$120 of the board price is in the VRM. Even if you cut half the phases out, it would still be a huge portion of the board price with the current positioning of the B350 boards.

The ASUS Prime X370-Pro does exist at the $150 price point. Not sure what they are using for the FETs, but they dont have a history of skimping that bad.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The mATX boards are mostly 3+2 with ~75A capability. The 4+2 & 4+3 boards look to be good for a bit over 110A. The cheap '6 phase' boards are not much better than the 3 phase boards, if at all because they tend to use even cheaper parts.
> 
> If you expect a sub $150 board to ship with $50 of VRM components at a platform launch, you are expecting too much. AM3+ is a good example, there wasn't a single mid-range quality VRM to be had on the 970 chipset until LONG after the initial platform launch. The best 970 launch boards couldn't reliably run the FX-8000 series at stock clocks, and that seems to be where the paranoia about VRMs came from. Well, that and MSI back around the Phenom I launch.
> 
> Actually, the only reason 970 chipset boards ever got good VRM's was because a $150 CPU requiring a $200+ motherboard makes no sense. And the FX 8000 series was working its way down into that price range at the time those boards came out.
> 
> With the Ryzen CPU's a stout VRM is a luxury, not a necessity. If you want something that is "above and beyond" you are going to have to pay for it because the hardware does not dictate that it be designed that way.
> 
> The ASRock X370 Taichi has 16 total phases (6+2 doubled) worth of TI mosfets (4x overspeced on current) and costs around $200. The VRM components alone come out to around $60, which means that $90-$120 of the board price is in the VRM. Even if you cut half the phases out, it would still be a huge portion of the board price with the current positioning of the B350 boards.
> 
> The ASUS Prime X370-Pro does exist at the $150 price point. Not sure what they are using for the FETs, but they dont have a history of skimping that bad.


ah, I half thought you were having one on.

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html

Definitely not skimping .

I don't expect unicorn board to be free. Bring beer, pizza, dance. yes, more capable vrm yes. free? nyet.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> 5050 fun zone?


Yes. Biostar , 5050 funzone..


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The mATX boards are mostly 3+2 with ~75A capability. The 4+2 & 4+3 boards look to be good for a bit over 110A. The cheap '6 phase' boards are not much better than the 3 phase boards, if at all because they tend to use even cheaper parts.
> 
> If you expect a sub $150 board to ship with $50 of VRM components at a platform launch, you are expecting too much. AM3+ is a good example, there wasn't a single mid-range quality VRM to be had on the 970 chipset until LONG after the initial platform launch. The best 970 launch boards couldn't reliably run the FX-8000 series at stock clocks, and that seems to be where the paranoia about VRMs came from. Well, that and MSI back around the Phenom I launch.
> 
> Actually, the only reason 970 chipset boards ever got good VRM's was because a $150 CPU requiring a $200+ motherboard makes no sense. And the FX 8000 series was working its way down into that price range at the time those boards came out.
> 
> With the Ryzen CPU's a stout VRM is a luxury, not a necessity. If you want something that is "above and beyond" you are going to have to pay for it because the hardware does not dictate that it be designed that way.
> 
> The ASRock X370 Taichi has 16 total phases (6+2 doubled) worth of TI mosfets (4x overspeced on current) and costs around $200. The VRM components alone come out to around $60, which means that $90-$120 of the board price is in the VRM. Even if you cut half the phases out, it would still be a huge portion of the board price with the current positioning of the B350 boards.
> 
> The ASUS Prime X370-Pro does exist at the $150 price point. Not sure what they are using for the FETs, but they dont have a history of skimping that bad.


Now you think 120ºC+ at the VRM is fine with [email protected] - That's what some guys are reporting with fans over VRM on MSI B350 boards.
Myself rather have big money on the VRM instead of having it being put in some egg frying cheapo Nikos and a pretty silk. I think they should have put just a little bit more capable VRM current wise..
That being said, the Taichi is a fantastic board for its price, the GT7 is also great and the Prime X370 is better than most of it's competition. Bios is definitively not among the strong point with any of these boards but also Bios can be improved, weak fets will not.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> -snip-
> The ASUS Prime X370-Pro does exist at the $150 price point. Not sure what they are using for the FETs, but they dont have a history of skimping that bad.


they use the same FETs as C6H (from what i read)


----------



## chris89

If the vrm doesn't have a heatsink then they are bound to get hot. I found 100C before using tower cooler and with Wraith style cooler it can cool the vrm to 50C or so. Even after adding a heatsink VRM could go up to 100C easily without direct airflow.

I have PWM set min PWM Temperature of 32C, Min PWM Value 32, PWM Off at 0, PWM Hysteresis of 4C basically... If still too hot reduce PWM Start Temperature or Increase PWM Start Value... Also if you actually use the I/O shield your looking at 20C possibly higher VRM temperature. Hot air can't get out ya know? Has to bounce off the I/O Shield and run up through the rear case intake of air going out as exhaust.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/361253756416?_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> they use the same FETs as C6H (from what i read)


The top X370 boards Fet-wise resume


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> they use the same FETs as C6H (from what i read)
> 
> 
> 
> The top X370 boards Fet-wise resume
Click to expand...

What is interesting is that the Titanium seems to have cooler VRM temps and has been shown to be more power efficient than the other top end boards.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> What is interesting is that the Titanium seems to have cooler VRM temps and has been shown to be more power efficient than the other top end boards.


Depends on what you are comparing it to ?

Cooler than let's say:

MSI X370 SLI Plus. Yes.

X370 Taichi. No.

Aorus GA-AX370-Gaming K7. Maybe.

ROG Crosshair VI Hero. No

Biostar X370GT7. No.

Prime X370-Pro. Maybe.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> What is interesting is that the Titanium seems to have cooler VRM temps and has been shown to be more power efficient than the other top end boards.
> 
> 
> 
> Depends on what you are comparing it to ?
> 
> Cooler than let's say:
> 
> MSI X370 SLI Plus. Yes.
> 
> X370 Taichi. No.
> 
> Aorus GA-AX370-Gaming K7. Maybe.
> 
> ROG Crosshair VI Hero. No
> 
> Biostar X370GT7. No.
> 
> Prime X370-Pro. Maybe.
Click to expand...

I haven't been able to find a board matching or besting my Titanium's VRM temps with the stock heatsink and at normal ambient at these settings/load/frequency/volts.
The examples of the Tiachi, crosshair and K5- K7's have all been higher .


----------



## Secret Dragoon

Something I just noticed without any LLC:



The input voltage to the CPU seems to fluctuate wildly, even tho vcore is stable. What could be causing this?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Secret Dragoon*
> 
> Something I just noticed without any LLC:
> 
> 
> 
> The input voltage to the CPU seems to fluctuate wildly, even tho vcore is stable. What could be causing this?


Going off the temperatures I would say it is due to the load V_droop if you turned off LLC. Judging by the scale of the graph there is below 0.05V difference.

Also there may be overshoot.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Secret Dragoon*
> 
> Something I just noticed without any LLC:
> 
> 
> 
> The input voltage to the CPU seems to fluctuate wildly, even tho vcore is stable. What could be causing this?


Turn of XFR see what happens.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Turn of XFR see what happens.


AFAIK XFR is turned off when overclocked.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I haven't been able to find a board matching or besting my Titanium's VRM temps with the stock heatsink and at normal ambient at these settings/load/frequency/volts.
> The examples of the Tiachi, crosshair and K5- K7's have all been higher .


That's some good black magic right there.








Back to reality

*CROSSHAIR VI HERO Stock 1800X (95W)*



*AsRock Taichi Stock 1800X (95W)*



*Biostar X370GT7 Stock 1800X (95W)*



*CROSSHAIR VI HERO - stock 1700 ( 65W )*


*MSI X370 Titanium - stock 1700 ( 65W )*

Wonder the what the temps on the backside, behind the VRM...

niko fets website http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml









Titanium VRM fets
http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf

They have such a bad reputation that just happens to match their crap thermal vs current characteristics.

The datasheets, review sites, thermal imaging, history happen to paint a totally different picture on the MSI X370 Titanium cheapo $ 0.30 fets.

Why other vendors are not using these jewels on their top X370 and instead are using the TI and IR much more expensive alternatives .


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I haven't been able to find a board matching or besting my Titanium's VRM temps with the stock heatsink and at normal ambient at these settings/load/frequency/volts.
> The examples of the Tiachi, crosshair and K5- K7's have all been higher .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's some good black magic right there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Back to reality
> 
> They have such a bad reputation that just happens to match their crap thermal vs current characteristics.
> 
> The datasheets, review sites, thermal imaging, history happen to paint a totally different picture on the MSI X370 Titanium cheapo $ 0.30 fets.
> 
> Why other vendors are not using these jewels on their top X370 and instead are using the TI and IR much more expensive alternatives .
Click to expand...

If that's from the article I think it's from -
Those flir images were from a cell phone camera attachment and the fellow that interpreted the readings had no idea what he was doing.
I have a little experience with a real thremal imager https://www.fluke-direct.com/product/fluke-tix520-thermal-imager?gclid=CN2rrK7mzNMCFYlXDQodxTgDLQ I'd love to take some pics of the Titanium but the company i work for is a little uptight about letting it out to people.

No black magic here, the Titanium has a fantastic heatsink all you have to do is add airflow and temps are very hard for other boards to beat.

Added a fan so that the entire heatsink had airflow over it and this is the result. 4 ghz auto v-core and LLC settings. 70 F ambient.


That is the reality








EDIT:
If you want to gain a better understanding of why that example is so misleading , download Fluke's Smart view program and read through the instructions for their thermal imaging camera - Emissivity is the concept that was lost on the reviewer.

1.5 hours not much change in VRM temps so there I didn't see much point in continuing.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If that's from the article I think it's from -
> Those flir images were from a cell phone camera attachment and the fellow that interpreted the readings had no idea what he was doing.
> I have a little experience with a real thremal imager https://www.fluke-direct.com/product/fluke-tix520-thermal-imager?gclid=CN2rrK7mzNMCFYlXDQodxTgDLQ I'd love to take some pics of the Titanium but the company i work for is a little uptight about letting it out to people.
> 
> No black magic here, the Titanium has a fantastic heatsink all you have to do is add airflow and temps are very hard for other boards to beat.
> 
> Added a fan so that the entire heatsink had airflow over it and this is the result. 4 ghz auto v-core and LLC settings. 70 F ambient.
> 
> 
> That is the reality
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> If you want to gain a better understanding of why that example is so misleading , download Fluke's Smart view program and read through the instructions for their thermal imaging camera - Emissivity is the concept that was lost on the reviewer.
> 
> 1.5 hours not much change in VRM temps so there I didn't see much point in continuing.


Yeah, both respectable sites are wrong, 90% of the people on this thread are wrong, 149 users that reported Nikos as crap piece of junk are wrong, the mosfets, datasheet is wrong, and finally, math is wrong too.

By the way Nikos website looks to be on par with fets they produce.











As I said before, talk back to me when you can prove you have unicorns dancing around your boards VRM.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If that's from the article I think it's from -
> Those flir images were from a cell phone camera attachment and the fellow that interpreted the readings had no idea what he was doing.
> I have a little experience with a real thremal imager https://www.fluke-direct.com/product/fluke-tix520-thermal-imager?gclid=CN2rrK7mzNMCFYlXDQodxTgDLQ I'd love to take some pics of the Titanium but the company i work for is a little uptight about letting it out to people.
> 
> No black magic here, the Titanium has a fantastic heatsink all you have to do is add airflow and temps are very hard for other boards to beat.
> 
> Added a fan so that the entire heatsink had airflow over it and this is the result. 4 ghz auto v-core and LLC settings. 70 F ambient.
> 
> 
> That is the reality
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> If you want to gain a better understanding of why that example is so misleading , download Fluke's Smart view program and read through the instructions for their thermal imaging camera - Emissivity is the concept that was lost on the reviewer.
> 
> 1.5 hours not much change in VRM temps so there I didn't see much point in continuing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, the mosfets datasheet is wrong, both respectable sites are wrong, 90% of the people on this thread are wrong, 149 users that reported Nikos as crap piece of junk are wrong, and finally, math is wrong too.
> 
> By the way Nikos website looks to be on par with fets they produce.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said before, talk back to me when you can prove you have unicorns dancing around your boards VRM.
Click to expand...

You may choose to believe whatever you want , but the reality is that if you have good airflow over the Titanium's heatsink it's hard to find a board with cooler running VRM's

I just want people to know what the truth is.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> You may choose to believe whatever you want , but the reality is that if you have good airflow over the Titanium's heatsink it's hard to find a board with cooler running VRM's
> 
> I just want people to know what the truth is.


Even if the FETs are horrible, if you throw enough of them at a solution with decent enough cooling, you can get acceptable results.


----------



## Artikbot

Disregarding the quality of the components, or the price, or the websites (what on Earth is that metric anyway), the X370 Titanium has by far the best heatsink, so it shouldn't be surprising it has better thermals.

Especially when there is good airflow.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> You may choose to believe whatever you want , but the reality is that if you have good airflow over the Titanium's heatsink it's hard to find a board with cooler running VRM's
> 
> I just want people to know what the truth is.
> 
> 
> 
> Even if the FETs are horrible, if you throw enough of them at a solution with decent enough cooling, you can get acceptable results.
Click to expand...

They can't be that bad though , I managed to get the MSI 990 Gaming into the 24/7 5 ghz club with an FX 8 core and it uses the same ones.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://www.overclock.net/t/1519033/5-ghz-24-7-oc-club/1870#post_24930312



The key is that they need to be kept cool - a good heatsink has been provided by MSI , all you need do is put some air to it.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> They can't be that bad though , I managed to get the MSI 990 Gaming into the 24/7 5 ghz club with an FX 8 core and it uses the same ones.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1519033/5-ghz-24-7-oc-club/1870#post_24930312
> 
> 
> 
> The key is that they need to be kept cool - a good heatsink has been provided by MSI , all you need do is put some air to it.


Pretty much what I was getting at. Granted, the price of the board is not justified considering the cost of the components and what else is out.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> They can't be that bad though , I managed to get the MSI 990 Gaming into the 24/7 5 ghz club with an FX 8 core and it uses the same ones.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1519033/5-ghz-24-7-oc-club/1870#post_24930312
> 
> 
> 
> The key is that they need to be kept cool - a good heatsink has been provided by MSI , all you need do is put some air to it.
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty much what I was getting at. Granted, the price of the board is not justified considering the cost of the components and what else is out.
Click to expand...

Demand will start to slack a bit then the price should come down. Honesty though, If you had a product that was selling out would you lower the price?


----------



## KarathKasun

If I was meeting sales targets and making a huge profit margin, no.

As a consumer I would take build quality into account when buying at that price bracket though. So It wouldn't be something I would buy personally, but I'm a cheapskate.


----------



## Tasm

After knowing the crappy parts Titanium is using, how the hell are people still defending it...









But it runs cooler...great...you are only forgetting to mention that if it runs any hotter the crappy vrms would blow!

Consumer - oh, i want to Overclock the hell out of mine 1800X, lets grab the most expessive AM4 mobo, it should be the best, right!?

MSI - There you go with your 8 usd vrm parts. Be happy with it. Thank you for feeding our marketing machine! And remember, our mobo runs cooler, less º = greater quality...we mean, everlasting quality!


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> After knowing the crappy parts Titanium is using, how the hell are people still defending it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it runs cooler...great...you are only forgetting to mention that if it runs any hotter the crappy vrms would blow!
> 
> Consumer - oh, i want to Overclock the hell out of mine 1800X, lets grab the most expessive AM4 mobo, it should be the best, right!?
> 
> MSI - There you go with your 8 usd vrm parts. Be happy with it. Thank you for feeding our marketing machine! And remember, our mobo runs cooler, less º = greater quality...we mean, everlasting quality!


I wouldn't be if it weren't doing as well or better than other boards.


----------



## SuperZan

The Titanium is a good board. It's priced a bit high for what it offers, but I don't see many people disputing that. The build, phase design, and heatsinking are enough to keep performance parity with other top-range boards. My concern with MSI boards performance-wise is largely reserved for the lesser models which lack the mitigating elements that the Titanium's got. The Pro Carbon is a great-looking board, for example, but at a price point where it competes with the GT7 which outclasses it, and the Pro Carbon is also undercut by the Prime Pro which offers superior components in a very decent design.

I still think the lower-end MSI boards are fine for knowledgeable users, but newer overclockers should get plenty of advice on airflow and active VRM cooling before diving too deep with those motherboards.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tasm*
> 
> After knowing the crappy parts Titanium is using, how the hell are people still defending it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it runs cooler...great...you are only forgetting to mention that if it runs any hotter the crappy vrms would blow!
> 
> Consumer - oh, i want to Overclock the hell out of mine 1800X, lets grab the most expessive AM4 mobo, it should be the best, right!?
> 
> MSI - There you go with your 8 usd vrm parts. Be happy with it. Thank you for feeding our marketing machine! And remember, our mobo runs cooler, less º = greater quality...we mean, everlasting quality!


It works. even overclocked. Could debate about efficiency of JUST the mosfets til the cows come home, I will







, but it undeniably works, at load, with room to run hotter. Less expensive components and all.


----------



## chew*

No offense but 4 gig i hardly ocing on ryzen. Ln2 guys will be the real judge.


----------



## chew*

Oh if someone wants to do some napkin math...

Heres something for you.

790fx dr mos msi board. Fet exploded 5.8g cpu test in 3d06( there are far worse load tests ) we were not even warmed up yet...chip had alot more in it.

So do some napkin math and then realize that it hardly ever applies to real world as that board should not have popped...but it did..


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No offense but 4 gig i hardly ocing on ryzen. Ln2 guys will be the real judge.


Thats just it though. 4Ghz is about as far as anyone not using sub ambient cooling is going to get. There is no need for an excessively robust VRM for daily driver rigs, the silicon just does not scale that high on standard (up to custom water loops) cooling systems.

I don't see much point with the current AMD chips to worry that much about the VRM. Just get whatever board has the other features you need at the price you want, the VRM is not likely going to be your limiting factor if its a decent quality board. Now, if you are going LN2 or cascade, then you may need to look deeper into the VRM quality.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Oh if someone wants to do some napkin math...
> 
> Heres something for you.
> 
> 790fx dr mos msi board. Fet exploded 5.8g cpu test in 3d06( there are far worse load tests ) we were not even warmed up yet...chip had alot more in it.
> 
> So do some napkin math and then realize that it hardly ever applies to real world as that board should not have popped...but it did..


Never had that issue with old 790FX DFI boards with old style VRM's. They may have run hot, but I couldn't kill one. DrMOS boards OTOH, I popped 4 of them in a few weeks with good cooling using a Phenom 9950 @ 3.3ghz.


----------



## chew*

Over built has longevity in just about anything...

Meeting the status quo does not last long.

Also fwiw...z270 or whatever that intel chipset is...compare those pwm designs...then ask why a 4c8t chip has a better vrm than ryzen boards...

Then go look at the 8c/16t boards...

Especially go look at what the real titanium boards offer....


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Oh if someone wants to do some napkin math...
> 
> Heres something for you.
> 
> 790fx dr mos msi board. Fet exploded 5.8g cpu test in 3d06( there are far worse load tests ) we were not even warmed up yet...chip had alot more in it.
> 
> So do some napkin math and then realize that it hardly ever applies to real world as that board should not have popped...but it did..


Never blown anything on the power delivery system of an MSI board - had something blow on a Foxconn A7DA-S 3.0 AM3 AMD 790GX with a 965 @ stock clocks and volts though. Had less than 10 hours on it. Sounded like a .22 short went off.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Over built has longevity in just about anything...
> 
> Meeting the status quo does not last long.
> 
> Also fwiw...z270 or whatever that intel chipset is...compare those pwm designs...then ask why a 4c8t chip has a better vrm than ryzen boards...
> 
> Then go look at the 8c/16t boards...


Because Intel marketshare is higher and people pay extra for those boards. Taichi has a better VRM than most, if not all z270 boards in its price range. Its not like every z270 board has a godly VRM, there are cheapskate boards as well.

'longevity in quality parts' is kind of a joke too. I have one of those early MSI DrMOS boards ticking away in an old loaner box with no problems (even with a bit of an OC). It just depends on your use case scenario. Moderate OC on meh parts usually wont change much. Pushing right up to the cooling limits of a large HSF or water on meh parts usually results in the magic smoke being released.

This applies to EVERY hobby where performance is a thing. RC car/plane/heli/drone racing, automotive racing/tuning, HAM DXing, and so forth.


----------



## chew*

Ive blown up problem boards...and it just happened that others under same conditions had same thing happen...

790fx msi...asus well did not blow up but literally had to bin for a cold board on 790...

890fx we were killing gigas...the top model board...

990? Well we used the asus for the WR but it had certain trace issues addressed with formula-z...both the giga and msi were problematic.

All based on first hand experience...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No offense but 4 gig i hardly ocing on ryzen. Ln2 guys will be the real judge.


None taken, as most people who buy these chips and boards will not be subjecting them to liquid nitrogen. In the context of extreme overclocking, sure, there will be different judgements passed based on those needs. In the context of the use-cases for the majority of people buying this platform the requirements are performance and reliability under conditions maxing out around 1.425v sustained as measured at the socket with temperatures controlled solely through ambient cooling. In that context, I don't see a problem, physically, with any of the top-range x370 boards. In that guise anything I speak to or recommend will be under considerations that the average user may have subpar airflow, imperfect ambient cooling, and lack tools for measuring voltage at the socket or power at the wall. That's why, for example, I shy from advising newer overclockers to push 4.0GHz on B350 or low-end X370 without knowing the details of their situation.

Under your use conditions, and the use conditions of the liquid nitrogen crowd, things are no doubt different.. but I can only speak to experience with ambient cooling because that's what I do.


----------



## chew*

My m4e has a quality vrm....still cranking away on water with a high oc.

Just saying...quality is for the long haul.


----------



## chew*

Here is example of brutality on many many many fronts...

I could make a list...just because its a single thread does not make it less brutal...its booting this speed...that alone is harsh..at my temps...-40 draw is much higher than it will be if colder..

Believe it or not this is taxing on alot of fronts...minus vga stress...


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> My m4e has a quality vrm....still cranking away on water with a high oc.
> 
> Just saying...quality is for the long haul.


Like I said, 10 years with OC on mid range parts that people had 'problems' with, your argument holds no water. Discretion is a thing. If you tune everything to run within spec longevity will never be a problem. If you blindly push for high overclocks at excessive voltages, knowing that something is likely on the upper edge of its capabilities, you will break something.

I found out the hard way what the limits of the MSI 790GX VRM were, so I changed the setup to be more within spec. And look at that, its just as reliable as the Asus ROG board I have had since 2012.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Here is example of brutality on many many many fronts...
> 
> I could make a list...just because its a single thread does not make it less brutal...its booting this speed...that alone is harsh..
> 
> Believe it or not this is taxing on alot of fronts...minus vga stress...


At what socket temps? How long do you expect that CPU to last at 1.6v anyway? Especially as there have been talks of 1.6v leading to rapid degradation. How is that applicable to the use case of nearly everyone else?

It looks like you are running a bench system with the sole purpose of pushing chips till they pop. In which case you have the right board for the task at hand. Id argue that use case is less than 0.5% of the market, and that is why it has not been addressed more widely.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Like I said, 10 years with OC on mid range parts that people had 'problems' with, your argument holds no water. Discretion is a thing. If you tune everything to run within spec longevity will never be a problem. If you blindly push for high overclocks at excessive voltages, knowing that something is likely on its upper edge of its capabilities, you will break something.
> 
> I found out the hard way what the limits of the MSI 790GX VRM were, so I changed the setup to be more within spec. And look at that, its just as reliable as the Asus ROG board I have had since 2012.
> At what socket temps? How long do you expect that CPU to last at 1.6v anyway? Especially as there have been talks of 1.6v leading to rapid degradation. How is that applicable to the use case of nearly everyone else?
> 
> It looks like you are running a bench system with the sole purpose of pushing chips till they pop. In which case you have the right board for the task at hand. Id argue that use case is less than 0.5% of the market, and that is why it has not been addressed more widely.


Well if you have actually been reading thread i had a 1700 at 1.6v for 3 days...plopped it back in a board ran prime...works just fine still.

That said i expect this one will be just fine to..

Regardless i am cold...not on air...i would highly avoid that voltage on air/water...

Which btw msi guys are using 1.575 on water...lol so there goes your use case.

Voltage is there...they will use it..

Tbh its less about voltage used...more about what you run @ x volts...cpu's are like fuses...can and will pop.

Experienced benchers know this...they know what volts to use for what application...could i pop it...sure if that was my goal...i could pop any board or cpu...i know the right combos..

My goal is to find the fine line right now...so far i think i have found it.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Well if you have actually been reading thread i had a 1700 at 1.6 for 3 days...plopped it back in a bpard ran prime...works just fine still.
> 
> Regardless i am cold...not on air...i would highly avoid that voltage on air...


I believe that the other 1700 where it was a problem was just over a week, something like 200-300 hours. AFAIK it was below ambient as well.


----------



## chew*

Well maybe it was someone with less experience slamming cinebench through it...

On -40?

Thats just dumb.

Cpus will tell you what they want for voltage...they exhibit certain behaviors. If you ignore the behaviors your either dumb or lack the experience to notice it.

This one in particular likes 1.40 for cinebench...scales well cold (4.4g) does not scale with voltage. Could i force it sure...but im experienced enough to know better...


----------



## chew*

My experience lvl fwiw...i have run systems for amd and asus on ln2 vga and cpu...as gaming demos 8 hours straight no issues.

Atlantic city...come up and play on it starcraft demo @ 7 gig.

Boston pax east a 1155 rig @ 5.5 with a 580 on ln2...forget clocks...come up and play dirt 3 demo.

That chip was my own personal chip...it is the one in my m4e still cranking away...oced you bet ya..

Failure is not an option live...and that is why they have requested my services in the past. I do not will not fail live under any circumstances...

And just in case...i always had a ready to pour second system ready to roll. I never ever needed the back up rig..


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> My experience lvl fwiw...i have run systems for amd and asus on ln2 vga and cpu...as gaming demos 8 hours straight no issues.
> 
> Atlantic city...come up and play on it starcraft demo @ 7 gig.
> 
> Boston pax east a 1155 rig @ 5.5 with a 580 on ln2...forget clocks...come up and play dirt 3 demo.
> 
> That chip was my own personal chip...it is the one in my m4e still cranking away...oced you bet ya..
> 
> Failure is not an option live...and that is why they have requested my services in the past. I do not will not fail live under any circumstances...
> 
> And just in case...i always had a ready to pour second system ready to roll. I never ever needed the back up rig..


I don't doubt your experience, I just think that because of the nature of what you have access to your priorities are a bit skewed. The number of people who actually need a VRM capable of pushing 1.6v @ 150A+ in order for it to be reliable for them is very small (with Ryzen).

I still mourn the death of DFI honestly. Up until the end they had some of the highest quality boards as far as I am aware. The LP 790FX DK was fairly insane for its price at the time, with its 4+1 that could push 200A+ @ ~1.7v in real world usage. I think I only paid something like $120 for the one I had.


----------



## chew*

Abit,soyo,epox,dfi, even sapphire when they were sort of teamed up with ati chipset division ( grouper and manta ).

All are surely missed except via...via and there over priced chipsets can go pound dirt lol..

But anyway. Imo all b350 vrm are preety weak.. I have been conservative and recommended stock or 3.6 ocs max. Benching 4.0 short burst on the top b350...sure. Stability tests...hell no..

Im less than impressed with some of the x370 as well...carbon..asrock killer and fatality i wont even waste my time.

Gigabyte G5 hot vrm...but can do 3200 STABLE.

Asus prime pro runs cool solid vrm can't do 3200 STABLE without unicorns.

Lose lose..cant win on either one..

I need a GIGASUS prime gaming 5 pro i guess to get what i want in a mainstream x370...


----------



## KarathKasun

Oh jeez, VIA chipset bugs alone made me dislike their stuff. Only problem was the fact that there was no other real choice for AMD back in the Socket A era.

I actually had an A-Bit K7 RAID (with the revised KT-133 chipset) when that platform was new. Followed by a SOYO Dragon Platinum KT-333, which I wish I still had so I could hang it on a wall. The board itself was nice to look at.









Oh wow, the SOYO is still in NewEggs archives. link


----------



## chew*

I had the abit max and the soyo dragon...both awesome boards.

http://baber.com/motherboards/abit/socket_a/abit_at7_max2.htm

https://goo.gl/images/Ca5CGV

Then nvidia chipset released...i was gungho abit and epox...

Abit choked and died on 939....

Dfi rose to power from 754-939


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> That's some good black magic right there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Back to reality
> 
> *CROSSHAIR VI HERO Stock 1800X (95W)*
> 
> 
> 
> *AsRock Taichi Stock 1800X (95W)*
> 
> 
> 
> *Biostar X370GT7 Stock 1800X (95W)*
> 
> 
> 
> *CROSSHAIR VI HERO - stock 1700 ( 65W )*
> 
> 
> *MSI X370 Titanium - stock 1700 ( 65W )*
> 
> Wonder the what the temps on the backside, behind the VRM...
> 
> niko fets website http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front
> 
> tpu.png 203k .png file
> /bin/home.phtml
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Titanium VRM fets
> http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> They have such a bad reputation that just happens to match their crap thermal vs current characteristics.
> 
> The datasheets, review sites, thermal imaging, history happen to paint a totally different picture on the MSI X370 Titanium cheapo $ 0.30 fets.
> 
> Why other vendors are not using these jewels on their top X370 and instead are using the TI and IR much more expensive alternatives .


A bit of light in the tunnel. Always be skeptical of MB reviews. It's sad to see how bad most motherboard reviews are nowadays. List product specs, unboxing pictures, run random benchmarks which mean nothing (sometimes not even a comparison on the same platform), conclude that the board didn't blow up when powered on, solid 10/10, would get for free again every time. No one even thought to test DRAM scaling until I uploaded some graphs of the scaling. Reviewers got sticks in their AM4 review kits which was among the worst for the platform. Most of them could not get past the 2666 MHz limit. Seriously, no one thought to test other sticks with different DRAM ICs??

Worst as of late, TPU. It's just not possible to give ANY X370 motherboard a 10/10 with the platform in its current state. Sure it might tick all the boxes and come at a good price, but it it flawless? Definitely not. Z270M OC Formula is a very well tuned overclocking board. Not mentioned is huge RMA rates, if you can even find one to purchase. Maximus VIII Extreme was a good board, but not sure I'd give it that high a review myself. It was just too expensive IMO without enough features or innovation to justify it.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/?category=Motherboards&manufacturer=&pp=25&order=score


----------



## SuperZan

Too true. It's been a bit sad watching enthusiast tech journalism get heavier on the journalism and lighter on the enthusiast. Thankfully we've still got forums with experienced hands, engineers, and extreme overclockers to give us a more accurate overview.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> A bit of light in the tunnel. Always be skeptical of MB reviews. It's sad to see how bad most motherboard reviews are nowadays. List product specs, unboxing pictures, run random benchmarks which mean nothing (sometimes not even a comparison on the same platform), conclude that the board didn't blow up when powered on, solid 10/10, would get for free again every time. No one even thought to test DRAM scaling until I uploaded some graphs of the scaling. Reviewers got sticks in their AM4 review kits which was among the worst for the platform. Most of them could not get past the 2666 MHz limit. Seriously, no one thought to test other sticks with different DRAM ICs??


I did ( other sticks ) but i am not a "reviewer".

Scaling...







( i was stuck on a non ref clock board ) silly AMD sending me a non ref clock board lol.

I don't care about freebies anymore either.

They don't like my findings...to bad...i bought it.

Tables have turned...i don't need them but they could certainly use my feedback to improve product...or ignore me and keep peddling junk..

I speak my mind and don't hold back but i think you and sf3d know that already lol.

Sup elmor. Have not chatted to much with the big guys since i came back


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I did ( other sticks ) but i am not a "reviewer".
> 
> I don't care about freebies anymore either.
> 
> They don't like my findings...to bad...i bought it.
> 
> Tables have turned...i don't need them but they could certainly use my feedback to improve product...or ignore me and keep peddling junk..
> 
> I speak my mind and don't hold back but i think you and sf3d know that already lol.
> 
> Sup elmor. Have not chatted to much with the big guys since i came back


Haha you might be a bit too rouge even for my taste. Good to see you back in action









You've definitely done some interesting experiments on the platform, I especially like that you've been finding the limits of B350 boards. There overclocking becomes a bit of challange again (but you don't seen to have had too big issues getting decent numbers). I mean if I did reviews, I'd ask for nothing else than B350 and B250-boards. That's where the sales volume is = big opportunity for view count and sales referrals. But that's just me, guess it's not interesting to get a free $100 board instead of one for $300.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Haha you might be a bit too rouge even for my taste. Good to see you back in action
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've definitely done some interesting experiments on the platform, I especially like that you've been finding the limits of B350 boards. There overclocking becomes a bit of challange again (but you don't seen to have had too big issues getting decent numbers). I mean if I did reviews, I'd ask for nothing else than B350 and B250-boards. That's where the sales volume is = big opportunity for view count and sales referrals. But that's just me, guess it's not interesting to get a free $100 board instead of one for $300.


I would buy some more and may soon. Im fairly satisfied that they can handle the r5 chips just fine.

Need to find some more clearance items.


----------



## KarathKasun

Honestly thats the only reason I got the MSI B350M Gaming Pro, it went on sale for $69 on Newegg. Actually, it was $54 because there was a combo deal with the R5 1400.









I poked around, found the power figures for the CPU and the MB, decided it was going to be good enough for my application, and pulled the trigger. Cant really complain about spending around $85 (sold old core system components for $200) and getting a pretty solid upgrade.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Thank you for your excellent investigation on the topic. It's sad to see how bad most motherboard reviews are nowadays. List product specs, unboxing pictures, run random benchmarks which mean nothing (sometimes not even a comparison on the same platform), conclude that the board didn't blow up when powered on, solid 10/10, would get for free again every time. No one even thought to test DRAM scaling until I uploaded some graphs of the scaling. Reviewers got sticks in their AM4 review kits which was among the worst for the platform. Most of them could not get past the 2666 MHz limit. Seriously, no one thought to test other sticks with different DRAM ICs?


I love my Taichi for what it is, still would never rate it 10/10, specially with it's actual bios.

I blame the memory crap on AMD as they should either provided the best single ranked Micron/Samsung b-die or provide nothing other than a note stating "1rx4 or 1rx8 per slot". Oh well, it has costed them pretty bad notes from many tech sites that just had the right excuse to play fool...

The problem with the MSI X370 Titanium is really simple: It uses $ 0.30 fets to feed the CPU and SoC. These should *never* be used on any $ 100+ board, the Titanium retails for $300.

It seems like if MSI AM4 line is dumping grounds for nikos fets...


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I love my Taichi for what it is, still would never rate it 10/10, specially with it's actual bios.
> 
> I blame the memory crap on AMD as they should either provided the best single ranked Micron/Samsung b-die or provide nothing other than a note stating "1rx4 or 1rx8 per slot". Oh well, it has costed them pretty bad notes from many tech sites that just had the right excuse to play fool...
> 
> The problem with the MSI X370 Titanium is really simple: It uses $ 0.30 fets to feed the CPU and SoC. These should *never* be used on any $ 100+ board, the Titanium retails for $300.
> 
> It seems like if MSI AM4 line is dumping grounds for nikos fets...


MSI is definitely milking that board for all they can. Are people buying it just for the looks? A few more interesting topics. How many reviews of the C6H tested reference clock adjustments, its main feature? And used it to get higher DRAM frequency? Only Overclock3d as far as I can tell, kudos to them. Did any of them mention the bricking issues? FanXpert problems? Aura problems?


----------



## AlphaC

@ elmor, my theory is some people are buying it because "pricier is always better built" supposedly (i.e. people that just buy the most expensive MSRP because they can and cba to do research).

Then there's people buying it before reviews on premises of Xpower quality VRM and OC features, who got shafted. It lacks BCLK , the mosfets / inductors of Z170 Xpower, v-check points, & OC Dashboard for starters.

There's likely others that are niche users requiring SATA express U.2 / 2nd M.2 slot all on the same board.

I don't think there would be as many buyers if it were a $220 Mpower board even if it were identical.

@virpz

To be fair the NIKOS PK616+PK632 mosfets used on MSI Gaming boards doesn't surprise me since Intel boards such as M5 / M7 /Mpower used them, including the X99 Tomahawk & Gaming Pro carbon. It does surprise me they're used on the flagship.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> MSI is definitely milking that board for all they can. Are people buying it just for the looks? A few more interesting topics. How many reviews of the C6H tested reference clock adjustments, its main feature? And used it to get higher DRAM frequency? Only Overclock3d as far as I can tell, kudos to them. Did any of them mention the bricking issues? FanXpert problems? Aura problems?


Yeah, to get straight info based on reviews is no easy job these days. Some sites even do entire reviews by copy&paste of the manufacturers product highlights, othersdo half ass reviews by stating half truths.
The consumers have changed, polarization is just a different way to ask for the ignorant s, most brands aretrying to make the most out of it by giving them what they deserve.
"Let's provide them with really good paint job and hide the crap bellow the carpet= They pay more for less so we can have an extended profit margin"
Paint is cheap, quality parts are expensive, way more than $0.30:thumb:


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I love my Taichi for what it is, still would never rate it 10/10, specially with it's actual bios.
> 
> I blame the memory crap on AMD as they should either provided the best single ranked Micron/Samsung b-die or provide nothing other than a note stating "1rx4 or 1rx8 per slot". Oh well, it has costed them pretty bad notes from many tech sites that just had the right excuse to play fool...
> 
> The problem with the MSI X370 Titanium is really simple: It uses $ 0.30 fets to feed the CPU and SoC. These should *never* be used on any $ 100+ board, the Titanium retails for $300.
> 
> It seems like if MSI AM4 line is dumping grounds for nikos fets...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI is definitely milking that board for all they can. Are people buying it just for the looks? A few more interesting topics. How many reviews of the C6H tested reference clock adjustments, its main feature? And used it to get higher DRAM frequency? Only Overclock3d as far as I can tell, kudos to them. Did any of them mention the bricking issues? FanXpert problems? Aura problems?
Click to expand...

I bought the Titanium mostly for aesthetics and the fact that I've had better luck with MSI boards than any other brand I've tried. 3 year warranty doesn't hurt either.

4150mhz on the cpu , 3200mhz cl 14 1t on the ram - daily clocks, haven't seen many other doing much better on ambient cooling.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I bought the Titanium mostly for aesthetics and the fact that I've had better luck with MSI boards than any other brand I've tried. 3 year warranty doesn't hurt either.
> 
> 4150mhz on the cpu , 3200mhz cl 14 1t on the ram - daily clocks, haven't seen many other doing much better on ambient cooling.


You also haven't seen more than 1 cpu









I got a 1600 here that says i dont care how good your unicorn pwm is...im not doing over 3.4.

Show me 4 gig on that then i am impressed...till then..

Point is no board magic pixie dust or not can do anything more than put lipstick on a pig...at the end of the day...its still a pig.

I've had boards clocking cheap junk bin chips with 32g ram populated at same timings speeds even mismatched sticks while still hitting 4gig plus.

Hell ive had DR 16g dimms running prime stable at 3400 for that matter...times shown how long running how much ram used plenty of undeniable unmasked non hidden data.

Haven't seen an msi do that to date









See how easily analogies can be flipped?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I bought the Titanium mostly for aesthetics and the fact that I've had better luck with MSI boards than any other brand I've tried. 3 year warranty doesn't hurt either.
> 
> 4150mhz on the cpu , 3200mhz cl 14 1t on the ram - daily clocks, haven't seen many other doing much better on ambient cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> You also haven't seen more than 1 cpu
Click to expand...

That's all I need.

It is remarkable how many golden chips I get with these MSI boards though


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I bought the Titanium mostly for aesthetics and the fact that I've had better luck with MSI boards than any other brand I've tried. 3 year warranty doesn't hurt either.
> 
> 4150mhz on the cpu , 3200mhz cl 14 1t on the ram - daily clocks, haven't seen many other doing much better on ambient cooling.


That's your processor sample, hardly the board.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I bought the Titanium mostly for aesthetics and the fact that I've had better luck with MSI boards than any other brand I've tried. 3 year warranty doesn't hurt either.
> 
> 4150mhz on the cpu , 3200mhz cl 14 1t on the ram - daily clocks, haven't seen many other doing much better on ambient cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> That's your processor sample, hardly the board.
Click to expand...

Funny, that's what guys said about my FX 8350 on the 990 GD 80. .

You won't get there on a dud chip, but you won't get an average chip there on a dud of a board either.

How about CL 14 3200 mhz 1 T on the very first bios using AXMP? Any other motherboards able to do that?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> The problem with the MSI X370 Titanium is really simple: It uses $ 0.30 fets to feed the CPU and SoC. These should *never* be used on any $ 100+ board, the Titanium retails for $300.
> 
> It seems like if MSI AM4 line is dumping grounds for nikos fets...


Says who? Where did the prices come from? How do these nikos parts compare to other similar parts in terms of reliability, cost and performance?

Instead of smearing the company, which makes perfectly fine parts by the way, it is far more useful to point out the actual real life issues associated with these parts.

I've seen like a dozen people smearing both nikos and msi in this thread without providing any reasoning or evidence. Enough is enough already.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Says who? Where did the prices come from? How do these nikos parts compare to other similar parts in terms of reliability, cost and performance?
> 
> Instead of smearing the company, which makes perfectly fine parts by the way, it is far more useful to point out the actual real life issues associated with these parts.
> 
> I've seen like a dozen people smearing both nikos and msi in this thread without providing any reasoning or evidence. Enough is enough already.


I have already posted compelling evidence...

An ln2 bencher who only benches memory speed obviously not winning any awards there on msi....

Also he benches cpu-z and cinebench....thats it nothing else....wastes ln2 on a 1700x just for cpu-z...just cpu-z on the lowest clocking chip in recent history...

Sorry but that math does not add up...

Wheres his cinebench runs?

Use your imagination...i already know what happened.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have already posted compelling evidence...


Where?


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Funny, that's what guys said about my FX 8350 on the 990 GD 80. .
> 
> You won't get there on a dud chip, but you won't get an average chip there on a dud of a board either.
> 
> How about CL 14 3200 mhz 1 T on the very first bios using AXMP? Any other motherboards able to do that?


All X370 boards are by far capable enough to sustain that on a decent chip.

And my Gaming-5 did 3200MHz 14-13-13-28 1T (obviously, they all run at 1T) on 1.35V on the launch BIOS... Hell it can bench at 14-11-11-26 just fine - but it's not stable on 1.35V and I can't be bothered to find how much it takes to stabilise it for such a minute performance gain.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Where?


Read it...im sorry but nobody wastes ln2 on ryzen...possibly the worst clocking chip in the past 10 years just to do a cpu-z. Especially when it appears there "benchmark" is cinebench...

That makes as much sense as me doing only a memory speed result on some new latest and greatest memory yet no super pi 32m.

So once again why no cinebench result from that user?

Its a no brainer for me...


----------



## PsyM4n

What does that have to do with how good the parts on the vrm are? You're not making any sense.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Funny, that's what guys said about my FX 8350 on the 990 GD 80. .
> 
> You won't get there on a dud chip, but you won't get an average chip there on a dud of a board either.
> 
> How about CL 14 3200 mhz 1 T on the very first bios using AXMP? Any other motherboards able to do that?
> 
> 
> 
> All X370 boards are by far capable enough to sustain that on a decent chip.
> 
> And my Gaming-5 did 3200MHz 14-13-13-28 1T (obviously, they all run at 1T) on 1.35V on the launch BIOS... Hell it can bench at 14-11-11-26 just fine - but it's not stable on 1.35V and I can't be bothered to find how much it takes to stabilise it for such a minute performance gain.
Click to expand...

My nephew is on a K7 , I gave him half of my 32 gb set of ram that worked perfectly on the Titanium in 2 x 8 gb configuration. The most he could get out of it was 2667 mhz .


----------



## bloot

RAM speed is kind of a lottery, depending on several factors it seems, my kit was stuck at 2933 with the Killer SLI and now it can do 3400 with the K7.

Motherboard, memory kit and chip IMC are among those factors.

I'm liking more and more this Aorus board.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> What does that have to do with how good the parts on the vrm are? You're not making any sense.


You seriously can not figure it out?

He ran cpu-z found max of chip....ran cinebench...magic smoke dead cpu/board...thats why no results for 58 days since








http://hwbot.org/user/ren_kei_yang/


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> My nephew is on a K7 , I gave him half of my 32 gb set of ram that worked perfectly on the Titanium in 2 x 8 gb configuration. The most he could get out of it was 2667 mhz .


I could only get 3680. Your right it sux.

What's that titanium getting again? Oh yah 3200...


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> My nephew is on a K7 , I gave him half of my 32 gb set of ram that worked perfectly on the Titanium in 2 x 8 gb configuration. The most he could get out of it was 2667 mhz .


And I gave my brother my 5D Mark II and he couldn't manage to get a picture exposed properly but I produce professional work on it...

What's your point?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> You seriously can not figure it out?
> 
> He ran cpu-z found max of chip....ran cinebench...magic smoke dead cpu/board...thats why no results for 58 days since
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://hwbot.org/user/ren_kei_yang/


You sure it wasn't the ln2 destroying the board physically? No matter the board you have, it will eventually die as soon as it shorts at an unprotected spot (no way around that, on any board).
Even if it didn't short, it would eventually die due to moisture or extreme temperature changes. As soon as you reach an associate threshold under the circumstances, the board dies, any board.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> And I gave my brother my 5D Mark II and he couldn't manage to get a picture exposed properly but I produce professional work on it...
> 
> What's your point?


His point is he binned the best parts and passed on his junk lol..


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You sure it wasn't the ln2 destroying the board physically? No matter the board you have, it will eventually die as soon as it shorts at an unprotected spot (no way around that, on any board).
> Even if it didn't short, it would eventually die due to moisture or extreme temperature changes. As soon as you reach an associate threshold under the circumstances, the board dies, any board.


No way around that? Really? I bench with water on my board np. Its called conformal coating vaseline plastidip eraser...

Pick one all are methods that work...

I use conformal..

To funny. You have no clue about ln2 benching...

Good thing i do...so once again the only platform you would only bench cpu-z on for cpu-z is BD...

You bench cinebench on ryzen...he does but did not...why...

Simple it died trying to run it.

Happened to me...insulation can not unicorn poor quality fets..

Boards last many session over and over...hell we froze for BD record two boards over and over again on lhe before we found a decent chip...one was being blow dryered while other was being frozen to -250....switch your turn..


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No way around that? Really? I bench with water on my board np. Its called conformal coating vaseline plastidip eraser...
> 
> Pick one all are methods that work...
> 
> I use conformal..
> 
> To funny. You have no clue about ln2 benching...
> 
> Good thing i do...so once again the only platform you would only bench cpu-z on for cpu-z is BD...
> 
> You bench cinebench on ryzen...he does but did not...why...
> 
> Simple it died trying to run it.
> 
> Happened to me...insulation can not unicorn poor quality fets..
> 
> Boards last many session over and over...hell we froze for BD record two boards over and over again on lhe before we found a decent chip...one was being blow dryered while other was being frozen to -250....switch your turn..


Yeah, I have no clue. Absolutely none.
It's not as if you can miss a spot when applying the coating. It's also impossible for debris, like a piece of hair, to find its way behind the coating when applying it, thus sorting the board.
Of course the coating is always perfect and lasts forever.









/sarcasm.


----------



## chew*

Silicone conformal...yep it does. Urethane is problematic. Silicone is not. It does not miss spots. Its flow characteristics prevent that in fact it works almost to good to the point where you can ruin dimm slots socket and pci slots....

you knew that because you use it and bench ln2

/sarcasm.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> My nephew is on a K7 , I gave him half of my 32 gb set of ram that worked perfectly on the Titanium in 2 x 8 gb configuration. The most he could get out of it was 2667 mhz .
> 
> 
> 
> And I gave my brother my 5D Mark II and he couldn't manage to get a picture exposed properly but I produce professional work on it...
> 
> What's your point?
Click to expand...

That you will accept any information that appears to put the Titanium in a poor light and refuse anything that shows it to be equal or superior.

Titanium could - K7 could not.... simple as that.


----------



## chew*

So your dud chip that sucked in titanium sucked in gigabyte...what a surprise.

I go by facts.

Facts prime is easy to cheat...suspect highly when not cascaded to show iterations and amount of work done...suspect 2 version not visible.
Suspect 3 low ram usage.

That just covers how you run and display your "prime"

All top tier boards have done 3200 np the way i test with multiple chips. Its expected its not a miracle...

The issue is not till you go mainstream and lower that 3200 real stable is a problem.

You happen to dodge quite a bit.

I show 3680 on k7...no comment.

Fan on back of mobo open case no comment. Might want to go edit that post now that i brought that up..

Binned to win no comment..

Change subject alot though..

Still on ancient microcode? News flash it clocks 100 mhz higher...eventually going to lose that..

Roll that beautiful bean err i mean vrm temp screen again...

I believe straight up guys with bad and good to say...

With the current breed...you would be a great reviewer though...

Everything perfect nothing to see here 10/10


----------



## DADDYDC650

Wonder who will release a true top of the line board for the x370 first?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> So your dud chip that sucked in titanium sucked in gigabyte...what a surprise.


K7 2667 - barely - Titanium 3200 mhz cl 14 - just enabled AXMP - not much debating which was better.

The Titanium's lack of a reference clock adjustments will be a handicap for anyone wanting to run faster frequency than 3200 mhz.

I am the self admitted worlds worst memory overclocker, I just don't have the patience - Titanium's ez pezee 3200 cl 14 1T is a great choice for me.

What voltages did you have on the ram/soc in the screenshot above ?


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> K7 2667 - barely - Titanium 3200 mhz cl 14 - just enabled AXMP - not much debating which was better.
> 
> The Titanium's lack of a reference clock adjustments will be a handicap for anyone wanting to run faster frequency than 3200 mhz.
> 
> I am the self admitted worlds worst memory overclocker, I just don't have the patience - Titanium's ez pezee 3200 cl 14 1T is a great choice for me.
> 
> What voltages did you have on the ram/soc in the screenshot above ?


Got a K7. Slapped in my 2x8GB kit and enabled the profile. Runs at 3200 CL14 1T without issue.


----------



## chew*

1.2 soc.

Voltage 1.50...tad higher than the 1.45 stilt has suggested run them at bit i was in im not slacking timings mood.

16-16-16 way less volts...far more realistic.

Procedure matters most...


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Says who? Where did the prices come from? How do these nikos parts compare to other similar parts in terms of reliability, cost and performance?
> 
> Instead of smearing the company, which makes perfectly fine parts by the way, it is far more useful to point out the actual real life issues associated with these parts.
> 
> I've seen like a dozen people smearing both nikos and msi in this thread without providing any reasoning or evidence. Enough is enough already.


Nikos= Hot Running Chinese budget fets. You don't like me saying that ? Prove me wrong !

They run hot, are less than reliable and MSI is using them with it's Titanium AM4 now.

MSI is charging a premium for a board made of budget parts and as @AlphaC pointed it lacks even the clockgen that all the other less expensive, higher quality made boards have.
The MSI X370 Titanium retails for $ 300.

Now if you are looking for a expensive board with good painting job and nothing else the MSI X370 Titanium is the right board for you.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Nikos= Hot Running Chinese budget fets. You don't like me saying that ? Prove me wrong !


That's the opposite way of how a conversation works.

Whatever an individual claims is meant to be supported by facts, or when said facts are unavailable, at least some observations of the material in question.

When resorting to unsupported claims, name-calling, smearing, putdowns, personal attacks and the likes then you do not have a conversation. Best case scenario is that you have a childish argument in the form of "mine is bigger than yours", worst case is that you have someone trolling just to get reactions.

So, lets stick to facts and get the conversation going instead of using empty claims and phrases like "nikos fets are reaching 100 trillion celsius temperature, they melt everything they touch, make a hole on the ground, fall until they reach the center of the earth and as a result make the earth explode and get us all killed" or "some guy I know had an msi board with nikos fets and it gave him HIV".

It's not a matter of liking what you read or not. If you claim something, prove it and stop wasting everyone else's time.


----------



## Sand3853

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Got a K7. Slapped in my 2x8GB kit and enabled the profile. Runs at 3200 CL14 1T without issue.


K7 here as well, running a Hynix kit at 3200 Cl16 without issue; same kit in 2 other boards wouldn't post past 2400.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Funny, that's what guys said about my FX 8350 on the 990 GD 80. .
> 
> You won't get there on a dud chip, but you won't get an average chip there on a dud of a board either.
> 
> How about CL 14 3200 mhz 1 T on the very first bios using AXMP? Any other motherboards able to do that?


Wee asus board had no problem with xmp on release bios

Titanium bios may not have been perfect but at least it, like the biostar gt7, was mostly problem free without widespread issues.
Just worked, gratifying for flagship board.

Your nephew seems to have drawn the short end of the stick on his experience with the other half of that kit. Hard to judge, don't know skill level.
I'm curious did you ever run that kit on your titanium?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> So your dud chip that sucked in titanium sucked in gigabyte...what a surprise.
> 
> I go by facts.
> 
> Facts prime is easy to cheat...suspect highly when not cascaded to show iterations and amount of work done...suspect 2 version not visible.
> Suspect 3 low ram usage.
> 
> That just covers how you run and display your "prime"
> 
> All top tier boards have done 3200 np the way i test with multiple chips. Its expected its not a miracle...
> 
> The issue is not till you go mainstream and lower that 3200 real stable is a problem.
> 
> You happen to dodge quite a bit.
> 
> I show 3680 on k7...no comment.
> 
> Fan on back of mobo open case no comment. Might want to go edit that post now that i brought that up..
> 
> Binned to win no comment..
> 
> Change subject alot though..
> 
> Still on ancient microcode? News flash it clocks 100 mhz higher...eventually going to lose that..
> 
> Roll that beautiful bean err i mean vrm temp screen again...
> 
> I believe straight up guys with bad and good to say...
> 
> With the current breed...you would be a great reviewer though...
> 
> Everything perfect nothing to see here 10/10


I run prime at it's default settings as it is easy for others to compare to in that event. I arrange the prime workers window in a manner that allows as much pertinent information from HWINFO to be seen as possible and still allow others to see the workers have or have not failed.

Unlike some fellows I always post proof of what I've done and would never try to hide anything or trick anyone intentionally. I do make mistakes from time to time and if I realize it I'll post corrections.

I've posted several times that I have my Titanium on a P 5 ( check sig ) with fans blowing on the VRMS but not on the back side of socket. I do not and will not make any effort to conceal facts. Anyone wishing to compare vrm temps is welcome to do the same.

As for the 3680 mhz on the ram, that probably has as much to do with your abilities as the board - there are many thousands of users with my level of ram overclocking talent/experience , very few with yours.

One board, one set of ram, one cpu 15 minutes invested 4 ghz , 3200mhz cl14 1T. That's the reality.

No and I am aware that it is harder to run prime on the new micro-code


----------



## chew*

I was not saying that u cheat prime but it can be...and the way you display it...does not help in the event it became questionable. Hw info is ehh. Software lol.

Im also aware that you run it the easy way which is why i mentioned it...so for perspective for the rest...4150 on old microcode the easy way....far more realistic now









My abilities derive more from ability to diagnose symptoms/bugs...

Giga reboot loops 5 times. There are5 timings...its a ryzen thing. 1 per timing.









Most hit reset by second loop and miss the cool stuff that comes after grabbing a snickers bar and waiting.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> That you will accept any information that appears to put the Titanium in a poor light and refuse anything that shows it to be equal or superior.
> 
> Titanium could - K7 could not.... simple as that.


I what?

Might want to double check who you're quoting before putting words in my mouth.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> That's the opposite way of how a conversation works.
> 
> Whatever an individual claims is meant to be supported by facts, or when said facts are unavailable, at least some observations of the material in question.
> 
> When resorting to unsupported claims, name-calling, smearing, putdowns, personal attacks and the likes then you do not have a conversation. Best case scenario is that you have a childish argument in the form of "mine is bigger than yours", worst case is that you have someone trolling just to get reactions.
> 
> So, lets stick to facts and get the conversation going instead of using empty claims and phrases like "nikos fets are reaching 100 trillion celsius temperature, they melt everything they touch, make a hole on the ground, fall until they reach the center of the earth and as a result make the earth explode and get us all killed" or "some guy I know had an msi board with nikos fets and it gave him HIV".
> 
> It's not a matter of liking what you read or not. If you claim something, prove it and stop wasting everyone else's time.


That's a conversation, prove me wrong but also let me try to help you with that...

There you have the datasheets. No absolute maximums, please.
















Nikos MSI fets
http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml
http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf

Now, the TI fets used with the Taichi, Crosshair and even on the Prime.
http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/technicaldocuments
http://www.ti.com/general/docs/lit/getliterature.tsp?genericPartNumber=csd87350q5d&fileType=pdf

Figures, It is not a matter of me liking or not MSI/Nikos, it's just what the MSI X370 Titanium has to offer at $300 cost/benefit wise, it is how these fets are crap and cheap in their own datasheet.

Would I recommend anybody to build their $ 1000+ worth of hardware over that thing ? Hell NO

Would I buy and recommend the MSI X370 Titanium if it was anything like the Z270 Titanium quality wise ? Hell yeah.


----------



## Tasm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> It works. even overclocked. Could debate about efficiency of JUST the mosfets til the cows come home, I will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , but it undeniably works, at load, with room to run hotter. Less expensive components and all.


As any B350 works.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> That's a conversation, prove me wrong but also let me try to help you with that...
> 
> There you have the datasheets. No absolute maximums, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nikos MSI fets
> http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml
> http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> Now, the TI fets used with the Taichi, Crosshair and even on the Prime.
> http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/technicaldocuments
> http://www.ti.com/general/docs/lit/getliterature.tsp?genericPartNumber=csd87350q5d&fileType=pdf
> 
> Figures, It is not a matter of me liking or not MSI/Nikos, it's just what the MSI X370 Titanium has to offer at $300 cost/benefit wise, it is how these fets are crap and cheap in their own datasheet.
> 
> Would I recommend anybody to build their $ 1000+ worth of hardware over that thing ? Hell NO
> 
> Would I buy and recommend the MSI X370 Titanium if it was anything like the Z270 Titanium quality wise ? Hell yeah.


Let them be ripped off. Titanium is great. Totally worth the price. There are much more to think about than the vrm parts


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Funny, that's what guys said about my FX 8350 on the 990 GD 80. .
> 
> You won't get there on a dud chip, but you won't get an average chip there on a dud of a board either.
> 
> How about CL 14 3200 mhz 1 T on the very first bios using AXMP? Any other motherboards able to do that?
> 
> 
> 
> Wee asus board had no problem with xmp on release bios
> 
> Titanium bios may not have been perfect but at least it, like the biostar gt7, was mostly problem free without widespread issues.
> Just worked, gratifying for flagship board.
> 
> Your nephew seems to have drawn the short end of the stick on his experience with the other half of that kit. Hard to judge, don't know skill level.
> I'm curious did you ever run that kit on your titanium?
Click to expand...

I taught him everything I know about ram overclocking.... ( which is very little







)

It's possible they aren't as good as the 2 that ended up staying in my board. I did run both halves by themselves at 3200 cl 14 but didn't test both sets extensively. My nephew has bought his own set now and I haven't heard how he is getting along with them - he returned the other half of my kit to me and I'm running them now in 2x8 3200 mhz cl 14 1 T - I'll let you know how I get along with them.

Bios , windows and microcode updates make for complicated comparisons....lol I'll update you on how things go with his rig as well.


----------



## chew*

Absolutely makes a ton of difference.

On all new bios etc the stuff im testing is hitting same max same volts.

Guide be posted on giga soon. Be way easier once you understand its quirks.

Simple terms auto multi plus refclock = win.

Deviate from above = lose.

Agesa or giga?

Little bit of both...but groundwork wise...it has the potential to do some pretty good stuff.

No bios can fix pwm sinks though...

Dropping switching frequency might cool fets down though.

They could have it cranked up high.

If you chose to use it with plans to actively cool vrm as i stated in day 1 launch...be fine.

Cruddy airflow closed case stock cooler 4 gig? Gl with that...


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Absolutely makes a ton of difference.
> 
> Guide be posted on giga soon. Be way easier once you understand its quirks.
> 
> Simple terms auto multi plus refclock = win.
> 
> Deviate from above = lose.


looking forward to that guide.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Yeah, I have no clue. Absolutely none.
> It's not as if you can miss a spot when applying the coating. It's also impossible for debris, like a piece of hair, to find its way behind the coating when applying it, thus sorting the board.
> Of course the coating is always perfect and lasts forever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> /sarcasm.










Now what was that you were lecturing me about?

Was it moisture?

Sorry to make you look dumb but you do that fine without help it seems...

People who do this on the professional lvl do know what they are doing.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> That's a conversation, prove me wrong but also let me try to help you with that...
> 
> There you have the datasheets. No absolute maximums, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nikos MSI fets
> http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml
> http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> Now, the TI fets used with the Taichi, Crosshair and even on the Prime.
> http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/technicaldocuments
> http://www.ti.com/general/docs/lit/getliterature.tsp?genericPartNumber=csd87350q5d&fileType=pdf
> 
> Figures, It is not a matter of me liking or not MSI/Nikos, it's just what the MSI X370 Titanium has to offer at $300 cost/benefit wise, it is how these fets are crap and cheap in their own datasheet.
> 
> Would I recommend anybody to build their $ 1000+ worth of hardware over that thing ? Hell NO
> 
> Would I buy and recommend the MSI X370 Titanium if it was anything like the Z270 Titanium quality wise ? Hell yeah.


According to the documents you pointed to, the particular combination of nikos low and high side fets perform slightly better than the TI fets you pointed to. The numbers on these documents say so.

The difference here is minimal though. In practice, the difference would only affect extreme scenarios (ie: ln2, phase, etc) or scenarios when more than one low and/or high side fets are used per coil.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now what was that you were lecturing me about?
> 
> Was it moisture?
> 
> Sorry to make you look dumb but you do that fine without help it seems...
> 
> People who do this on the professional lvl do know what they are doing.


You can call me whatever you want. The fact is that errors happen. You might be doing the same thing perfectly fine for decades and still encounter a problem or two at some point. When that happens, it might not even be your fault.


----------



## chew*

I don't make mistakes anymore because i learned from previous and adapted till it was perfected.



Urethane cracks...adapted went to silicone...poured ln2 all over a vga to verify it holds up. Dunked vga in ln2 to verify..

Solved flow issues on mobos..

I dont even have insulation around phase right now...just puddle control...my board has a puddle on it right now. I will boot it up. No worries...done it over 5 times this week.

I perfected this over 5 years ago...just normal procedure now...

Problems i encounter = bad quality components.


----------



## Karagra

There are a few select people in here who shine above the rest. Chew is one of them.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I don't make mistakes anymore because i learned from previous and adapted till it was perfected.


Yeah, and what happens if one of the board layers is misprinted, or when the print is weak? I've seen pcb layers literally coming apart when pushed, while others caught fire at some area where the print was weak. It's all made in china nowadays anyway.

Then you have the solder mask. There's a reason why server oriented boards stick to specific colors. Sure, the white used on some boards looks good... and it's the worst color to work with, with the traces being hardly visible and such.

Even if someone doesn't do mistakes (humans do, inevitably) there are always parts with manufacturing defects of all sorts.


----------



## lordzed83

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> MSI is definitely milking that board for all they can. Are people buying it just for the looks? A few more interesting topics. How many reviews of the C6H tested reference clock adjustments, its main feature? And used it to get higher DRAM frequency? Only Overclock3d as far as I can tell, kudos to them. Did any of them mention the bricking issues? FanXpert problems? Aura problems?


Indeed i went over so many reviews and like everyone are sticking to 100bclk... Well not using MAIN option of overclocking in boards is just stupid :S


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Yeah, and what happens if one of the board layers is misprinted, or when the print is weak? I've seen pcb layers literally coming apart when pushed, while others caught fire at some area where the print was weak. It's all made in china nowadays anyway.
> 
> Then you have the solder mask. There's a reason why server oriented boards stick to specific colors. Sure, the white used on some boards looks good... and it's the worst color to work with, with the traces being hardly visible and such.
> 
> Even if someone doesn't do mistakes (humans do, inevitably) there are always parts with manufacturing defects of all sorts.


Of course there are.

There are also problem boards. No matter how good you are they will just pop.

Can i rma my stuff? Hell no. That why i beat the snot out of hardware on air before i prep them. I learned that quickly to lol. If they survive...then prep them.

Least i know my attention to detail was not the cause.

However you don't bench systems this long and have this much ice build up just from being lucky. And that is my point. I have tons of hours under ln2...trouble free insulation is a reality if your willing to play legit and not keep your ability to RMA...which if your on ln2...you should not be doing anyway..



You also become a source for reliable feedback to vendors which can be very usefull to them..


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> According to the documents you pointed to, the particular combination of nikos low and high side fets perform slightly better than the TI fets you pointed to. The numbers on these documents say so.


So, you are telling me that the combination of 1x PK616BA HS 2X PK632BA LS is slightly better than one CSD87350Q5D ?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> So, you are telling me that the combination of 1x PK616BA HS 2X PK632BA LS is slightly better than one CSD87350Q5D ?


In theory, according to the spec-sheets.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> According to the documents you pointed to, the particular combination of nikos low and high side fets perform slightly better than the TI fets you pointed to. The numbers on these documents say so.


Which numbers are you looking at? Usually the below values are the most significant. The rest is up to package limitations and how you cool them.

PK616BA (High-side) Rds = 6.3mOhm Qg = 9.3nC @ Vgs = 4.5V
PK632BA (Low-side) Rds = 3mOhm Qg = 22nC @ @ Vgs = 4.5V

CSD87350 (High-side) Rds = 5mOhm Qg = 8.4nC @ Vgs = 4.5V
CSD87350 (Low-side) Rds = 2.1mOhm Qg = 20nC @ Vgs = 4.5V

Only advantage of 2xPK632BA for low side is that heat dissipation is split over two packages instead of one. Efficiency wise it's worse due to a small increase in switching losses. Additionally there are efficiency advantages due to optimizations possible when using a power block, see below graphs taken from the TI datasheet.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> In theory, according to the spec-sheets.


Not at all, the Niko Semi FETs have a higher resistance and will thus run hotter, which means that actual power capability is much lower because temps at the same load will be quite a bit higher. Thermal transfer through plastic is pretty poor.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> According to the documents you pointed to, the particular combination of nikos low and high side fets perform slightly better than the TI fets you pointed to. The numbers on these documents say so.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> So, you are telling me that the combination of 1x PK616BA HS 2X PK632BA LS is slightly better than one CSD87350Q5D ?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> In theory, according to the spec-sheets.


While I slightly disagree, ill just accept your theory. Like you said, enough, is enough.

No Further Questions Your Honor.

So, everybody at this point should be aware of what happens when you have not one but TWO CSD87350Q5D per phase versus the MSI X370 Titanium crapfets.

According to PsyM4a, it is almost 3x1.

*AsRock X370 Taichi*
6-phase Vcore
Per phase: Two CSD87350Q5D
480A capable

*ASUS Crosshair VI Hero*
4-phase Vcore
Per phase: Two CSD87350Q5D
320A capable

*Biostar Gt7*
4- phase Vcore
Per phase: Two IR3550 per phase
480A capable

*ASUS Prime X370*
6-phase Vcore
Per phase: *one* CSD87350Q5D
240A capable

*MSI X370 Titanium*
6-phase Vcore
Phase: One PK616BA High side, Two PK632BA Low side
252A capable according to that manufacturer http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml

Conversation ended.


----------



## PsyM4n

The nikos 2plus1 combination dissipates heat better and has higher output capabilities. There are actual physical limitations and power requirements affecting the TI part in this case.
The nikos combo should indeed be slightly less efficient than the TI. That's less important since the difference is too small anyway to begin with and the input can supply enough power to the fet (the eps limit is high enough for that).

The TI part would be more than just "a little" better if the nikos were used in a 1plus1 configuration.

That behavior is pretty much why manufacturers nowadays tend to shy away from independent fets and seek parts with more integration.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The nikos 2plus1 combination dissipates heat better and has higher output capabilities. There are actual physical limitations and power requirements affecting the TI part in this case.
> The nikos combo should indeed be slightly less efficient than the TI. That's less important since the difference is too small anyway to begin with and the input can supply enough power to the fet (the eps limit is high enough for that).
> 
> The TI part would be more than just "a little" better if the nikos were used in a 1plus1 configuration.
> 
> That behavior is pretty much why manufacturers nowadays tend to shy away from independent fets and seek parts with more integration.


When you are at the levels of RDSon we are talking about, its a 20% difference. That is a large difference in heat output at high load, and the hotter a FET runs the less power it is capable of handling and the more heat it generates.

Thats actually why Niko Semi parts get a bad wrap. Thermal runaway is a thing. You have to de-rate their parts more than their competitors, so the specs in their datasheet don't really mean much.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> When you are at the levels of RDSon we are talking about, its a 20% difference. That is a large difference in heat output at high load, and the hotter a FET runs the less power it is capable of handling and the more heat it generates.
> 
> Thats actually why Niko Semi parts get a bad wrap. Thermal runaway is a thing. You have to de-rate their parts more than their competitors, so the specs in a datasheet don't really mean much.


Yeah, that's why I said that if you had the nikos in a 1plus1 setup instead of 2plus1 they would be more than "a little" worse. It's just that this particular 2plus1 setup ends up in a slightly better position.

It's not a matter of who's better. Each package has different characteristics.


----------



## Artikbot

It's not only the on state resistance... You also have lower gate charge which results in lower switching losses in both transistor and driver.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Yeah, that's why I said that if you had the nikos in a 1plus1 setup instead of 2plus1 they would be more than "a little" worse. It's just that this particular 2plus1 setup ends up in a slightly better position.
> 
> It's not a matter of who's better. Each package has different characteristics.


They all have overkill current handling capabilities. Our limits lie in heat output, not current handling. Thus efficiency, therefore waste heat becomes the limiting factor.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> They all have overkill current handling capabilities. Our limits lie in heat output, not current handling. Thus efficiency, therefore waste heat becomes the limiting factor.


Smaller packages have a harder time dissipating heat, some manufacturers make packages with metal on both sides of the package to help with heat dissipation. A lot of variable take place.

I'm quite sure that if you compare the asus prime with the msi titanium, the msi will have slightly better behavior on the vrm.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Smaller packages have a harder time dissipating heat, some manufacturers make packages with metal on both sides of the package to help with heat dissipation. A lot of variable take place.
> 
> I'm quite sure that if you compare the asus prime with the msi titanium, the msi will have slightly better behavior on the vrm.


Actually, this is not true. Larger packages have more plastic for the heat to transfer through and will result in a higher FET silicon temperature. The FETs with the best heat conductivity are the ones without a package, and they are tiny. Problem is that they are really fragile.


----------



## Artikbot

While they have varying thermal conductivities (mostly in favour of the PowIR parts), you still have to dissipate said heat, both through the motherboard and the heatsink. Spreading the load over slightly bigger areas doesn't help that much in terms of drawing a conclusion between one board or another. They are mostly identical.

Heat generation is what our boards should mostly be judged on, And the MSI mitigates this by using a real heatsink.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> What does that have to do with how good the parts on the vrm are? You're not making any sense.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Nikos= Hot Running Chinese budget fets. You don't like me saying that ? Prove me wrong !:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> That's the opposite way of how a conversation works.
> 
> Whatever an individual claims is meant to be supported by facts, or when said facts are unavailable, at least some observations of the material in question.
> 
> When resorting to unsupported claims, name-calling, smearing, putdowns, personal attacks and the likes then you do not have a conversation. Best case scenario is that you have a childish argument in the form of "mine is bigger than yours", worst case is that you have someone trolling just to get reactions.
> 
> So, lets stick to facts and get the conversation going instead of using empty claims and phrases like "nikos fets are reaching 100 trillion celsius temperature, they melt everything they touch, make a hole on the ground, fall until they reach the center of the earth and as a result make the earth explode and get us all killed" or "some guy I know had an msi board with nikos fets and it gave him HIV".
> 
> It's not a matter of liking what you read or not. If you claim something, prove it and stop wasting everyone else's time.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> That's a conversation, prove me wrong but also let me try to help you with that...
> 
> There you have the datasheets. *No absolute maximums, please*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nikos MSI fets
> http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml
> http://products.niko-sem.com/images/product/148231008405971632.pdf
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> Now, the TI fets used with the Taichi, Crosshair and even on the Prime.
> http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/technicaldocuments
> http://www.ti.com/general/docs/lit/getliterature.tsp?genericPartNumber=csd87350q5d&fileType=pdf
> 
> Figures, It is not a matter of me liking or not MSI/Nikos, it's just what the MSI X370 Titanium has to offer at $300 cost/benefit wise, it is how these fets are crap and cheap in their own datasheet.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> According to the documents you pointed to, the particular combination of nikos low and high side fets perform slightly better than the TI fets you pointed to. The numbers on these documents say so


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> So, you are telling me that the combination of 1x PK616BA HS 2X PK632BA LS is slightly better than one CSD87350Q5D ?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> In theory, according to the spec-sheets.


Boy, oh boy.

You are missing the *basics of Ohm's law*, but hey. You did you fall into that trap like nobody else.

10/10







: keep


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Actually, this is not true. Larger packages have more plastic for the heat to transfer through and will result in a higher FET silicon temperature. The FETs with the best heat conductivity are the ones without a package, and they are tiny. Problem is that they are really fragile.


The bottom of the package has metal. The more, the better. There are other packages where the top also has metal. Again the more, the better.


----------



## Artikbot

Don't get into silly more or less metal or plastic or whatever. Look at the datasheets. They exist for a reason.


----------



## sakae48

most SMT FETs has a big plane on the back side. some will be tied to "Drain", some tied to something else (in 87350 case, it's tied to GND). this plane acted as a heat spreader which spread the heat to the PCB.
the bigger package is not equivalent as bigger heat pad. do mind as the efficiency gets better, the package size could be shrunken.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> most SMT FETs has a big plane on the back side. some will be tied to "Drain", some tied to something else (in 87350 case, it's tied to GND). this plane acted as a heat spreader which spread the heat to the PCB.
> the bigger package is not equivalent as bigger heat pad. do mind as the efficiency gets better, the package size could be shrunken.


Agreed.

My point is that instead of using packages with higher integration, higher efficiency and lower losses msi opted for more parts with less integration, and to make up for heat accumulated from the losses they've used more parts with better heat dissipation and at the same time used a relatively strong heat-sink.
Since the nikos powerpacks are either low or high side they have a relatively easier time dissipating the lost heat than nexfets, drmosfets and the likes that integrate both high and low side. That's actually the only advantage they have that I can think of.

I took some time to go back a few pages in this thread, and 10 pages back or so there are thermal monitoring results from the vrm of various boards. According to these results, the titanium is not far behind in regards to temperatures compared to the crosshair, meaning that it should be around the same temperature levels as the prime (it should actually be a bit better in theory).


----------



## sakae48

it's all depends on the engineer's perspective. what approach did he use. it's not simple at all.
having a dual mosfet in a package will consume less time to route the PCB trace. one have smaller capacitance while one has faster rise / fall time. which one better? it depends on what perspective they use. which one the engineers thought to be better.


----------



## PsyM4n

Precisely. It's not a simple "X part is bad, Y part is good". Lot's of variables taking place.


----------



## Artikbot

The images you posted fall right out the window the moment the processors are pushed beyond stock though.

No offense meant, but it seems to me you're just conveniently agreeing with people without really understanding anything of what's going on to shine yourself in better light.


----------



## bardacuda

I've got a Prime Pro. If you guys want I can take some video of running IBT or OCCT at 1.4V and show what HWiNFO and my IR thermometer says, and touch the heatsink with my hand with no fan blowing on it...if someone with a Titanium wants to do the same thing.


----------



## Zhany

Anyone have an ideas where the Core current numbers come from in HWInfo? the Amperage number of 173.549 seems nonsensical to me? I'm pretty sure the VRM on my board would have gone into full on meltdown if that much power was actually tying to go through. When I manually calculate the amperage based on wattage and voltage I get 105 Watts CPU Package Power / 1.212 CPU Core Voltage = 86.6 amps which makes a lot more sense to me at least.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> The images you posted fall right out the window the moment the processors are pushed beyond stock though.
> 
> No offense meant, but it seems to me you're just conveniently agreeing with people without really understanding anything of what's going on to shine yourself in better light.


You're throwing me an insult and ask me not to get offended. That makes you the third different person who straight off insults me in three pages.

You know who doesn't know what he is talking about? *Let me show some examples*:

Right now you said I posted images. I did not post related images, not even linked to them. I said that they were posted 10 pages ago or so.

*next*:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> So, everybody at this point should be aware of what happens when you have not one but TWO CSD87350Q5D per phase versus the MSI X370 Titanium crapfets.
> 
> According to PsyM4a, it is almost 3x1.
> 
> *AsRock X370 Taichi*
> 6-phase Vcore
> Per phase: Two CSD87350Q5D
> 480A capable
> 
> *ASUS Crosshair VI Hero*
> 4-phase Vcore
> Per phase: Two CSD87350Q5D
> 320A capable
> 
> *Biostar Gt7*
> 4- phase Vcore
> Per phase: Two IR3550 per phase
> 480A capable
> 
> *ASUS Prime X370*
> 6-phase Vcore
> Per phase: Two CSD87350Q5D
> 240A capable
> 
> *MSI X370 Titanium*
> 6-phase Vcore
> Phase: One PK616BA High side, Two PK632BA Low side
> 252A capable according to that manufacturer http://www.niko-sem.com/in/front/bin/home.phtml
> 
> Conversation ended.


Here.
For starters the prime has just one fet per phase. The amperage capability posted is also wrong due to this.
Next is the doubling in phases taking place, doubled or not as long as you have coil, driver, high side fet and low side fet all connected to the pwm, with or without doubler, you have a phase. If you had analog (well, hybrid more likely nowadays) pwm instead of digital, you could have even more sophisticated setups with interleaving allowing something like 10 phases with 3 doublers using a 6 phase pwm or something. The point is that the numbers on that post are messed up.

*next*:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now what was that you were lecturing me about?
> 
> Was it moisture?
> 
> Sorry to make you look dumb but you do that fine without help it seems...
> 
> People who do this on the professional lvl do know what they are doing.


The guy here posts ln2 session photos of years old components and insults me right to my face in the middle of a conversation about completely unrelated components... to prove his point. All that without forgetting to remind the world that he is a "pro".

In short, he's telling me "mine is bigger than yours, so I win".

No comment.

*next*:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Boy, oh boy.
> 
> You are missing the *basics of Ohm's law*, but hey. You did you fall into that trap like nobody else.
> 
> 10/10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> : keep


The guy here quoted multiple posts from multiple pages back just to tell me that I fell into a trap "like nobody else".... cause you know, this is war and such. Who needs to have an adult conversation when you can just say "I win, you lose, conversation ended" or something.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I've got a Prime Pro. If you guys want I can take some video of running IBT or OCCT at 1.4V and show what HWiNFO and my IR thermometer says, and touch the heatsink with my hand with no fan blowing on it...if someone with a Titanium wants to do the same thing.


You could just tell us. It'll be interesting to see how the board responds to load changes. This is one of the few reasonable posts in the last pages.


----------



## chew*

Seems best place to ir is back of board cuda.

Stick some black tape on hs..ir gets accurate









You challenged my abilities and my knowledge psyman...

You said its impossible. Moisture kills!!!

I showed you its not impossible..moisture is my friend.

The fact that i am a pro or not has nothing to do with it. An average guy can do the same...

The fact that they are age old components...lol.

Ok ill take a pic of next session and i will pour water on my board in a video just for you...

Done it before for non believers do it again.no worries...


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You're throwing me an insult an ask me not to get offended. That makes you the third different person who straight of insults me in three pages.
> 
> You know who doesn't know what he is talking about? *Let me show some examples*:
> 
> Right now you said I posted images. I did not post related images, not even linked to them. I said that they were posted 10 pages ago or so.
> 
> *next*:
> Here.
> For starters the prime has just one fet per phase. The amperage capability posted is also wrong due to this.
> Next is the doubling in phases taking place, doubled or not as long as you have coil, driver, high side fet and low side fet all connected to the pwm, with or without doubler, you have a phase. If you had analog (well, hybrid more likely nowadays) pwm instead of digital, you could have even more sophisticated setups with interleaving allowing something like 10 phases with 3 doublers using a 6 phase pwm or something. The point is that the numbers on that post are messed up.
> 
> *next*:
> The guy here posts ln2 session photos of years old components and insults me right to my face in the middle of a conversation about completely unrelated components... to prove his point. All that without forgetting to remind the world that he is a "pro".
> 
> In short, he's telling me "mine is bigger than yours, so I win".
> 
> No comment.
> 
> *next*:
> The guy here quoted multiple posts from multiple pages back just to tell me that I fell into a trap "like nobody else".... cause you know, this is war and such. Who needs to have an adult conversation when you can just say "I win, you lose, conversation ended" or something.
> You could just tell us. It'll be interesting to see how the board responds to load changes. This is one of the few reasonable posts in the last pages.


yours included. you are not abolished from "unreasonable posts" because you are now all (seemingly) offended.
those posted images? FLIR? are trash to use as anything but "pretty colors" anyone using them to back up their point - instantly invalidates the point, but you knew that right?

the problem we are having - is that we have too many "armchair" engineers here - and we have people who have been doing this for more years than most of us combined; I wonder who is more correct?


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You could just tell us. It'll be interesting to see how the board responds to load changes. This is one of the few reasonable posts in the last pages.


I could, but then I could just be making up numbers, or have a fan blowing on it and fail to mention it or pretend I don't. Not gonna go to the trouble unless someone with a Titanium wants to do an apples to apples comparison.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Seems best place to ir is back of board cuda.


Ehh I'd have to take my rig apart and I'm pretty lazy. There is a hole in the board tray underneath the socket so it's possible I might be able to do that without taking anything apart. PSU might be in the way though. If I can do that I will.

That's also why I say I can touch the heatsink in the tests. It doesn't give a number but if I don't burn myself it must be low enough.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> yours included. you are not abolished from "unreasonable posts" because you are now all (seemingly) offended.
> those posted images? FLIR? are trash to use as anything but "pretty colors" anyone using them to back up their point - instantly invalidates the point, but you knew that right?
> 
> the problem we are having - is that we have too many "armchair" engineers here - and we have people who have been doing this for more years than most of us combined; I wonder who is more correct?


I come here to have fun and share information, not have people call me names, swear at me, put me down and show off their e-peens just because they disagree.

For multiple pages now, I've been saying the same one thing. Of all the people who got involved in the conversation and had the hardware I mentioned, only one was willing to get the conversation going. The one who just posted above me.

Enough is enough already.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Here.
> For starters the prime has just one fet per phase. The amperage capability posted is also wrong due to this.
> Next is the doubling in phases taking place, doubled or not as long as you have coil, driver, high side fet and low side fet all connected to the pwm, with or without doubler, you have a phase. If you had analog (well, hybrid more likely nowadays) pwm instead of digital, you could have even more sophisticated setups with interleaving allowing something like 10 phases with 3 doublers using a 6 phase pwm or something. The point is that the numbers on that post are messed up.


I believe everything else is right other than the two fets per phase on the Prime. It has 6 straight phases (not doubled) but pretty sure the 240A is correct. This board seems to have similar amperage capabilities as the Titanium. It also doesn't have bclk option like the more expensive boards so it seems to be the best comparison.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> I come here to have fun and share information, not have people call me names, swear at me, put me down and show off their e-peens just because they disagree.
> 
> For multiple pages now, I've been saying the same one thing. Of all the people who got involved in the conversation and had the hardware I mentioned, only one was willing to get the conversation going. The one who just posted above me.
> 
> Enough is enough already.


edit : nevermind.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I believe everything else is right other than the two fets per phase on the Prime. It has 6 straight phases (not doubled) but pretty sure the 240A is correct. This board seems to have similar amperage capabilities as the Titanium. It also doesn't have bclk option like the more expensive boards so it seems to be the best comparison.


Indeed, the 240 amperage on the prime was correct.


----------



## chew*

Just throwing this out there...

This is 890fx ud5.

Myself and mad22 were benching wprime 1024 for a comp...same board...we both popped the vrm on same board.

Now i could be wrong but this was a 6+4. (Cpu/Nb) iirc. Very similar to something we currently see on a certain board. Chips were thubans iirc.



This phase design 5-6 years later looks awful familiar...lol.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You could just tell us. It'll be interesting to see how the board responds to load changes. This is one of the few reasonable posts in the last pages.
> 
> 
> 
> I could, but then I could just be making up numbers, or have a fan blowing on it and fail to mention it or pretend I don't. Not gonna go to the trouble unless someone with a Titanium wants to do an apples to apples comparison.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Seems best place to ir is back of board cuda.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ehh I'd have to take my rig apart and I'm pretty lazy. There is a hole in the board tray underneath the socket so it's possible I might be able to do that without taking anything apart. PSU might be in the way though. If I can do that I will.
> 
> That's also why I say I can touch the heatsink in the tests. It doesn't give a number but if I don't burn myself it must be low enough.
Click to expand...

Why not compare your apples to my apples? - plop a fan on your VRM heatsinks and see what you get for VRM temps on an hour of prime 95 blend - even if you want to run stock clocks , I'd be interested in seeing those temps as well.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I believe everything else is right other than the two fets per phase on the Prime. It has 6 straight phases (not doubled) but pretty sure the 240A is correct. This board seems to have similar amperage capabilities as the Titanium. It also doesn't have bclk option like the more expensive boards so it seems to be the best comparison.


isn't the chips on the backside is the doubler?


----------



## br0da

Not for the CPU VCC, the two doublers on the backside are for the SoC VCC.
The rest of those ICs are drivers.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Not for the CPU VCC, the two doublers on the backside are for the SoC VCC.
> The rest of those ICs are drivers.


ah.. thought it was a doubler. great!


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Why not compare your apples to my apples? - plop a fan on your VRM heatsinks and see what you get for VRM temps on an hour of prime 95 blend - even if you want to run stock clocks , I'd be interested in seeing those temps as well.


I don't have a place to mount a fan, and I suspect most people don't either, or wouldn't even know enough to do so even if they could. No fan is a more realistic test.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You're throwing me an insult and ask me not to get offended. That makes you the third different person who straight off insults me in three pages.
> 
> You know who doesn't know what he is talking about? *Let me show some examples*:


If you took it as a straight insult - you only have yourself to blame. Instead of acting all worked up, explain why I am wrong and I'll happily retract my statement. Until then - my labelling you as a convenient agreer doesn't change.

Quote:


> Right now you said I posted images. I did not post related images, not even linked to them. I said that they were posted 10 pages ago or so.


Yes, you're right. You quoted them, not posted them. Apologies.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I don't have a place to mount a fan, and I suspect most people don't either, or wouldn't even know enough to do so even if they could. No fan is a more realistic test.


Same here. I'd actually like to try it, but there's no place I can realistically mount a fan other than ghetto rigging it somewhere - something the laziness in me would not rather do if it's not going to stay there.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Why not compare your apples to my apples? - plop a fan on your VRM heatsinks and see what you get for VRM temps on an hour of prime 95 blend - even if you want to run stock clocks , I'd be interested in seeing those temps as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a place to mount a fan, and I suspect most people don't either, or wouldn't even know enough to do so even if they could. No fan is a more realistic test.
Click to expand...

Just set a 120mm on top of your graphics card , it's what I do


----------



## bardacuda

Here are some numbers from when I was testing at 1.375V, although I didn't run Prime. AFAIK Temperatures 3 - 6 are my VRM temps. I could touch the heatsink during IBT and it was just mildly warm.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624139/official-ryzen-7-1800x-1700x-1700-owners-club-4ghz-club/#post_26000478


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Why not compare your apples to my apples? - plop a fan on your VRM heatsinks and see what you get for VRM temps on an hour of prime 95 blend - even if you want to run stock clocks , I'd be interested in seeing those temps as well.


I can do that but i'm doubtful it will work miracles on K7. Better temps sure but not miracles.

Other boards I am fairly certain would be fairly low.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> If you took it as a straight insult - you only have yourself to blame. Instead of acting all worked up, explain why I am wrong and I'll happily retract my statement. Until then - my labelling you as a convenient agreer doesn't change.
> 
> Yes, you're right. You quoted them, not posted them. Apologies.


As long as you have freedom of speech, you are free to your opinion, no matter what the said opinion is.

So according to you, if I come and visit there, rape you, beat you and cut your limbs off, it'll be your fault if you get offended, despite what I might have done to you. You're free to think like that and I'm free to disagree.

Anyway, your apology is accepted. If you search my post history you'll see me saying pretty much what the person I agreed with said, far before he said it.

As for my statements regarding the vrms in question, I actually took the time to do a rough performance estimation of each, based on specs and application and reached a conclusion. If you want more info, feel free to ask.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Why not compare your apples to my apples? - plop a fan on your VRM heatsinks and see what you get for VRM temps on an hour of prime 95 blend - even if you want to run stock clocks , I'd be interested in seeing those temps as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can do that but i'm doubtful it will work miracles on K7. Better temps sure but not miracles.
> 
> Other boards I am fairly certain would be fairly low.
Click to expand...

Default prime 95 blend settings, 70 F ambient were what I used. Direct airflow over the VRM heatsinks , none of the back side of motherboard.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Default prime 95 blend settings, 70 F ambient were what I used. Direct airflow over the VRM heatsinks , none of the back side of motherboard.


Well my wife likes 74f ambients as evident in my videos but close enough.

Happy wife = happy life


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Default prime 95 blend settings, 70 F ambient were what I used. Direct airflow over the VRM heatsinks , none of the back side of motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> Well my wife likes 74f ambients as evident in my videos but close enough.
> 
> Happy wife = happy life
Click to expand...

I know how that goes







. Chew's wife temp offset = enable lol


----------



## chew*

Water on mobo fun stuff.

Don't try this at home kids









https://youtu.be/7l8Usv44tXQ


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> According to the documents you pointed to, the particular combination of nikos low and high side fets perform slightly better than the TI fets you pointed to. The numbers on these documents say so.
> 
> The difference here is minimal though. In practice, the difference would only affect extreme scenarios (ie: ln2, phase, etc) or scenarios when more than one low and/or high side fets are used per coil.
> You can call me whatever you want. The fact is that errors happen. You might be doing the same thing perfectly fine for decades and still encounter a problem or two at some point. When that happens, it might not even be your fault.


I don't want to beat a dead horse but the PK616BA is a slower part than the TI NexFET let alone the other high side mosfets being used.
PK616BA has a turn on delay of 27 ns @ V_GS = 10V vs 8 ns on the TI NexFET @V_GS = 4.5V. (7ns for 4C09N and 4C10N @ V_GS=10V , max is 16ns for SM4337 @ V_GS = 10V)
Then there's the other specs such as rise time: 23ns at V_GS = 10 V vs 10ns of the NexFET rated at V_GS = 4.5 V. (28 ns for 4C09N @ V_GS=10 V , 26 ns for 4C10N @ V_GS=10 V , max is 9ns for SM4337 @ V_GS = 10V)
To add to that further there's a 51nS turnoff delay vs 33ns on the TI NexFET. (4C09N = 20ns @ V_GS = 10V , 18 ns for 4C10N @ V_GS=10 V , max is 37ns for SM4337 @ V_GS = 10V)
Then there's 24nS fall time , the TI NexFET has 4.7ns. (4C09N and 4C10N = 4ns @ V_GS = 10V , max is 14ns for SM4337 @ V_GS = 10V)
For all of those specs the PK616BA is basing off V_GS=10V , which is faster than V_GS = 4.5V.

Stepping down from V_DS = 15V to V_GS = 10V is less of a delta versus V_GS 4.5V.
Couple the fact that there are six of them (high side) in total for the CPU on the Xpower versus 8 phases on the CH VI Hero.
Thermal resistance junction to case is 4 °C/W vs the 2 °C/W of the NexFETs and for high side mosfets this directly limits you along with the dynamic characteristics.

When you are talking about the low side FETs, the PK632BA might have 88A on top of the paper but the heat dissipated is going to cook it : the package limitation is 40A and the thermal resistance junction to case is 2.7 °C/W vs the 2 °C/W of the NexFETs. Then there's a RDS(on) that has a max of 4mΩ , which is double that of the NexFETs (i.e. 8 phases of NexFETs ~~16 phases of PK632BA).

I'm just curious what led you to make such bold claims that the Xpower's mosfets were even close to the NexFETs. If they were so great I'd think the Intel MSI Xpower boards would use them.

I was honestly (pleasantly) surprised ASUS used NexFETs on the X370 Prime Pro instead of 4C09N or 4C10N plus 4C06N. On the mainstream Intel Z170/Z270 boards those were used, likely for cost savings.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> As long as you have freedom of speech, you are free to your opinion, no matter what the said opinion is.
> 
> So according to you, if I come and visit there, rape you, beat you and cut your limbs off, it'll be your fault if you get offended, despite what I might have done to you. You're free to think like that and I'm free to disagree.


Yes - willingly taking a neutral stance, clinging to theoretical slim chances and deliberately using vagueness to boost one's credibility equals physical abuse and torture.

Very well done, 10/10 would use as an example again.

And yes, I'd love to see your performance estimations, numbers, sources and outcomes.


----------



## PsyM4n

OK. It's quite simple actually.

- The higher the frequency, the higher the losses. So I didn't even consider checking the switching timings. It's not even relevant in this case IMO.

- Packages integrating both low and high side fets have lower footprint, lower losses, more efficiency, because of their design.

- Packages integrating both low and high side fets dissipate the lost heat less efficiently cause the whole package works more (recent fairchild drmos even have metal on top of the package too, to help with that).

- Individual fets have less efficiency and more losses and yet dissipate heat more efficiently cause the package works less.

- A 1plus1 configuration of the nikos fets in question might be generating more heat but also dissipates more heat. Still the dissipation doesn't keep up with the heat generated from the losses. The TI fet in question is unquestionably better in this regard.

Because of very specific power requirements from the CPU it's possible to put much less load on each fet by doing a 2plus1 configuration for vcore, without actually increasing your phases, as msi did. By doing this you have even less heat generated and keep the power output high, assuming you have the means to get the heat away from the fets fast enough... by using a big heatsink with a big heatpipe for example.
What I'm saying here is that I considered the above, checked the boards in question, checked how the fets in question perform on their spec sheets and concluded that this particular approach on the titanium should perform slightly better than the asus prime using a single ti fet per phase.

That's pretty much it.


----------



## bardacuda

Still open to do an apples to apples comparison using a setup that may be common to noob OCers or non-enthusiasts using reasonable/realistic voltages. 1.4Vcore and 1.1VSoC in a closed case with no fan on the VRM, but with the side panel off to take measurements / feel the heatsink.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> OK. It's quite simple actually.
> 
> - The higher the frequency, the higher the losses. So I didn't even consider checking the switching timings. It's not even relevant in this case IMO.


'IMO' doesn't apply when talking about fact. At 500kHz (more or less the average switching frequency for these) switching losses are definitely in the region where you start to account for them. Calculating them isn't easy, you need a lot of parameters from the FET as well as the converter topology.

More transistors also means higher switching losses.

Quote:


> - Packages integrating both low and high side fets have lower footprint, lower losses, more efficiency, because of their design.
> 
> - Packages integrating both low and high side fets dissipate the lost heat less efficiently cause the whole package works more (recent fairchild drmos even have metal on top of the package too, to help with that).


Not strictly true. Integration is often out of convenience. I'd (and like myself, many others) much rather use a single monolithic package than several discrete elements. Saves time speccing them out, saves time laying down the PCB, saves time thinking about the thermals. Also simplifies the supply chain.

Of course, if you go with high end monolithic converters (such as PowIRstage), you get performance befitting of the segment they're targetting.

Quote:


> - Individual fets have less efficiency and more losses and yet dissipate heat more efficiently cause the package works less.
> 
> - A 1plus1 configuration of the nikos fets in question might be generating more heat but also dissipates more heat. Still the dissipation doesn't keep up with the heat generated from the losses. The TI fet in question is unquestionably better in this regard.


No, not really. *Cheap* transistors have worse performance than integrated parts. You can spend the money (something MSI didn't do) and you will get striking performance, very much superior to what you can get with standard off-the-shelf monolithic

packages when it comes to high current applications.

And it doesn't matter how much heat a particular package can dissipate if you can't remove it from the thing to begin with - that's where thermal resistance for the package and the heatsink come to play. MSI did account for this and made use of a better heatsink. Gigabyte especially went with a more efficient design at low voltages and did away with a less capable heatsink. Unfortunately for us of course.

Quote:


> Because of very specific power requirements from the CPU it's possible to put much less load on each fet by doing a 2plus1 configuration for vcore, without actually increasing your phases, as msi did. By doing this you have even less heat generated and keep the power output high, assuming you have the means to get the heat away from the fets fast enough... by using a big heatsink with a big heatpipe for example.


Yes - but only if you use equally high end parts, which MSI skipped. They did increase the number of switches on board - for obvious reasons, and it does the job.

Quote:


> What I'm saying here is that I considered the above, checked the boards in question, checked how the fets in question perform on their spec sheets and concluded that this particular approach on the titanium should perform slightly better than the asus prime using a single ti fet per phase.
> 
> That's pretty much it.


They are both hugely overkill and limited by the heatsink, not the packages anyway. As are all mid-high end X370 boards.

Plus - it better perform better than the X370 Prime. It's the cheapest X370 board available, by a reasonable margin; while the MSI is the most expensive, also by a reasonable margin.

I see no numbers...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Still open to do an apples to apples comparison using a setup that may be common to noob OCers or non-enthusiasts using reasonable/realistic voltages. 1.4Vcore and 1.1VSoC in a closed case with no fan on the VRM, but with the side panel off to take measurements / feel the heatsink.


It will be a while before mine goes back into a case , if ever - one thing to remember is that an open case system on water has almost no airflow over the VRMS if it were in a properly configured case , it would most likely have more airflow over the heatsink surface..

Titanium on p5 with airflow on the vrms



Baracudas ASUS prime pro.


I more or less matched your settings for the IBT maximum run except that I was running 4ghz vs your 3850 and I was running 2933mhz on the ram vs your 2400.

The Titanium's maximum was 14 C cooler on the cpu VRM and it actually passed the test.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I see no numbers...


There is a reason for that. For numbers, more information is required. Exact thermal capabilities of the heatsink and the thermal pad and the board itself. Otherwise, any exact number will be wrong. Best you can do is rough estimation.

As for integration, apart from cost saving which is the primary reason, the closer the better, on same package it's even better, as long as your parts do not work at the same time. Which is precisely why it's the best approach for mosfets.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> More transistors also means higher switching losses.


Tell me you're kidding. No, seriously.


----------



## bardacuda

Ok so not apples to apples then.

I am seeing 51°C in the first motherboard section which is what I was going by for my VRM temps. That would be a 6°C difference. I can't compare to the other sections with "VR1" and "VR2" as I don't have them on this board, and I can't see all of yours either, just the first two. I know I have one choke that tends to run much hotter than the other 5, so I assume the associated 'fet for that phase is also higher. I could skew results by only pointing at the two coolest running phases if I wanted.

This is why I would like to take video using IR thermometer / touch test for a comparison. Can't really trust software. And I'm not saying you're doing any funny business either, orkin. Let me be clear on that. It's just that if we want to put all this argument spam to bed then we need some standard test that would be difficult to fudge.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The guy here quoted multiple posts from multiple pages back just to tell me that I fell into a trap "like nobody else".... cause you know, this is war and such. Who needs to have an adult conversation when you can just say "I win, you lose, conversation ended" or something.
> You could just tell us. It'll be interesting to see how the board responds to load changes. This is one of the few reasonable posts in the last pages.


You are the one beating yourself, that "trap" was set on your own..

Definitely not a war, I even gave you directions on what not to read ( absolute maximums ) in the datasheets, who's on a war is going to provide the enemy with intel ?

I hope you realize that most people on here have that mindset of always trying to share and educate and that is really nice. I often to do the same but I may like to have some fun while I prove a point.

You are not my enemy.

Enjoy the board, it is a really nice place to learn a new thing everyday - I do


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I see no numbers...
Click to expand...

Umm....I never said that.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Ok so not apples to apples then.
> 
> I am seeing 51°C in the first motherboard section which is what I was going by for my VRM temps. That would be a 6°C difference. I can't compare to the other sections with "VR1" and "VR2" as I don't have them on this board, and I can't see all of yours either, just the first two. I know I have one choke that tends to run much hotter than the other 5, so I assume the associated 'fet for that phase is also higher. I could skew results by only pointing at the two coolest running phases if I wanted.
> 
> This is why I would like to take video using IR thermometer / touch test for a comparison. Can't really trust software. And I'm not saying you're doing any funny business either, orkin. Let me be clear on that. It's just that if we want to put all this argument spam to bed then we need some standard test that would be difficult to fudge.


The 51C is socket temp.









My heatsinks are actually cooler than my body temp and feels cool to the touch.

Take the side off of your case and put a house fan on it if you want to compare.

Software is as accurate for my rig as it was for yours.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Umm....I never said that.


Indeed, wrong quote.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> The 51C is socket temp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My heatsinks are actually cooler than my body temp and feels cool to the touch.
> 
> Take the side off of your case and put a house fan on it if you want to compare.
> 
> Software is as accurate for my rig as it was for yours.


Pretty sure your vrm is running bellow ambient temps too...


----------



## chew*

I'm just being an idiot and did not want to break down the C6H....keep in mind my board is "prepped" traps more heat.

these chips really remind me of Llano. scale with cold not with volts but anyway.

IMC coldbug.........2933 insta fail......

not bad for a board I just put water on in a video.....still waiting for the water to kill it..getting grey hairs waiting.

Specifically waited for an 8K to complete.......it brings the heat.

Running prime my way of course ( the hard way )


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Tell me you're kidding. No, seriously.


Oh boy.










Really?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Oh boy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?


You do realize that there are more important issues than reduced efficiency at low loads... not to mention that modern modulators take care of that anyway...


----------



## chew*

You do realize I completely clowned you and your condensation and moisture comments right?

Still waiting for an apology or at least an admission that you might have been wrong.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Still waiting for an apology or at least an admission that you might have been wrong.


Sure, as soon as you quote where that was.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You do realize that there are more important issues than reduced efficiency at low loads... not to mention that modern modulators take care of that anyway...


The... what?

What on Earth are you talking about?

Look - it's very simple.

More transistors=more gates.

More gates=more capacitors to charge.

More capacitors to charge=more electrons need to be taken from one place and put into another place.

More electrons that need to be taken from one place and put into another place=more losses.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> You sure it wasn't the ln2 destroying the board physically? No matter the board you have, it will eventually die as soon as it shorts at an unprotected spot (no way around that, on any board).
> Even if it didn't short, it would eventually die due to moisture or extreme temperature changes. As soon as you reach an associate threshold under the circumstances, the board dies, any board.


cheers

I can go quote more where you claim its impossible to insulate properly to......suggesting hairs and other issues.

Sidenote Woot doing 4.3 now got vrm up to 35c @ 4.3, ill let prime cook for a while. Ambients are 76F currently.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> The... what?
> 
> What on Earth are you talking about?
> 
> Look - it's very simple.
> 
> More transistors=more gates.
> More gates=more capacitors to charge.
> More capacitors to charge=more electrons need to be taken from one place and put into another place.
> More electrons that need to be taken from one place and put into another place=more losses.


This is heavily outweighed by the reduced conduction losses at high loads. Even at low loads, modern modulators can actually turn off phases completely, both on demand and automatically. Search for "APS", "EPU" and the likes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> cheers
> 
> I can go quote more where you claim its impossible to insulate properly to......suggesting hairs and other issues.
> 
> Sidenote Woot doing 4.3 now got vrm up to 35c @ 4.3, ill let prime cook for a while. Ambients are 76F currently.


I still stand by that statement.


----------



## chew*

That's fine. I'm not standing but I will sit next to my motherboard with a puddle of water on it running prime 95









Now that's what I call water cooling.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> The 51C is socket temp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My heatsinks are actually cooler than my body temp and feels cool to the touch.
> 
> Take the side off of your case and put a house fan on it if you want to compare.
> 
> Software is as accurate for my rig as it was for yours.
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty sure your vrm is running bellow ambient temps too...
Click to expand...

Now you are just being silly.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> This is heavily outweighed by the reduced conduction losses at high loads. Even at low loads, modern modulators can actually turn off phases completely, both on demand and automatically. Search for "APS", "EPU" and the likes.
> I still stand by that statement.


You're free to believe whatever you want to believe - but it doesn't change the fact that they are fixed losses and definitely not negligible. The technologies you cite are meant for deep sleep/parking states where keeping the phases turned on would mean the switching losses are potentially higher than the resistive losses. They hardly ever apply for a computer that is under any sort of load (that includes normal usage).

And do yourself a favour - before asking me to google something, educate yourself on basic power electronics and switching mode power supplies, then come back.

Thanks.


----------



## virpz

Oh, let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be
And there will be an answer, let it be


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Now you are just being silly.


That's good, it seems like it is always better to have just one more person to fill that picture.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Now you are just being silly.
> 
> 
> 
> That's good, it seems like it is always better to have just one more person to fill that picture.
Click to expand...

I can see now that you have little interest in any truth that challenges your beliefs. Your presence has little value here.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> You're free to believe whatever you want to believe - but it doesn't change the fact that they are fixed losses and definitely not negligible. The technologies you cite are meant for deep sleep/parking states where keeping the phases turned on would mean the switching losses are potentially higher than the resistive losses. They hardly ever apply for a computer that is under any sort of load (that includes normal usage).
> 
> And do yourself a favour - before asking me to google something, educate yourself on basic power electronics and switching mode power supplies, then come back.
> 
> Thanks.


http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents

Look for "Single phase" failures. Those are due to incorrect manual phase setting.

When not in need of more power, the best approach is to set the phases on the most efficient configuration, usually that's by leaving the said technology on with automatically selected number of phases. On high end boards, that rarely means using all the phases at full stock load.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I can see now that you have little interest in any truth that challenges your beliefs. Your presence has little value here.


I appreciate your input on that.


----------



## virpz

Now, back to the topic.

Based on the boards vrm info posted here and on other places I have compiled a spreadsheet with Board vs Phases vs Fets.
My opinion on fets is not included, facts are.

If you find any errors, want to contribute, add more data just please, let me know.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yJKXFE2Gzkw4m5Y9jLSLJQ3GxQdMf-HX4z4kUxRW3OU/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yJKXFE2Gzkw4m5Y9jLSLJQ3GxQdMf-HX4z4kUxRW3OU/edit?usp=sharing


----------



## AlphaC

@ virpz I think the Sinopower on the Asrock X370 K4 is SM4337 high side + SM4336 low side (same for the Killer SLI).


----------



## chew*

I should note for those of you who do not understand the principles of cold and how they effect power consumption.

The VRM temps on this board at these clocks and this voltage regardless of the fact that I have clocked it higher may actually be working less due to the fact that I have not increased voltage.

It will pull more from the air OC @4050 to phase @ 4.3 but it will draw much less since I am cold versus air...tbh I am probably breaking even at this point give or take.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> @ virpz I think the Sinopower on the Asrock X370 K4 is SM4337 high side + SM4336 low side (same for the Killer SLI).


this is correct - i have verifyed on 3 killers, and 2 K4s.


----------



## chew*

gt7 is IR 3555 confirmed not 3550

K7 and gaming 5 has identical PWM phases so your SOC on one of them is a typo


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> @ virpz I think the Sinopower on the Asrock X370 K4 is SM4337 high side + SM4336 low side (same for the Killer SLI).


X370 Gaming K4 can also come with NIKOs:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html
https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7269/2/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-review-eerste-am4-van-asrock-asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4

@virpz: There is no Gaming K4 from Gigabyte.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @virpz: There is no Gaming K4 from Gigabyte.


technically speaking with the VRM it does not deserve the model K5. I like K4 better


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents
> 
> Look for "Single phase" failures. Those are due to incorrect manual phase setting.
> 
> When not in need of more power, the best approach is to set the phases on the most efficient configuration, usually that's by leaving the said technology on with automatically selected number of phases. On high end boards, that rarely means using all the phases at full stock load.


Keep steering the discussion in the way that suits you best while attempting (not very successfully I might add) to evade all flak you catch by being constantly and consistently called out for not knowing what you're talking about.

Really. It's a very interesting exercise.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> gt7 is IR 3555 confirmed not 3550
> 
> K7 and gaming 5 has identical PWM phases so your SOC on one of them is a typo


Impressive. So the GT7 is well on its track to being yet another TA890FX eh!


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> technically speaking with the VRM it does not deserve the model K5. I like K4 better


I agree.









virpz, is there any data you can share to proof your infos about the Biostar X370GTN?
I'm quite curious about those VRMs since those look quite awkward on the pictures from Biostar but I still haven't found any better pictures on the Internet.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Keep steering the discussion in the way that suits you best while attempting (not very successfully I might add) to evade all flak you catch by being constantly and consistently called out for not knowing what you're talking about.
> 
> Really. It's a very interesting exercise.


Yeah, I know nothing. Enough is enough already.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> X370 Gaming K4 can also come with NIKOs:
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html
> https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7269/2/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-review-eerste-am4-van-asrock-asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4
> 
> @virpz: There is no Gaming K4 from Gigabyte.


Hey br0da

His list has both versions

Also I think if someone wants to make a list separately off hardwareluxx ' s it ought to have more information otherwise it's a redundant exercise.

Maybe add inductor + capacitor ratings. Inductors are a bit more difficult but the capacitors might be the only VRM differences sometimes such as x370 Krait Gaming vs x370 SLI PLUS). It's a large undertaking however.

i.e. X370 Prime pro appears to use "5KW48" with 820 and 3V written under that , for the caps. (source https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/03/30/asus-prime-x370-pro-review/1) <-- MILR68 and "16 52 6" written on chokes
CHVI Hero uses FP10K with 71cz and 561 written under that , as well as FP10K with 6Zcz and 101 written under that presumably for SOC ( source: http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/asus-rog-crosshair-vi-hero-x370-motherboard-review/3/)
X370 Gaming 5 uses something with FP and 61C6 and 561 written on it (https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_x370_aorus_gaming_5_aorus_review/2)
X370 Taichi uses FP12K with 6ZA3 and 561 written on it (https://www.tweakpc.de/hardware/tests/mainboards/asrock_x370_taichi/s02.php)


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Impressive. So the GT7 is well on its track to being yet another TA890FX eh!


That was one of my favourite boards. I have a lot of nostalgia for it and for some of the older Biostar boards like the T5 XE and the late nineties goodies (including the mobo from my first build in '98) . Nothing else AM4 was really exciting me (my 157th ASUS board? another Gigabyte or MSI board when I've got a half-dozen sitting around the house?). I'm very glad that I went for the GT7 - it's probably my favourite board in the last decade. Performs well, the LED DJ plays right into the tasteless disco inferno I've wanted to build for so long, and it's really a very well-built board. I'm glad to see Biostar back in the performance space.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Impressive. So the GT7 is well on its track to being yet another TA890FX eh!


Newegg not a review sample. My bench partners board.

Has some bios teething issues as do all. Simple terms....Don't use down core on GT7

Pricing puts it smack dab in between Prime pro and gaming 5 which is where imo I think the board belongs.

I would not consider any board without refclock a "flagship"

I think it might be a darn good mainstream contender.


----------



## SuperZan

Fair play. Right now you can adjust the refclock to a degree, but the lack of an external clock gen is an evident weakness, no argument there.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> @ virpz I think the Sinopower on the Asrock X370 K4 is SM4337 high side + SM4336 low side (same for the Killer SLI).


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> this is correct - i have verifyed on 3 killers, and 2 K4s.


Yes.
I got both in the sheet because it was reported that some boards displayed Nikos fets.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> X370 Gaming K4 can also come with NIKOs:
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8135/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-motherboard-review/index3.html
> https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7269/2/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-review-eerste-am4-van-asrock-asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4
> 
> @virpz: There is no Gaming K4 from Gigabyte.


Thanks !








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> I agree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> virpz, is there any data you can share to proof your infos about the Biostar X370GTN?
> I'm quite curious about those VRMs since those look quite awkward on the pictures from Biostar but I still haven't found any better pictures on the Internet.


No, they displayed indeed the IR3555M. More likely mistyping from my part








One may dispute it's 5K caps, myself could not care much since that VRM is most likely to be really efficient. I am really into the looks and quality of that board. For it's price it could be THE BOAR to get... hell, first units sold on NE even came with a free 240 M.2 for "free".




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Hey br0da
> 
> His list has both versions
> 
> Also I think if someone wants to make a list separately off hardwareluxx ' s it ought to have more information otherwise it's a redundant exercise.
> 
> Maybe add inductor + capacitor ratings. Inductors are a bit more difficult but the capacitors might be the only VRM differences sometimes such as x370 Krait Gaming vs x370 SLI PLUS). It's a large undertaking however.


Our list has a few more entries than HWluxxx, it is just a matter of how good we can be at finding info.
That cap thing can definitly be done, inductors are a little more hard to get data since most don't have any marks. I do have an LCR meter here, the filter inductors with the Taichi should be in the [email protected] 0.22-0.40 mOhms range ?


----------



## Artikbot

My Gaming 5 has C69N 560 6.3V written on the cap cans. There's 10 of them in front of the CPU phases.

If my google-fu isn't wrong, they're Nippon Chemi-con NCAP PSC series, 560µF 6.3V


----------



## AlphaC

@ virpz, you wrote SM4377 instead of SM4337 for the X370 Asrock boards. Sorry if I wasn't clear.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> @ virpz, you wrote SM4377 instead of SM4337 for the X370 Asrock boards. Sorry if I wasn't clear.


Damn, I would never had noticed that







Good eyes


----------



## KarathKasun

Got the MSI B350M Gaming Pro in finally.

R5 1400, 3.8ghz/1.35v, VRM heatsink temps in the 40c range after running the OCCT standard test for ~10 minutes. Haven't dug out my IR thermometer yet, but it is barely warm to the touch. Using an old 120mm tower cooler with the fan set up to blow under the fin stack just a bit so the VRM does have direct airflow.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Got the MSI B350M Gaming Pro in finally.
> 
> R5 1400, 3.8ghz/1.35v, VRM heatsink temps in the 45c range.
> Using an old 120mm tower cooler with the fan set up to blow under the fin stack just a bit so the VRM does have direct airflow.


Good idea , you made a point earlier about thermal runaway or something to that effect - wise to be well taken. That doesn't need to happen too often to damage boards that don't have good built in protections against such a thing or have those protections turned off.

Look forward to hearing your thoughts about that combo.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Removed the fan that was blowing on the soc vrm and the upper half of the cpu vrm and had a go at ibt very high.


----------



## KarathKasun

Id dare say I would put it into my recommended list for the quad cores, especially if you can pick it up for under $70 like I was able to.

Had to bump vcore up a hair to 1.38v to get AVX Linpack stable at 3.8ghz, all temps still well within margin though.
Motherboard sensors are maxing out around 60c and the CPU is solid at 65c.

Under AVX Linpack load Im seeing ~65A on the cores and ~25A on the SOC. This is well within spec for the VRM.

This is hands down the simplest MB/CPU/RAM combo when it comes to setting up a 24/7 OC, perfect for a primary 'has to work and be cheap' type of system.

The GSkill Fortis 2133 15-15-15-15-35 kit hit 2933 w/o hassles @ 1.35v, though I am on VERY safe timings of 20-20-20-20-40. I can go back and start testing at lower timings, but if the performance gain is not there Im just going to put it back to where it is. *update* 2933 18-18-18-18-38 seems fine so far.

At the end of the day, $285 US for a 3.8ghz/2933mhz setup isn't bad by any measure.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Id dare say I would put it into my recommended list for the quad cores, especially if you can pick it up for under $70 like I was able to.
> 
> Had to bump vcore up a hair to 1.38v to get AVX Linpack stable at 3.8ghz, all temps still well within margin though.
> Motherboard sensors are maxing out around 60c and the CPU is solid at 65c.
> 
> Under AVX Linpack load Im seeing ~65A on the cores and ~25A on the SOC. This is well within spec for the VRM.
> 
> This is hands down the simplest MB/CPU/RAM combo when it comes to setting up a 24/7 OC, perfect for a primary 'has to work and be cheap' type of system.
> 
> The GSkill Fortis 2133 15-15-15-15-35 kit hit 2933 w/o hassles @ 1.35v, though I am on VERY safe timings of 20-20-20-20-40. I can go back and start testing at lower timings, but if the performance gain is not there Im just going to put it back to where it is. *update* 2933 18-18-18-18-38 seems fine so far.
> 
> At the end of the day, $285 US for a 3.8ghz/2933mhz setup isn't bad by any measure.


Yah if you can find clearance deals or sales the b350s are great. $70-80 and you can have a bunch of fun...i was stuck on one for weeks when g5 took a dive and mobo supplies were limited.


----------



## virpz

So who's up for the challenge of getting all boards Total Vcore current at 60ºC ?

Let's just assume manufacturers did OK with everything in the circuit and get an estimation.


----------



## chew*

Im up for the challenge of abusing all boards but thats about it...almost have all the ones that are worth having.

Need to rma one but after that and the biostar arrives...

Only thing left is to get an msi on the cheap to see which dies cold first...my junky 1700x or the board.

Gonna be a tough call lol..


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> No, they displayed indeed the IR3555M. More likely mistyping from my part


I was asking about the GTN, not the GT7.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Im up for the challenge of abusing all boards but thats about it...almost have all the ones that are worth having.
> 
> Need to rma one but after that and the biostar arrives...
> 
> Only thing left is to get an msi on the cheap to see which dies cold first...my junky 1700x or the board.
> 
> Gonna be a tough call lol..


I got the itch on that GT7, resist I will.

I was going to wait for the next bios update on my Taichi to try harder but anyways... I got refclk to 123Mhz but can't get it stable at all after the 4G mark. Any inputs on that ?

I beat the MSI will die first due to a battery explosion


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> I was asking about the GTN, not the GT7.


Yes, it looks small



It is 4+3 phase, had a guy from germany confirming it had 4x SM4377 / 8xSM4364A . Ill leave it blank until we can have a actual picture of it.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Yes, it looks small
> 
> 
> 
> It is 4+3 phase, had a guy from germany confirming it had 4x SM4377 / 8xSM4364A . Ill leave it blank until we can have a actual picture of it.


That is pretty potent for an ITX board.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> That is pretty potent for an ITX board.


Looking for information in China... Biostar is looking good again.









Edit: Definitely not Sinopower fets. Vishay TrenchFets maybe ?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I got the itch on that GT7, resist I will.
> 
> I was going to wait for the next bios update on my Taichi to try harder but anyways... I got refclk to 123Mhz but can't get it stable at all after the 4G mark. Any inputs on that ?
> 
> I beat the MSI will die first due to a battery explosion


Pretty much for 24/7 118-120 is the sweet spot for all boards..some can hit much higher but not at what i consider "stable"

Chipset is a factor. Cpu is a factor pll is a factor. temps are a factor.

Running cold as i have been complicates things. Theres a chart floating around showing memory controller scaling or plummeting shall i say based on temps.

Bsod from cold boot anyone? Now you know why. Also know why im on phase now. Doing imc research. Part of it may be cache related...coaxed my 1400 to 3100...my 1700 was not hearing it no matter what..

Most of these cpus top out around 4025-4050 in real stability...many cant even get there.

Scale with cold...not with volts. Lose ability to clock ram...the gain is negated for the most part especially in "realworld" stability.

In other news...i finally got the k7 to hit 80c on a fanless vrm..still alive.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Pretty much for 24/7 118-120 is the sweet spot for all boards..some can hit much higher but not at what i consider "stable"
> 
> Chipset is a factor. Cpu is a factor pll is a factor. temps are a factor.
> 
> Running cold as i have been complicates things. Theres a chart floating around showing memory controller scaling or plummeting shall i say based on temps.
> 
> Bsod from cold boot anyone? Now you know why. Also know why im on phase now. Doing imc research. Part of it may be cache related...coaxed my 1400 to 3100...my 1700 was not hearing it no matter what..
> 
> Most of these cpus top out around 4025-4050 in real stability...many cant even get there.
> 
> Scale with cold...not with volts. Lose ability to clock ram...the gain is negated for the most part especially in "realworld" stability.
> 
> In other news...i finally got the k7 to hit 80c on a fanless vrm..still alive.


Yep. I cant get 50mhz over 3800 with ~1.4V while 3800 only takes ~1.35v. You can tell that its a low power focused process, makes me wonder what is going to happen with further revisions to the node.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Yep. I cant get 50mhz over 3800 with ~1.4V while 3800 only takes ~1.35v. You can tell that its a low power focused process, makes me wonder what is going to happen with further revisions to the node.


If you are stressing it right that is pretty normal.

1700x 3.8
1700 3.9
1800x 4025
1600x 3.8
1600 3.4
1500x 3.5
1400 probably way above average @ 4050

R5 is a complete lottery.

R7 is 3.7-4.0 so not so lotto.

Better cooling can be counter productive for memory speeds.

Better to run them hot. Set volts at what you know is 1.4 and whatever chip can do it can do.

If you experience cold boot bsods...go to bios let it sit for a minute...then boot, give it time to warm up.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Pretty much for 24/7 118-120 is the sweet spot for all boards..some can hit much higher but not at what i consider "stable"
> 
> Chipset is a factor. Cpu is a factor pll is a factor. temps are a factor.
> 
> Running cold as i have been complicates things. Theres a chart floating around showing memory controller scaling or plummeting shall i say based on temps.
> 
> Bsod from cold boot anyone? Now you know why. Also know why im on phase now. Doing imc research. Part of it may be cache related...coaxed my 1400 to 3100...my 1700 was not hearing it no matter what..
> 
> Most of these cpus top out around 4025-4050 in real stability...many cant even get there.
> 
> Scale with cold...not with volts. Lose ability to clock ram...the gain is negated for the most part especially in "realworld" stability.
> 
> In other news...i finally got the k7 to hit 80c on a fanless vrm..still alive.


My chip was really hard to stabilize at 3.3GHz, It seems like if it needed that specific voltage to be set on Vcore and SoC, with 3.6GHz it acted the same way Vcore.

I can run this 3.9G 1.337V without a glitch, 4GHz and I then I need +70mV on Vcore, +15mV on SoC. I wonder how solid is the idea of a relation between Vcore, VSoC and MHz ?

Also having just one rank attached to the IMC gets me to load windows at the 123/126 refclk ( bios post is like 3 secs ) but also limits my OC. Thing is hard to deal with, I still have hope that it may get a lil better with a good bios update.

What is your fav board ( less buggy ) so far ?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> My chip was really hard to stabilize at 3.3GHz, It seems like if it needed that specific voltage to be set on Vcore and SoC, with 3.6GHz it acted the same way Vcore.
> 
> I can run this 3.9G 1.337V without a glitch, 4GHz and I then I need +70mV on Vcore, +15mV on SoC. I wonder how solid is the idea of a relation between Vcore, VSoC and MHz ?
> 
> Also having just one rank attached to the IMC gets me to load windows at the 123/126 refclk ( bios post is like 3 secs ) but also limits my OC. Thing is hard to deal with, I still have hope that it may get a lil better with a good bios update.
> 
> What is your fav board ( less buggy ) so far ?


Taichi was preety solid once you figure out to set refclock first. K7 seems solid to. Benching wise neither can compete with the C6H it just has a way way more mature bios.

For 24/7 other than the gigas rather alarming vrm temps and taichis wifi/bt device drop all are pretty solid @ 120 ref clock..

I would say those would be the 3 way shoot out ref clock boards.

Prime pro gaming 5 and biostar gt7 would be the 3 way mainstream non ref clock shoot out boards.

I would include msi but until an agesa unlocks some magical ref clock for it.....or they drop price by 100 to fit in the "mainstream contendors" neither likely to happen...they are in a bracket of there own.

I don't know what happened to review sites in the past 5 years...they compare vgas and cpus performance vs price then motherboards they completely forget this.

In that category alone is where i have a huge beef with the titanium.

It can not physically overcome the ability to ref clock and actually lower subtimings...agesa forbids it...you can not modify with a bios what you are not allowed acess to.

That shoves it into mainstream performance...with $100 more price tag than the second most expensive...


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Taichi was preety solid once you figure out to set refclock first. K7 seems solid to. Benching wise neither can compete with the C6H it just has a way way more mature bios.
> 
> For 24/7 other than the gigas rather alarming vrm temps and taichis wifi/bt device drop all are pretty solid @ 120 ref clock..
> 
> I would say those would be the 3 way shoot out ref clock boards.
> 
> Prime pro gaming 5 and biostar gt7 would be the 3 way mainstream shoot out boards.
> 
> I would include msi but until an agesa unlocks some magical ref clock for it.....or they drop price by 100 to fit in the "mainstream contendors" neithet likely to happen...they are in a bracket of there own.
> 
> I don't know what happened to review sites in the past 5 years...they compare vgas and cpus performance vs price then motherboards they completely forget this.


Noticed that, Prime X370 [email protected] beating Taichi [email protected] on pretty much everything.

Now, what is that with the Taichi that I have everything set to manual, crap disabled on bios. I boot up to windows, stress it, abuse it, rest it. The next time I restart I can't even get to load windows again, it crashes to black screen. Then I need to enter bios, load defaults and set all the crap again, otherwise it will crash. That behavior only happens if I have cpu set to clocks higher than 3.9GHz.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Noticed that, Prime X370 [email protected] beating Taichi [email protected] on pretty much everything.
> 
> Now, what is that with the Taichi that I have everything set to manual, crap disabled on bios. I boot up to windows, stress it, abuse it, rest it. The next time I restart I can't even get to load windows again, it crashes to black screen. Then I need to enter bios, load defaults and set all the crap again, otherwise it will crash. That behavior only happens if I have cpu set to clocks higher than 3.9GHz.


That is the temp related imc issue at work.

Prime pro is running a very tight ship performance wise. I imagine that is why it causes me drama trying to run 3200 stable.

Pretty much no ref clock board should lose to a mainstream if you drop strap to 2400-2666 and run up ref clock.

Thats the entire point of getting one or its a waste of money.

2933 use 2400 strap 3200 use 2666 strap.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Noticed that, Prime X370 [email protected] beating Taichi [email protected] on pretty much everything.


The Prime Pro and C6H (and maybe the B350 Plus too?) have a performance bias option in the BIOS that gives higher scores in Cinebench and others...so take any of those with a grain of salt when coming from one of these boards.


----------



## Artikbot

Wonder what does it do?


----------



## chew*

Reg tweaks at the cpu lvl...legit though so no grain of salt needed....comes at a cost...less stability to drive harder.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> The Prime Pro and C6H (and maybe the B350 Plus too?) have a performance bias option in the BIOS that gives higher scores in Cinebench and others...so take any of those with a grain of salt when coming from one of these boards.


Yes, I was comparing the Prime I had for a while to my Taichi.
Overclocking with the Taichi allowed me to get higher stable speeds but I am still learning R7's and Taichi's bios.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Reg tweaks at the cpu lvl...legit though so no grain of salt needed....comes at a cost...less stability to drive harder.


Right, not saying it's not legit...just that you shouldn't compare scores in CB using this option to general performance level in any other program.

If these tweaks can get you an 1800 CB score at a lower frequency than you would need to get the same score on the Taichi, it doesn't mean your games are going to run faster too with lower clocks on the ASUS. S'all I'm saying.


----------



## chew*

Actually it can and will if....the game is heavily multithreaded.

If heavy memory aida preset can impact it.

Aida preset works elsewhere..

For a quick less dragged out example grab pifast.

Run with and without aida preset.

That bench likes bandwidth should see a variance.


----------



## bardacuda

Hmm interesting and good news for ASUS owners in that case. Do you have any links where different real world programs were tested on ASUS boards with different performance bias settings?

I could do some testing if there are any free programs anyone is interested in.


----------



## chew*

I have only done synthetics but it works...i think starcraft or maybe gta is really heavily threaded. May want to try those with both cine bench presets.

I think its at the cpu lvl it impacts similar useage.


----------



## bardacuda

Ehh don't have 'em...that's why I said 'free' programs


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Right, not saying it's not legit...just that you shouldn't compare scores in CB using this option to general performance level in any other program.
> 
> If these tweaks can get you an 1800 CB score at a lower frequency than you would need to get the same score on the Taichi, it doesn't mean your games are going to run faster too with lower clocks on the ASUS. S'all I'm saying.


Maybe I was not clear in my first message.
We wer talking about it withbenchmark in the context. But, if that bias preset is impacting the memory and cache bandwidth then It should impact software in general.
There are a few bios settings that can change the behavior of cache and memory, some are available direct to the user, others not, it depends on the vendors choice with said bios.

All good


----------



## chew*

Well can run time spy on off check cpu scores


----------



## bardacuda

@virpz

Ok, I thought you said it's faster in pretty much everything. Didn't read anything about it just being faster in benchmarks. My mistake.

@chew*

Free programs that work in Windows 7 or Linux hahah!


----------



## chew*

Its a shame i have like 50 games in steam/origin/uplay but for me to do game tests properly...would require a ton of unpaid time...that time is valuable as i have little of it..


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> @virpz
> 
> Ok, I thought you said it's faster in pretty much everything. Didn't read anything about it just being faster in benchmarks. My mistake.


At this point Im pretty sure my english sucks.








I think it will impact software in general, the degree of such impact depends on the software specific needs.


----------



## bardacuda

Nah your English is good. I was just zeroing in on that one comment about ASUS @ 3.8 vs. Taichi @ 4.0 and only skimmed through the rest of the convo, so prob just me being a lazy reader







Anyway, minor miscommunication.

I am really interested now in what the performance bias setting can actually do for people in the real world. Maybe faster folding/boinc-ing, encoding, compiling, rendering, etc.?? I would be willing to test as long as it's not going to take several hours. If anyone wants to suggest some tests that I can run for, say, 15 mins or so and still get some good data; and then reboot and try a different setting; I should be able to get some numbers for one scenario in about an hour (Performance bias @ None, Auto, CB15, and AIDA @ 15 mins each).


----------



## virpz

Prime Pro - no tweaks


Taichi - Tweaked. Look at the Physics score










No cheats in the sense of hacking results, just tweaking in the sense of giving what was needed.


----------



## bardacuda

Wait, so the Taichi has tweaks and is faster than the ASUS? Now I'm confused.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Wait, so the Taichi has tweaks and is faster than the ASUS? Now I'm confused.


In that scenario, yes.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> newer overclockers should get plenty of advice on airflow and active VRM cooling before diving too deep with those motherboards.


Better yet, have all of them who own loops to say "I'm not paying you a dollar until you offer feature parity with 2013 Intel boards".

So many comments about airflow on the VRM. We wouldn't need to jury-rig fans with basic feature parity.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Better yet, have all of them who own loops to say "I'm not paying you a dollar until you offer feature parity with 2013 Intel boards".
> 
> So many comments about airflow on the VRM. We wouldn't need to jury-rig fans with basic feature parity.


Since you've selected my comment out of the 'many comments about airflow', sure, I'll get right on that and coordinate a worldwide campaign. Or, we could acknowledge that many users are going to be using these existing motherboards as they are and that advice given to people who are new to overclocking should probably take factors like case airflow into consideration.

Do you really think that people choosing not to buy AM4 motherboards would have had the effect you desire? I think it's much more likely that the lack of perfect parity would give way to a lack of support entirely, a la AM3+. If you want that feature parity, be glad that people are demonstrating the demand for AM4 products with their own money so that you can carry on with your principled crusade.

The CH6, Taichi, GT7, and Gaming 5 / K7, even the Titanium (despite my misgivings about the price) alone represent more effort put into AM4 than years of AM3+ combined. I'm not going to wait around for miracles, especially miracles that are unlikely to occur if consumers magically undertook a blanket boycott.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Better yet, have all of them who own loops to say "I'm not paying you a dollar until you offer feature parity with 2013 Intel boards".
> 
> So many comments about airflow on the VRM. We wouldn't need to jury-rig fans with basic feature parity.


get the CHVI Hero and get the EK monoblock.

Owning a loop doesn't exempt you from VRM cooling.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Do you really think that people choosing not to buy AM4 motherboards would have had the effect you desire? I think it's much more likely that the lack of perfect parity would give way to a lack of support entirely, a la AM3+. If you want that feature parity, be glad that people are demonstrating the demand for AM4 products with their own money so that you can carry on with your principled crusade.


Snark won't change the fact that board makers can do better, like offering basic feature parity with Intel offerings.

It's also weird for people to obsess over VRM components and choose to completely ignore the hybrid water/air VRM coolers.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm not going to wait around for miracles, especially miracles that are unlikely to occur if consumers magically undertook a blanket boycott.


Of course companies will make products people demand. They need to be told what those are. If people shell out their money for something else then it would be more miraculous for them to start offering the thing people actually want.

Or, we can just pretend that Intel CPUs require nicer stuff.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> The CH6, Taichi, GT7, and Gaming 5 / K7, even the Titanium (despite my misgivings about the price) alone represent more effort put into AM4 than years of AM3+ combined.


AM3+ had the Crosshair and Sabertooth boards. Even after FX was long dead board makers released new boards with things like USB 3.1 and M.2 (like the Aura board). I don't buy this argument at all.

Minimal effort is required. It's not like the hybrid sink is a new thing. It's been around in Intel land since 2013.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> get the CHVI Hero and get the EK monoblock.
> 
> Owning a loop doesn't exempt you from VRM cooling.


Straw man. I'm talking about the hybrid water/air coolers that two board makers offer on Intel, a feature that has been offered on Intel since 2013.

Or, we can worry immensely about the tiniest differences between the current Ryzen boards while claiming that supporting people's water loops is irrelevant for board makers.

EK blocks are fine for those who want to spend that money and put the extra effort into replacing a part they already paid for. It's important, apparently, for the Titanium to have the best air sink but totally unimportant to have a board out there with loop support.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Snark won't change the fact that board makers can do better, like offering basic feature parity with Intel offerings.
> 
> It's also weird for people to obsess over VRM components and choose to completely ignore the hybrid water/air VRM coolers.


No it won't, but refusing to buy motherboards based on a moving set of criteria isn't going to do anything either. We (or rather, you and others who care about it) can put in writing your desire for a hybrid water/air VRM cooler solution on a motherboard. If you can get enough people on board, maybe it'll happen for you. That's not a feature I particularly care about on this platform and the board I chose actually has equal or better features and components next to its Z270 counterpart. So you see, I've done my bit for the cause. Cheers.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Of course companies will make products people demand. They need to be told what those are. If people shell out their money for something else then it would be more miraculous for them to start offering the thing people actually want.
> 
> Or, we can just pretend that Intel CPUs require nicer stuff.


It would be miraculous to see investment in a platform increase without sales. Make your concerns known to the board partners, carry on with your boycott, try to win people over to your cause... but know that your chances of getting any forward movement are much greater on a profitable platform with consistent sales.

I didn't say anything about Intel CPU's requiring 'nicer stuff', but I won't pretend that a new and unproven AMD socket is going to receive as much initial attention as a profitable mainstream Intel socket.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> AM3+ had the Crosshair and Sabertooth boards. Even after FX was long dead board makers released new boards with things like USB 3.1 and M.2 (like the Aura board). I don't buy this argument at all.
> 
> Minimal effort is required. It's not like the hybrid sink is a new thing. It's been around in Intel land since 2013.


Right. Two excellent motherboards (from *one* vendor), maybe four or five total worth recommending, over years of the platform's existence. It doesn't matter whether you buy my argument or not. The fact is that we've already seen better and more consistent vendor participation for AM4 than we ever saw with AM3+, especially if we're talking boards that can provably achieve the best ambient-temperature clocks available to this platform within safe parameters. The comparative list of boards I'd recommend for a 5.0GHz Vishera overclock is several boards lighter.

I'd say minimal effort has more than been satisfied. Total parity probably won't come until Zen+, assuming that this iteration of Zen does well financially. That's how these things work. That's why Intel boards have the things you want to see on AM4 motherboards.


----------



## realtomatoes

yeah, those hybrid coolers found on the gigabyte gaming 9 would have been nice. too bad asrock doesn't do something similar.

i guess one of the reasons we haven't seen the "cool" boards is coz am4 is a new platform. board makers weren't sure if it would sell to begin with while sandy bridge derivatives sold like crazy. and given the 270 chipset came out almost at the same time, am sure the board makers were focusing more on the 270 platform coz they know that thing sells and if they don't put their best boards out on that platform they will lose out to competition.

either way, we buy the best we can get and hopefully get enough people onto the platform for the board makers to want to invest more into creating better products for it. at the end of the day, sales is what will drive board makers to innovate.


----------



## KarathKasun

passenger
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Straw man. I'm talking about the hybrid water/air coolers that two board makers offer on Intel, a feature that has been offered on Intel since 2013.
> 
> Or, we can worry immensely about the tiniest differences between the current Ryzen boards while claiming that supporting people's water loops is irrelevant for board makers.
> 
> EK blocks are fine for those who want to spend that money and put the extra effort into replacing a part they already paid for. It's important, apparently, for the Titanium to have the best air sink but totally unimportant to have a board out there with loop support.


If a good passive heatsink cant cool your VRM its not worth watercooling anyway. VRM watercooling is mostly a gimmick when you have enough space around the CPU socket to implement a VRM that will put out substantially less heat to begin with.

Do you not remember the Gigabyte Z77X-UP7? 2KW of continuous power output with a passive heatsink, demonstrated for something like 8 hours at a trade show with a dummy load.


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> VRM watercooling is mostly a gimmick when you have enough space around the CPU socket to implement a VRM that will put out substantially less heat to begin with.


yeah, might not be needed but it sure looks pwetty!


----------



## cssorkinman

I grabbed the Raytek Ranger ST and took some temps during an IBT AVX run at 4050 mhz at 1.424 volts +/-
HWINFO is pretty darn close on its VRM temps from what I see. 20 C ambient.


Choke temps 37 was the hottest where it wasn't getting direct ariflow the ones under the fan were much cooler.

Hottest spot on the back side of motherboard I could find ( that I could get to ). ( no airflow on it) 48 C

Top of SOC VRM heatsink ( black area)

Top of cpu vrm heatsink ( black area )

Ambient temp


Emissivity setting @ 95 - within 1C of ambient probe temp while scanning matte black surface of P5

@bardacuda I made a video, but my upload is 768k.... it would finish uploading about the time AM5 was released.


----------



## chew*

48c on back that's very realistic.

Software reports that to?

Rayteks are nice..they preety much invented IR handhelds.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 48c on back that's very realistic.
> 
> Software reports that to?


It was directly between the solder points underneath the cpu VRM heatsink. HWINFO was reporting 46 C on the cpu vrm at the time.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> passenger
> If a good passive heatsink cant cool your VRM its not worth watercooling anyway. VRM watercooling is mostly a gimmick when you have enough space around the CPU socket to implement a VRM that will put out substantially less heat to begin with.


Watercooling is a gimmick. If you can't cool it with a Noctua D15 then you're in gimmick territory.

Overlocking is a gimmick. If you can't get the performance you want at stock then you bought the wrong part.

It's a gimmick to not want to mess around with jury-rigging fans with hanging zip ties or some other cumbersome solution, or trying to get fans wedged into tiny spaces around big tower coolers. It's a gimmick to not want to dust those fans and deal with the extra noise and airflow complexity.

And, there have been plenty of comments about Ryzen that say active VRM cooling is necessary.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Do you not remember the Gigabyte Z77X-UP7? 2KW of continuous power output with a passive heatsink, demonstrated for something like 8 hours at a trade show with a dummy load.


Based on my understanding of The Stilt's comments regarding AM3+ passive cooling is inadequate for overclocked parts once the VRMs are required to dissipate a certain level of watts.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> Everything counts, however if you are running a FX-8K series CPU at 4.7GHz+ the VRM alone is dissipating 40W+. Some of that power will be dissipated by the CPU cooler.


He said heat that isn't cooled by the VRM sink can travel back to the CPU, heating it up and/or putting greater demand on the CPU cooling.

It's now popular to say Ryzen isn't as demanding as AM3+ but people are simultaneously arguing in favor of buying expensive boards because of their better VRMs. They're simultaneously talking about greater heat levels from having fewer phases and dirtier output, too. The Stilt said the AM4 spec and the 14nm process make current quality more important than with AM3+. It's a tighter spec and there is less leeway for voltage fluctuations.

I know Ryzen isn't as demanding as Piledriver in some ways but The Stilt's comments indicate that current quality is important to it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> When AMD moved from 32nm SHP SOI to 28nm BULK the voltage stability became extremely important. Despite the platforms using parts made with different processes (e.g AM3+ and FM2+) had exactly the same load-line specification (1.3mOhms) in reality the smaller and otherwise inferior 28nm process was significantly more sensitive to voltage variations / fluctuations.
> 
> Achieving a stable voltage supply through proper (load dependent) load-line calibration can result in hundreds of MHz additional headroom when close to Fmax, even on the more recent 28nm (Godavari) chips.
> 
> For Zen the load-line appears to be (based on the existing VRM designs) significantly tighter than it was with previous AMD designs and much tighter than the Intel VR12 spec (which is already strict) specifies...


This comment seems a bit different than this one, which has two different droop specs for AM3+ and FM2, respectively, but the point I'm making isn't really affected:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> The load-line specification for both AM3+ and FM2+ is extremely loose (1.3 mOhm & 2.1mOhm) and because of that the voltage droop by the specification is very large. To ensure that the operation parameters remain within a spec, an AM3+ part which draws 100A of current and requires 1.3000V to be fully stable must have at least 1.4300V default voltage (130mV droop @ 100A).
> 
> Some of the motherboards are built to have lower Rll (< 1.3mOhm / 2.1mOhm) than the specification dictates, or the end-user might adjust it to be lower than the default value. If the droop is lower or non-existing for either reason, it appears that the parts are extremely overvolted from the factory. The truth of course being that they are configured for perfectly right default voltage, which complies with the specifications (droop) and contains some standard safety margins.
> 
> On AM4 the situation is significantly better, since the load-line spec. is less than half of what it was on AM3+.


Gimmickry is subjective/arbitrary unless it can be demonstrated that there is no substantive benefit to something at all.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 48c on back that's very realistic.
> 
> Software reports that to?
> 
> Rayteks are nice..they preety much invented IR handhelds.


Where I work , all the testing equipment has to be approved before use on site - Raytek and Fluke make the grade. I like the Raytek, someday if I have time I might take the training for the Fluke IR camera - the problem with that is , once I get qualified, that's one more thing I'll be expected to do ( my plate is full already lol ).


----------



## chew*

Ok so this about worse case as it gets. Wife offset ambients 74f.

No fan on vrm and board laying on box so no air gap behind pcb..

Less than stellar cpu @ 1.4v and i jacked soc up for good measure with a ref clock overclock and memory @ 3200. Cpu fan on auto. Prime blend custom 12600mb ram.

Still ticking...seems the board is less worried than I am about the temps. 81c peak during the entire test. 73c average.

I might note my biggest concern with this board is AMDs nice rgb cooler... If a user used one of those exhausting heat at that vrm....90c is a reality...


----------



## chew*

Next up...

Since most don"t realize how much it actually makes a difference....

3 runs same tweaks same speeds. Stock, realistic ref clock, excessive ref clock.

Stock. cas latency i could not fix at this divider....at best its worth 2 seconds but you cant run it....so thats another reason to ref clock at lower dividers. Was set 11 in bios..









Realistic ref clock









Excessive ref clock and really not worth the gains over a moderate ref clock.









Now if cas latency is worth 2 seconds...that puts first run @ 7:58.

Still a 5 second gap..that is a rather large gain and absolutely would have realworld application impact.

If you notice each strap i went lower trc dropped and that is just what we can see


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Yes. Biostar , 5050 funzone..


ah, so this is the 5050 fun zone. lol
looks like the X370GTN has it too.


folks, any thoughts about the vrm on the X370GTN?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> ah, so this is the 5050 fun zone. lol
> looks like the X370GTN has it too.
> 
> 
> folks, any thoughts about the vrm on the X370GTN?


4+3 phase.
It does have what looks like a Vishay trenchfet.

Edit: Too much hope...

The SoC has some nikos, maybe PZ0903BK.



Controller is ILS 95712


Something like SM4377or SM4337 on the memory vrm,


R7 [email protected] Vcore 1.186V
Cryorig C7
Mem 2400Mhz
OCCT for 30 minutes
Unknown ambient...


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Watercooling is a gimmick. If you can't cool it with a Noctua D15 then you're in gimmick territory.
> 
> Overlocking is a gimmick. If you can't get the performance you want at stock then you bought the wrong part.
> 
> It's a gimmick to not want to mess around with jury-rigging fans with hanging zip ties or some other cumbersome solution, or trying to get fans wedged into tiny spaces around big tower coolers. It's a gimmick to not want to dust those fans and deal with the extra noise and airflow complexity..


That's not the point and you know it. Water cooling something spitting out 150w+ makes sense. Water cooling something that can otherwise be designed to not run hot enough to need active cooling at all does not, that is why I call it a gimmick. Most of the overkill boards can cool themselves adequately with convection flow at this point, unless you are using very specific chips that are not on either platform being discussed here.

If you rely on "WC compatible" parts, you are doing it wrong.
If you have to jury rig fans in your case to compensate for your horrid motherboard decision that is YOUR problem.
If you are water cooling to get around "airflow complexity"... I can't even. Air is pretty simple, and easy to keep clean with less planning than water cooling.

Water cooling as an excuse for silence is pretty played out at this point as well. With large enough heatsinks designed for the purpose you can have a PC that is almost 100% silent, with a bit of a CPU OC to boot (had a Z77/i5 2500k set up like this for a long time). There are high end GPUs with fans that stop when not under load to go with this kind of system too.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I grabbed the Raytek Ranger ST and took some temps during an IBT AVX run at 4050 mhz at 1.424 volts +/-
> HWINFO is pretty darn close on its VRM temps from what I see. 20 C ambient.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Choke temps 37 was the hottest where it wasn't getting direct ariflow the ones under the fan were much cooler.
> 
> Hottest spot on the back side of motherboard I could find ( that I could get to ). ( no airflow on it) 48 C
> 
> Top of SOC VRM heatsink ( black area)
> 
> Top of cpu vrm heatsink ( black area )
> 
> Ambient temp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emissivity setting @ 95 - within 1C of ambient probe temp while scanning matte black surface of P5
> 
> @bardacuda I made a video, but my upload is 768k.... it would finish uploading about the time AM5 was released.


This is nice, but IBT would be a bad stress test to use for an apples to apples comparison. If you don't use exactly the right amount of RAM you can end up stressing the CPU different amounts, like you see below where it was only putting out ~155 GFlops. Since you don't have a screenshot of IBT in the above post at all it's impossible to tell what kind of stress the CPU was under. Again, I'm not suggesting you're fudging anything, but you _could_ be, so it doesn't settle anything.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Removed the fan that was blowing on the soc vrm and the upper half of the cpu vrm and had a go at ibt very high.


Prime would have the same issues if one was to use blend or some variation on it, since capturing readings at different FFT sizes would still be apples and oranges. I think a good test would be something that is close-ish to worst case that Joe noob OCer might encounter. Maybe OCCT with default settings (should be a constant, reproducable, yet high load) after 1/2 hour or more, inside a case, with no fan on the VRM, @ 1.4+ VCore. Frequency at 3850 or less since I probably can't go any higher.

It shouldn't be unreasonable to expect MSI's flagship to perform well in that kind of scenario...and given its price point, putting it up against the Prime Pro is going easy on it. The argument that I have been seeing is that the VRM is good enough for Ryzen...and any shortcomings it might have in mosfet quality is made up for by exceptional design for heat dissipation...so let's put that to the test.

If you have slow upload speed, or don't have a case to put your system in or whatever, I understand and I'm not asking you to go out of the way to do it, or even asking you specifically to do anything.
I'm just throwing it out there that if anyone does have a Titanium, and wants to do a test using the conditions I mentioned in order to put an end to the arguing with some hard data, then I'll be glad to do the same test for comparison purposes.
It has to be something that is hard to fudge though, be apples to apples, and show that the board can do what the price point suggests it should be able to do. Otherwise, it would be a waste of time.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> This is nice, but IBT would be a bad stress test to use for an apples to apples comparison. If you don't use exactly the right amount of RAM you can end up stressing the CPU different amounts, like you see below where it was only putting out ~155 GFlops. Since you don't have a screenshot of IBT in the above post at all it's impossible to tell what kind of stress the CPU was under. Again, I'm not suggesting you're fudging anything, but you _could_ be, so it doesn't settle anything.
> Prime would have the same issues if one was to use blend or some variation on it, since capturing readings at different FFT sizes would still be apples and oranges. I think a good test would be something that is close-ish to worst case that Joe noob OCer might encounter. Maybe OCCT with default settings (should be a constant, reproducable, yet high load) after 1/2 hour or more, inside a case, with no fan on the VRM, @ 1.4+ VCore. Frequency at 3850 or less since I probably can't go any higher.
> 
> It shouldn't be unreasonable to expect MSI's flagship to perform well in that kind of scenario...and given its price point, putting it up against the Prime Pro is going easy on it. The argument that I have been seeing is that the VRM is good enough for Ryzen...and any shortcomings it might have in mosfet quality is made up for by exceptional design for heat dissipation...so let's put that to the test.
> 
> If you have slow upload speed, or don't have a case to put your system in or whatever, I understand and I'm not asking you to go out of the way to do it, or even asking you specifically to do anything.
> I'm just throwing it out there that if anyone does have a Titanium, and wants to do a test using the conditions I mentioned in order to put an end to the arguing with some hard data, then I'll be glad to do the same test for comparison purposes.
> It has to be something that is hard to fudge though, be apples to apples, and show that the board can do what the price point suggests it should be able to do. Otherwise, it would be a waste of time.


What I'm seeing here is that the vrm temperatures on the titanium are quite lower than on the prime ibt tests you posted, despite the processor using more power on the titanium tests.

Still, I didn't expect that 10c difference in fet temperatures under the circumstances. The TI packages should be able for more. I'm afraid that it's the coils dragging the vrm down on the prime (just look at their temps, ouch). If there's an option on the prime to decrease the vrm switching frequency, it might help quite a bit.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I grabbed the Raytek Ranger ST and took some temps during an IBT AVX run at 4050 mhz at 1.424 volts +/-
> HWINFO is pretty darn close on its VRM temps from what I see. 20 C ambient.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Choke temps 37 was the hottest where it wasn't getting direct ariflow the ones under the fan were much cooler.
> 
> Hottest spot on the back side of motherboard I could find ( that I could get to ). ( no airflow on it) 48 C
> 
> Top of SOC VRM heatsink ( black area)
> 
> Top of cpu vrm heatsink ( black area )
> 
> Ambient temp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emissivity setting @ 95 - within 1C of ambient probe temp while scanning matte black surface of P5
> 
> @bardacuda I made a video, but my upload is 768k.... it would finish uploading about the time AM5 was released.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is nice, but IBT would be a bad stress test to use for an apples to apples comparison. If you don't use exactly the right amount of RAM you can end up stressing the CPU different amounts, like you see below where it was only putting out ~155 GFlops. Since you don't have a screenshot of IBT in the above post at all it's impossible to tell what kind of stress the CPU was under. Again, I'm not suggesting you're fudging anything, but you _could_ be, so it doesn't settle anything.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Removed the fan that was blowing on the soc vrm and the upper half of the cpu vrm and had a go at ibt very high.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Prime would have the same issues if one was to use blend or some variation on it, since capturing readings at different FFT sizes would still be apples and oranges. I think a good test would be something that is close-ish to worst case that Joe noob OCer might encounter. Maybe OCCT with default settings (should be a constant, reproducable, yet high load) after 1/2 hour or more, inside a case, with no fan on the VRM, @ 1.4+ VCore. Frequency at 3850 or less since I probably can't go any higher.
> 
> It shouldn't be unreasonable to expect MSI's flagship to perform well in that kind of scenario...and given its price point, putting it up against the Prime Pro is going easy on it. The argument that I have been seeing is that the VRM is good enough for Ryzen...and any shortcomings it might have in mosfet quality is made up for by exceptional design for heat dissipation...so let's put that to the test.
> 
> If you have slow upload speed, or don't have a case to put your system in or whatever, I understand and I'm not asking you to go out of the way to do it, or even asking you specifically to do anything.
> I'm just throwing it out there that if anyone does have a Titanium, and wants to do a test using the conditions I mentioned in order to put an end to the arguing with some hard data, then I'll be glad to do the same test for comparison purposes.
> It has to be something that is hard to fudge though, be apples to apples, and show that the board can do what the price point suggests it should be able to do. Otherwise, it would be a waste of time.
Click to expand...

A purely scientific apples to apples comparison would be impossible due to differences in cpu, psu, cpu cooling etc.

I was trying to get a handle on HWINFO's VRM temperature reporting accuracy regarding the Titanium ( VR -1 VR -2 ) - from what I was able to tell it's very close.


----------



## bardacuda

Doesn't need to be purely scientific since that would be basically impossible to set up over a forum. Not to mention I don't have the training or equipment to do one.

Just in a case, no fan, 1.4v, with a consistent high load.

I think that would give a good idea. I agree CPU cooling can make a difference but the other two seem negligible. If anyone has a better test that could reasonably be expected to be set up then I'm all ears.

Maybe later I'll just go ahead and make a video to get the ball rolling. Anyone that wants to try and reproduce the test as best they can with a different motherboard can share their results...doesn't have to be a Titanium. Maybe in that way we'll start getting some way to compare boards, instead just slinging around those same few FLIR images along with some poo and words.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Doesn't need to be purely scientific since that would be basically impossible to set up over a forum. Not to mention I don't have the training or equipment to do one.
> 
> Just in a case, no fan, 1.4v, with a consistent high load.
> 
> I think that would give a good idea. I agree CPU cooling can make a difference but the other two seem negligible. If anyone has a better test that could reasonably be expected to be set up then I'm all ears.
> 
> Maybe later I'll just go ahead and make a video to get the ball rolling. Anyone that wants to try and reproduce the test as best they can with a different motherboard can share their results...doesn't have to be a Titanium. Maybe in that way we'll start getting some way to compare boards, instead just slinging around those same few FLIR images along with some poo and words.


With no way of quantifying the amount of airflow over the VRM heatsink I think we should compare best temperatures possible at a given voltage/clockspeed on a standardized load?

If you'd pop the sides off the case and point a house fan at both sides that would be about the same as what I'm running.


----------



## bardacuda

Ok I'll do that in the video after I take the other readings. I'll just do the one side though because I don't have two floor fans.


----------



## chew*

As long as you guys verify with ir at some point on vrm is similar to software...no reason you can not use the software to record peak and average like i did...that solves prime 95 iteration issues.

We saw 68c on back of giga and 69-70 in software. Top of the fet i have no acess to is more than realistic to be 2c higher than my ir.

So the 73c avg and 81c peak is realistic imo with no fans.


----------



## bardacuda

I had to split the video in 2 for this upload site but here you go. The OCCT settings didn't show up in the first part of the video apparently, but you can catch them at about 20 or 25 seconds into the second part. Remind me to speak more clearly and not cover the microphone either if I ever do another one of these. It feels like I'm talking to myself while recording it









First 9.5 mins:

https://streamable.com/1fq70

Last 3 mins where I basically just reboot to show BIOS settings:

https://streamable.com/gyahq

Long story short [email protected] the VRM heatsink is ~37 - 38°C with a ~22°C ambient when the case is closed with no extra fans.
I'm not sure anymore what Temp 3 - 6 are in HWiNFO. It could be the VRM package, or it could be CPU socket or something else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I had to split the video in 2 for this upload site but here you go. The OCCT settings didn't show up in the first part of the video apparently, but you can catch them at about 20 or 25 seconds into the second part. Remind me to speak more clearly and not cover the microphone either if I ever do another one of these. It feels like I'm talking to myself while recording it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First 9.5 mins:
> 
> https://streamable.com/1fq70
> 
> Last 3 mins where I basically just reboot to show BIOS settings:
> 
> https://streamable.com/gyahq
> 
> Long story short [email protected] the VRM heatsink is ~37 - 38°C with a ~22°C ambient when the case is closed with no extra fans.
> I'm not sure anymore what Temp 3 - 6 are in HWiNFO. It could be the VRM package, or it could be CPU socket or something else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


+rep for science.

Temps 3-6 present on asus b350m- variants. No clue.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I had to split the video in 2 for this upload site but here you go. The OCCT settings didn't show up in the first part of the video apparently, but you can catch them at about 20 or 25 seconds into the second part. Remind me to speak more clearly and not cover the microphone either if I ever do another one of these. It feels like I'm talking to myself while recording it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First 9.5 mins:
> 
> https://streamable.com/1fq70
> 
> Last 3 mins where I basically just reboot to show BIOS settings:
> 
> https://streamable.com/gyahq
> 
> Long story short [email protected] the VRM heatsink is ~37 - 38°C with a ~22°C ambient when the case is closed with no extra fans.
> I'm not sure anymore what Temp 3 - 6 are in HWiNFO. It could be the VRM package, or it could be CPU socket or something else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Nice:thumb:

Those fets at that ambient temp and with that load are in the fields of +/- 92% efficiecy.

How do you like the XB EVO ?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I had to split the video in 2 for this upload site but here you go. The OCCT settings didn't show up in the first part of the video apparently, but you can catch them at about 20 or 25 seconds into the second part. Remind me to speak more clearly and not cover the microphone either if I ever do another one of these. It feels like I'm talking to myself while recording it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First 9.5 mins:
> 
> https://streamable.com/1fq70
> 
> Last 3 mins where I basically just reboot to show BIOS settings:
> 
> https://streamable.com/gyahq
> 
> Long story short [email protected] the VRM heatsink is ~37 - 38°C with a ~22°C ambient when the case is closed with no extra fans.
> I'm not sure anymore what Temp 3 - 6 are in HWiNFO. It could be the VRM package, or it could be CPU socket or something else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


As Yendor said +1 rep for science.









I'll give the videos a look when I get a chance.


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> How do you like the XB EVO ?


I think it's great. It's pretty easy to get at things on the motherboard. Getting at the PSU is a bit of a pain though, but you can take the motherboard tray out without too much effort to make it a little easier.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I had to split the video in 2 for this upload site but here you go. The OCCT settings didn't show up in the first part of the video apparently, but you can catch them at about 20 or 25 seconds into the second part. Remind me to speak more clearly and not cover the microphone either if I ever do another one of these. It feels like I'm talking to myself while recording it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First 9.5 mins:
> 
> https://streamable.com/1fq70
> 
> Last 3 mins where I basically just reboot to show BIOS settings:
> 
> https://streamable.com/gyahq
> 
> Long story short [email protected] the VRM heatsink is ~37 - 38°C with a ~22°C ambient when the case is closed with no extra fans.
> I'm not sure anymore what Temp 3 - 6 are in HWiNFO. It could be the VRM package, or it could be CPU socket or something else. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> 
> 
> 
> Nice:thumb:
> 
> Those fets at that ambient temp and with that load are in the fields of +/- 92% efficiecy.
> 
> How do you like the XB EVO ?
Click to expand...

How did you arrive at that figure?


----------



## PsyM4n

Still, the temperature of the chokes is unsettling. Why would asus cheap just there on an otherwise good design... dunno.

Anyway, I've seen vrm switching frequency settings for vcore and soc on the bios, messing with the vcore one might produce pleasant results. I wouldn't go above 500khz on the prime though.


----------



## bardacuda

Well I'm not worried about it personally. As others have pointed out it's just a copper coil with a ferrous core in a ceramic case. I wouldn't be surprised if they're good for several hundred °C. It's just heat bleeding into the surrounding circuitry that could be a problem.

For the test, like I say, I wanted to do a setup that your average joe might come across...and I doubt Joe would be messing with switching frequency. I've never even messed with it myself but I'd look into it if I felt it was a problem. I lost the silicon lottery again though anyway (I'm 0 for 3 in the last 6 years), and AMD recommends not going over 1.425V (which doesn't even get me to 3875MHz) so doubt I'll bother going higher than 3800 @ 1.325.

Maybe when Zen 3 hits on the "7nm" node I'll get a new chip and have a reason to drive it hard but who knows?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> How did you arrive at that figure?


Page eleven will paint a fast picture
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I think it's great. It's pretty easy to get at things on the motherboard. Getting at the PSU is a bit of a pain though, but you can take the motherboard tray out without too much effort to make it a little easier.


I can't get rid of mine, I will only change it for something that is not vertical and fits better than the EVO XB. Power supply and plenty of storage are a bit trouble tho.


----------



## bardacuda

Yeah the hot swap bays are worthless because the PSU cables are in the way. I have a longer than normal PSU that's not technically supported though so you might be able to use those bays with a smaller one. I knew I was never going to use more than 2 or 3 drives anyway though. For anyone that plans to use more it's not a great option unless you're ok with sticking your SSDs somewhere else and use the 3 main mounts for your HDDs.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> That's not the point and you know it. Water cooling something spitting out 150w+ makes sense.


It also makes sense to use a VRM water block when you have a loop already and you know it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Most of the overkill boards can cool themselves adequately with convection flow at this point, unless you are using very specific chips that are not on either platform being discussed here.


I've seen a lot of comments in this thread about needing active airflow to cool VRMs for Ryzen. In fact, people were talking up the Titanium for having the best sink.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If you rely on "WC compatible" parts, you are doing it wrong.


I thought you told me to buy that EK block. Maybe that was someone else.

Doing it wrong by cutting out by making use of the superior cooling ability of a water loop that's already there?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If you have to jury rig fans in your case to compensate for your horrid motherboard decision that is YOUR problem.


Try again.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If you are water cooling to get around "airflow complexity"... I can't even. Air is pretty simple, and easy to keep clean with less planning than water cooling.


Pretty simple, eh? Is that why ASUS released a Sabertooth board with a 40mm VRM cooling fan that blows air the wrong direction (back into the case)?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Water cooling as an excuse for silence is pretty played out at this point as well. With large enough heatsinks designed for the purpose you can have a PC that is almost 100% silent, with a bit of a CPU OC to boot


With a hybrid VRM/water block, as has been offered on Intel boards since 2013, one can get even more quiet and even more effective cooling.

The bottom line is that having the option to get a board with feature parity isn't important to you. Being able to take advantage of the loop already paid for isn't important to you. It is to me.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Well I'm not worried about it personally. As others have pointed out it's just a copper coil with a ferrous core in a ceramic case. I wouldn't be surprised if they're good for several hundred °C. It's just heat bleeding into the surrounding circuitry that could be a problem.


That's what I'm worrying for. It limits the board's potential. A pity, considering that they did the rest right.

Edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Page eleven will paint a fast picture
> http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf


Looking at the spec-sheet for a while now and still can't figure out how you reached that conclusion.


----------



## bardacuda

I didn't measure any amps or wattages, just temps. So I don't know how you could conclude anything on efficiency either.


----------



## Artikbot

If you use the reference application model components you can be pretty certain about the efficiency by looking at the manufacturer data.

They have a very nice chart for that, as he says, on page eleven.


----------



## cssorkinman

20 min OCCT default settings @ 4.1 ghz 1.45 - 1.46 volts CPU VRM max 44 C, - ambient 19 C, 2- 120 mm fans providing airflow to the entire heatsink area ,cpu and soc, - no fan on back side of board.

Temps had maxxed out and were dropping off intermittently - so I stopped the test.





After a minute of cool down


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I didn't measure any amps or wattages, just temps. So I don't know how you could conclude anything on efficiency either.


Assuming that you have the processors at 1.4V and requing X current at full load you can draw a line and get an approximation based on the csd87350q5d datasheet


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Looking at the spec-sheet for a while now and still can't figure out how you reached that conclusion.


A few pages back you wer talking crap non stop about that exact same subject now you can't figure it out.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> A few pages back you wer talking crap non stop about that exact same subject now you can't figure it out.


Well, I still can't. I'd appreciate it if you would enlighten me.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Well, I still can't. I'd appreciate it if you would enlighten me.


Me ?

If you want to learn something, you can have a good start by saying sorry to the few people that tried to en-light you before. Most of them are more knowledgeable than I on that subject but they also seem to have the patience I lack.


----------



## PsyM4n

OK, can someone tell me how he reached that conclusion? No matter how I think of it my rough estimation is about 90% efficiency at best.

Does not compute.


----------



## bardacuda

Does it really matter? The VRMs are not a problem on this board. Like you say if anything is a problem it's the chokes.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I didn't measure any amps or wattages, just temps. So I don't know how you could conclude anything on efficiency either.
> 
> 
> 
> Assuming that you have the processors at 1.4V and requing X current at full load you can draw a line and get an approximation based on the csd87350q5d datasheet
Click to expand...

Are you figuring at 55 C operating temp?


----------



## AlphaC

It's about 90% once you adjust for output voltage for mosfets only (not including choke/capacitors / board).

Adjusting for 1.4V results in less efficiency compared to 1.3V , the normalization factor is 1.025 x or so.


http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/datasheet/application-and-implementation#SLPS2885157
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Are you figuring at 55 C operating temp?


temp is irrelevant unless 100°C+


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Does it really matter? The VRMs are not a problem on this board. Like you say if anything is a problem it's the chokes.


There's more to that, and the chokes are mostly to blame.


----------



## chew*

barracuda drop switching frequency to lowest setting. the cpu clocks better anyway, less stress on board.....it may even be defaulted there tbh.


----------



## bardacuda

What's the downside? I think the CPU clock limit might be related to droop. If SVI 2 is my drooped voltage then I'm losing like 75mV. I'm hoping a new BIOS fixes it. I've already tried LLC 2 and 3 and they're unstable.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's about 90% once you adjust for output voltage for mosfets only (not including choke/capacitors / board).
> 
> Adjusting for 1.4V results in less efficiency compared to 1.3V , the normalization factor is 1.025 x or so.
> 
> 
> http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/datasheet/application-and-implementation#SLPS2885157
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Are you figuring at 55 C operating temp?
> 
> 
> 
> temp is irrelevant unless 100°C+
Click to expand...

25 amps 1 volt = 25 watts - 4.23 calculated lost = 20.77 = 83 % Where did I go wrong?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> What's the downside?


In your case, it doesn't matter. xD


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> What's the downside? I think the CPU clock limit might be related to droop. If SVI 2 is my drooped voltage then I'm losing like 75mV. I'm hoping a new BIOS fixes it. I've already tried LLC 2 and 3 and they're unstable.


I run lvl 5 vcore lvl 3 soc optimized phase on both. t.balanced on that board. Tbh i used same settings on all my Asus boards for daily use. 5 years strong on a 2600k with aggressive oc...no degrading not even after benching it on ln2...

No downside to lower switching frequency.

Also ODT 53.3 setting may help.

Not sure if your trying 3200 ram but imo that board can not handle it.

Run 2933 until they release a bios that I think is legit 3200 stable.

I have not pinned down the why...frustrating to say the least.


----------



## bardacuda

I've already been able to run 2666 but I can't boot to it. I either need to set it at stock and then do the OCing after booting with Ryzen Master or something, or I need a new bios with VDDR Boot Voltage. I'm basically just wating for a new BIOS before I do any more tinkering. Hoping to get access to sub timings too. I don't need the MHz for anything right now.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I've already been able to run 2666 but I can't boot to it. I either need to set it at stock and then do the OCing after booting with Ryzen Master or something, or I need a new bios with VDDR Boot Voltage. I'm basically just wating for a new BIOS before I do any more tinkering. Hoping to get access to sub timings too. I don't need the MHz for anything right now.


What memory do you have? Link me if you don't mind.


----------



## bardacuda

Ignore the stuff in the timing table editor window.


----------



## chew*

Holy hell i cant read any of that even if i dl image


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Holy hell i cant read any of that even if i dl image


http://cdn.overclock.net/e/ea/eadf3caa_MemoryCurrentInfo.jpeg


----------



## bardacuda

It's the full 3840 x 1080 image. Shouldn't be a problem.

Right-click > open in new tab. Zoom in.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 25 amps 1 volt = 25 watts - 4.23 calculated lost = 20.77 = 83 % Where did I go wrong?


All graphs for NexFets are for 1.3V. Also for 4GHz most people are using 100 - 110A not 150A.

The quick and dirty way would be > 91% efficiency based on NexFET Power block performance on that graph , for 1.3V only.

Efficiency = Power out /power in = (P_in-P_loss)/P_in = P_out / (P_out+P_loss)
For 150A (25A output current *6 phases), 1.4V the loss would be :
below 4W per phase (per graph _figure 1_) x 1.025 normalization factor _(figure 8 for 1.4V)_ = 4.1W per phase
Power loss for 6 phases = 4.1W x 6 = 24.6W ---> round to 25W
Power out = 1.4V x 150A = 210W

efficiency = 210W/(210+25W) = 0.8936 .... = above *89.3%*
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> What's the downside? I think the CPU clock limit might be related to droop. If SVI 2 is my drooped voltage then I'm losing like 75mV. I'm hoping a new BIOS fixes it. I've already tried LLC 2 and 3 and they're unstable.


Lower switching frequency results in higher potential ripple. However the X370 prime pro has a rather large capacitor bank. It has over 5K uF at the V_core side , albeit 5k hour rated caps.

Some more possible capacitance ratings:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



*Gigabyte GA-AB350-Gaming 3:* 5KW29 560 6.3V
6 x 560uF= 3,360μF
https://content.hwigroup.net/images/products_xl/386364/gigabyte-ab350-gaming-3.jpg , http://www.creativecomputing.net/images/AB350-Gaming%203-Rev10-SSBB_LED.jpg
*Asrock B350 K4* 2.5V 820 FX
5x 820 = 4,100μF
http://www.pcdvd.com.tw/showthread.php?t=1126287

It's likely the same for the Asrock B350 Pro4.
*Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4* : 6 x 821 = 4,926 uF <_-- "6ZBJ 821 2.5" black caps
*ASUS X370 Prime Pro*: 820 x 8 = 6,560uF <-- 5k life rating
*Gigabyte K7 / Gaming 5*: capacitors at CPU side are 561 , then 561 x 10 = 5,610uF <-- black caps 10K hr rating
*X370 Xpower* has 8x "M 71D" with 560 and 6.3V on the other line (black)
https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/04/10/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-review/1
560 x 8= 4,480uF
*B350 Pro carbon*: M71J 560 6.3V (black)
https://asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/Z270/AM4/B350GamingProCarbon//msi-b350_gaming_pro_carbon-quality-hero.jpg
560x7 = 3920uF
*B350 Tomahawk*: M71R 560 6.3V
https://ockd.es/review-analisis-msi-b350-tomahawk/4/
560x7 = 3920uF
*B350 Mortar*: 5KW12 560 6.3V
https://asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/Z270/AM4/B350Mortar/msi-b350m_mortar-tuning-hero.png
560x7 = 3920uF

There's 17 capacitors that read 561 on the *X370 Taichi.* I have no idea how many are split to SOC but if we assume that it's 12+4 VRM and use the proportional amount (12 of 16) that would be either 12 or 13 capacitors. A conservative estimate would be 12 x 561uF = 6732uF.

*Biostar GT7* : 5KW50 820 3V
http://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/8/1/8137_20_biostar-x370gt7-motherboard-review_full.jpg
11 capacitors but likely 8 of the 11 are for CPU based on placement.
Assuming 8x 820 = 6560uF which is very respectable

*CH VI Hero*'s picture at http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/P1010473.jpg suggests SOC is at the corner

I count 7x of the ones with 561 and 5x of the ones with 101. I'm not sure how the capacitors are split since it's all bunched up.
7x561 would only be 3,927 but if we include 5x101 you get 4,432uF but I don't want to give any wrong information.

*Biostar X370 GTN* uses 5KX07 820 3V

http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065630332.html
http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/wisteriear/imgs/d/b/db24c971.jpg
so it is likely all 6 for the CPU , 6 x 820 =4,920μF which is very good considering it is ITX


----------



## PsyM4n

Also keep in mind that more capacitance means less efficiency, although this also falls into the minor losses department (along with the losses from adding more phases). Then again, a little here, a little there... it stops being "a little" after a point.

Dunno how AC goes on into calculating exact numbers, I wouldn't. Not to mention that since we rarely get info for the chokes, the results mostly end up out of the window.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> It's the full 3840 x 1080 image. Shouldn't be a problem.
> 
> Right-click > open in new tab. Zoom in.


Ahh ok I have a identical rated geil set. I will add that to the mix for 2933 testing on x370 pro.


----------



## chew*

Think i forgot to post this video up.

3600mhz memory k7 how to ( benching only ) unless you have a unicorn...

https://youtu.be/smjIH-FbW0o


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Also keep in mind that more capacitance means less efficiency, although this also falls into the minor losses department (along with the losses from adding more phases). Then again, a little here, a little there... it stops being "a little" after a point.
> 
> Dunno how AC goes on into calculating exact numbers, I wouldn't. Not to mention that since we rarely get info for the chokes, the results mostly end up out of the window.


If you'd been paying attention then you would know I got it right off TI's specsheet down to the methodology. It's normalized. There's no pure speculation.

They're not exact numbers, they're best-guess estimates that are based on data provided by TI which isn't deceptive. Because TI has electronic engineer help on its site *and PSPICE models* for each component they cannot make stuff up for their spec sheets because real engineers use depend on those specsheets.

You'd have a point if I calculated switching loss based off rise and fall times and V_GS = 4.5V for the high side and omitted conduction loss (~10% duty cycle so it's low). Or maybe if I omitted switching loss for low side. However, I'm using their datasheet with basis on measured values.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







In actuality I didn't account for operating temperature the 90% efficiency holds up to 120°C. If you're at 70°C junction temp, multiply losses by 0.9 and you push efficiency above 90%.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> If you'd been paying attention then you would know I got it right off TI's specsheet down to the methodology. It's normalized. There's no pure speculation.
> 
> They're not exact numbers, they're best-guess estimates that are based on data provided by TI which isn't deceptive. Because TI has electronic engineer help on its site *and PSPICE models* for each component they cannot make stuff up for their spec sheets because real engineers use depend on those specsheets.


Tss, fine.

PS: If you'd been paying attention you'd know if I did.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 25 amps 1 volt = 25 watts - 4.23 calculated lost = 20.77 = 83 % Where did I go wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> All graphs for NexFets are for 1.3V. Also for 4GHz most people are using 100 - 110A not 150A.
> 
> The quick and dirty way would be > 91% efficiency based on NexFET Power block performance on that graph , for 1.3V only.
> 
> Efficiency = Power out /power in = (P_in-P_loss)/P_in = P_out / (P_out+P_loss)
> For 150A (25A output current *6 phases), 1.4V the loss would be :
> below 4W per phase (per graph _figure 1_) x 1.025 normalization factor _(figure 8 for 1.4V)_ = 4.1W per phase
> Power loss for 6 phases = 4.1W x 6 = 24.6W ---> round to 25W
> Power out = 1.4V x 150A = 210W
> 
> efficiency = 210W/(210+25W) = 0.8936 .... = above *89.3%*
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> What's the downside? I think the CPU clock limit might be related to droop. If SVI 2 is my drooped voltage then I'm losing like 75mV. I'm hoping a new BIOS fixes it. I've already tried LLC 2 and 3 and they're unstable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lower switching frequency results in higher potential ripple. However the X370 prime pro has a rather large capacitor bank. It has over 5K uF at the V_core side , albeit 5k hour rated caps.
> 
> Some more possible capacitance ratings:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> *Gigabyte GA-AB350-Gaming 3:* 5KW29 560 6.3V
> 6 x 560uF= 3,360μF
> https://content.hwigroup.net/images/products_xl/386364/gigabyte-ab350-gaming-3.jpg , http://www.creativecomputing.net/images/AB350-Gaming%203-Rev10-SSBB_LED.jpg
> *Asrock B350 K4* 2.5V 820 FX
> 5x 820 = 4,100μF
> http://www.pcdvd.com.tw/showthread.php?t=1126287
> 
> It's likely the same for the Asrock B350 Pro4.
> *Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4* : 6 x 821 = 4,926 uF <_-- "6ZBJ 821 2.5" black caps
> *ASUS X370 Prime Pro*: 820 x 8 = 6,560uF <-- 5k life rating
> *Gigabyte K7 / Gaming 5*: capacitors at CPU side are 561 , then 561 x 10 = 5,610uF <-- black caps 10K hr rating
> *X370 Xpower* has 8x "M 71D" with 560 and 6.3V on the other line (black)
> https://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2017/04/10/msi-x370-xpower-gaming-titanium-review/1
> 560 x 8= 4,480uF
> *B350 Pro carbon*: M71J 560 6.3V (black)
> https://asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/Z270/AM4/B350GamingProCarbon//msi-b350_gaming_pro_carbon-quality-hero.jpg
> 560x7 = 3920uF
> *B350 Tomahawk*: M71R 560 6.3V
> https://ockd.es/review-analisis-msi-b350-tomahawk/4/
> 560x7 = 3920uF
> *B350 Mortar*: 5KW12 560 6.3V
> https://asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/Z270/AM4/B350Mortar/msi-b350m_mortar-tuning-hero.png
> 560x7 = 3920uF
> 
> There's 17 capacitors that read 561 on the *X370 Taichi.* I have no idea how many are split to SOC but if we assume that it's 12+4 VRM and use the proportional amount (12 of 16) that would be either 12 or 13 capacitors. A conservative estimate would be 12 x 561uF = 6732uF.
> 
> *Biostar GT7* : 5KW50 820 3V
> http://www.tweaktown.com/image.php?image=imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/8/1/8137_20_biostar-x370gt7-motherboard-review_full.jpg
> 11 capacitors but likely 8 of the 11 are for CPU based on placement.
> Assuming 8x 820 = 6560uF which is very respectable
> 
> *CH VI Hero*'s picture at http://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/P1010473.jpg suggests SOC is at the corner
> 
> I count 7x of the ones with 561 and 5x of the ones with 101. I'm not sure how the capacitors are split since it's all bunched up.
> 7x561 would only be 3,927 but if we include 5x101 you get 4,432uF but I don't want to give any wrong information.
> 
> *Biostar X370 GTN* uses 5KX07 820 3V
> 
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065630332.html
> http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/wisteriear/imgs/d/b/db24c971.jpg
> so it is likely all 6 for the CPU , 6 x 820 =4,920μF which is very good considering it is ITX
Click to expand...

I appreciate you taking the time - I'm sure you know more about it than I do - I'm going to have to look for 6 % somewhere....


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I appreciate you taking the time - I'm sure you know more about it than I do - I'm going to have to look for 6 % somewhere....


You could search next to the fets, at the.... OK, actually that's quite pushing it.


----------



## AlphaC

If you want to talk about inductors, find the inductor sheet.
TI NexFET inductor normalization graph


Also measured vs calculated:


http://www.ti.com/lit/an/slpa009a/slpa009a.pdf


----------



## chew*

Taichi vrm temps video.

Worst case scenario no fans.

identical voltages used as were on K7 for comparisons sake.

https://youtu.be/MZh4ofYAo20

Next victim prime pro...till my "air end user support c6h" shows up.

My cold prepped C6H board is compromised for temp comparisons due to conformal coating...


----------



## AlphaC

CPU core current max = 175A , 240W CPU power?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> CPU core current max = 175A , 240W CPU power?


1.37...







:thumb:

@Psym4n

What do you think ?


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> CPU core current max = 175A , 240W CPU power?


I asked a similar question several pages back but it was buried, I have no idea where that number is coming from as if the CPU actually pulled that much power it would be more than double the TDP and the VRM on my board would be very very dead


----------



## chew*

Im not stock and my chip is not good...at all...i am good at pushing it.

I do not use good chips to show what a board can do...

Fyi...on this chip i use temp monitors off. Ocp off.

It will trip both..

I also find using junk hones my skills...when a good chip lands in my hands...i perform magic with little effort


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Fyi...on this chip i use temp monitors off. Ocp off.it will trip both..


ocp off llc1 @ [email protected] 1.5V - MSI X370 Ti









I want to have @Psym4n impressions.


----------



## chew*

Now you knpw why the gigabyte was screaming mercy...and i can push this chip more...

[email protected] 1.475...god bless any am4 board with passive only cooling...


----------



## realtomatoes

newb question: is llc for asrock taichi in reverse, like level 5 being the tightest which correspond to level 1 for like ch6?


----------



## chew*

Its backwards yes 1 strongest 5 weakest...and they changed something in 2.2 vs 1.94a.

Now I was @ 1.4125 llc 4 OCP off 53.3 On die termination (odt).

Soc,vddp was not necessary but i jacked it up to match the worst case scenario board vs board compare i am doing.

Does not take me very long to figure out what has changed in a board.

I have been doing this for so long it just comes naturally.


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have been doing this for so long it just comes naturally.


yeah, i was also wondering what came with the update 2.2.
thanks, chew*


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Its backwards yes 1 strongest 5 weakest...and they changed something in 2.2 vs 1.94a.
> 
> Now I was @ 1.4125 llc 4 OCP off 53.3 On die termination (odt).
> 
> Soc,vddp was not necessary but i jacked it up to match the worst case scenario board vs board compare i am doing.
> 
> Does not take me very long to figure out what has changed in a board.
> 
> I have been doing this for so long it just comes naturally.


So, you are telling me that the latest bios is not only about the agesa string ?









I see you noticed something different to the LLC . What was that ?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> yeah, i was also wondering what came with the update 2.2.
> thanks, chew*


Np dont use ocp off btw...its rather a bad thing to do for a real daily rig


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> So, you are telling me that the latest bios is not only the agesa string ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see you noticed something different to the LLC . What was that ?


They added a redundant memory tuning page with retry counts for am4 training. You will find ODT there.

Added some temp peak protection @ 75c thing at bottom of monitoring or i overlooked it before.

I disabled it.

I can set manual timings now vs xmp...setting ref clock does not completely reset everything...just vcore vdimm mem settings.

Previously i was running llc 1 1.4v...no clue but now its way to aggressive on my board.will have to remeasure socket to confirm.

I can boot 3600 but did not have my "bench drive with maxx mem" plugged in so it obviously would not boot my base win 10 install.

It is an improvement but will have to make sure they did not break 32g DR dimm operation.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> They added a redundant memory tuning page with retry counts for am4 training. You will find ODT there.
> 
> Added some temp peak protection @ 75c thing at bottom of monitoring or i overlooked it before.
> 
> I disabled it.
> 
> I can set manual timings now vs xmp...setting ref clock does not completely reset everything...just vcore vdimm mem settings.


Thanks !









ODT is a welcome adition.
AM4 tranning/peak protection, errrr


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ODT is a welcome adition.
> AM4 tranning/peak protection, errrr


ODT 53.3 i recommend as a baseline...up for cold...

Am4 training is normal been there all along. Just now you can change retry counts from 5 to 1 or more if you want to aggravate yourself

Peak protection specified motherboard temps 75c.

Some things i do you should not do.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ODT is a welcome adition.
> AM4 tranning/peak protection, errrr


Training more could be good. Training less is unlikely to ever improve results. Patience is something in short supply on the other side of most monitors...


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Np dont use ocp off btw...its rather a bad thing to do for a real daily rig


keep ocp for daily oc. got it.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> 1.37...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :thumb:
> 
> @Psym4n
> 
> What do you think ?


He thinks i am an idiot for pushing a chip that sux that hard


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Training more could be good. Training less is unlikely to ever improve results. Patience is something in short supply on the other side of most monitors...


In my experience so far the Am4 trainning acting all the time did no good.
Now, patience in my view is more of a matter of perspective as there are no standards to define it. Still, one can always spot the abusive use of it's patience.







: - Not directly directed to you


----------



## chew*

I just looked stupid me...i guess i had the gigabyte @ right volts but wrong speed (3.6)for 81c vrm....must torture again @ 3.9 120 ref clock









Forgot to ryzen master it to 3.9 i guess since bug does not allow multi adjust with ref clock.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Taichi vrm temps video.
> 
> Worst case scenario no fans.
> 
> identical voltages used as were on K7 for comparisons sake.
> 
> https://youtu.be/MZh4ofYAo20
> 
> Next victim prime pro...till my "air end user support c6h" shows up.
> 
> My cold prepped C6H board is compromised for temp comparisons due to conformal coating...


Impressive VRM temps , my Titanium wouldn't be that cool without fans on the VRM heatsinks that's for sure.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> He thinks i am an idiot for pushing a chip that sux that hard


I think he was like. "What t*he* hell is wrong with that equation. let me *think* about it" while the awsner was just in front of him...


----------



## virpz

Okay, gonna update to 2.2.

Wish me luck - the sky is falling and my UPS battery is dead.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Impressive VRM temps , my Titanium wouldn't be that cool without fans on the VRM heatsinks that's for sure.


Yah its not bad at all.

Im impartial in all this i know i have given the msi a hard time but mostly price based is my biggest gripe.

Gigabyte needs to step up there game or something. So far they are doing poorly temp wise.

The next round will surely be interesting...i may have to rma and get my gaming 5 back for my mainstream top 3 picks.

Will be very interesting to see biostar vs giga both having used IR vs the cheaper Asus using TI.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yah its not bad at all.
> 
> Im impartial in all this i know i have given the msi a hard time but mostly price based is my biggest gripe.
> 
> Gigabyte needs to step up there game or something. So far they are doing poorly temp wise.
> 
> The next round will surely be interesting...i may have to rma and get my gaming 5 back for my mainstream top 3 picks.
> 
> Will be very interesting to see biostar vs giga both having used IR vs the cheaper Asus using TI.


I'm very keen on your GT7 results. I've been very pleased with the board thus far, but it will be interesting to see what an experienced extreme overclocker thinks in unvarnished terms ( which we know you'll provide  ).


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> ODT 53.3 i recommend as a baseline...up for cold...
> 
> Am4 training is normal been there all along. Just now you can change retry counts from 5 to 1 or more if you want to aggravate yourself
> 
> Peak protection specified motherboard temps 75c.
> 
> Some things i do you should not do.


I appreciate that.

Don't worry, while I am not extreme/experienced as you i've been doing that for time enough to know not to:

1- Fill my waterloop reservoir with Ice
2- Disable OCP and try suicide runs thinking it will work out because I don't feel like having suicidal tendencies.

My comments were concerning more the utility of those things to me.

By the way, how do you guys like my waterblock ?


----------



## realtomatoes

are those swiftech blocks?


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Taichi vrm temps video.
> 
> Worst case scenario no fans.
> 
> identical voltages used as were on K7 for comparisons sake.
> 
> https://youtu.be/MZh4ofYAo20
> 
> Next victim prime pro...till my "air end user support c6h" shows up.
> 
> My cold prepped C6H board is compromised for temp comparisons due to conformal coating...


Thanks for sharing, this video made me return my K7 and buy a Taichi, impressive VRM temps


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> He thinks i am an idiot for pushing a chip that sux that hard


Actually, I'm wondering if having the ti fets paired in such a case would produce better results than just adding more phases.


----------



## chew*

Guess we can sort of answer that question when i test other boards.

Think asus may have looked into that if you have seen prime pros vcore vrm. 6 blank pads.


----------



## PsyM4n

Maybe it overshadowed the ROG in such a config and they opted not to do it... I will not be surprised if that was actually the case and they've chosen to ditch the dual ti and good coil setup.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Maybe it overshadowed the ROG in such a config and they opted not to do it... I will not be surprised if that was actually the case and they've chosen to ditch the dual ti and good coil setup.


Could be groundwork they laid out on that pcb for a sabertooth also. No clue.


----------



## PsyM4n

Maybe we should ask them...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Maybe we should ask them...


I have them asrock gskill geil corsair all on skype. Rest msi giga via email although seems i am in there spam box currently due to no reply.

Anyway i can ask no clue if they will tell me.


----------



## chew*




----------



## PsyM4n

Now, this will get interesting.


----------



## bardacuda

YAUSS!!


----------



## cssorkinman

If it's like AM3 + my MSI 990 GD - 80 was better than my CHV-Z on limited cooling and for " light benches" or validations, but for protracted stress testing the CHV-Z and UD -5 ( though I hated the bios) had the edge.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Maybe it overshadowed the ROG in such a config and they opted not to do it... I will not be surprised if that was actually the case and they've chosen to ditch the dual ti and good coil setup.


We are talking inductors in the nH range. With 4 to 6 turns of AWG 16 wire around a good iron powder core will put you at 250-300nH with good current capability, reasonable rdc and small package.
Even if ASUS managed to get really cheapo inductors there we are still not talking about Nikos efficiency range.

Also phases are phases only. You don't increase current capability with more phases, you do that by increasing the fets count or by having good efficient fets that enable you to meet the current x temp needs without the need of paying that much airflow over the VRM.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> We are talking inductors in the nH range. With 4 to 6 turns of AWG 16 wire around a good iron powder core will put you at 250-300nH with good current capability, reasonable rdc and small package.
> Even if ASUS managed to get really cheapo inductors there we are still not talking about Nikos efficiency range.
> 
> Also phases are phases only. You don't increase current capability with more phases, you do that by increasing the fets count or by having good efficient fets that enable you to meet the current x temp needs without the need of paying that much airflow over the VRM.


The problem here is that "missing" just a couple of turns is enough to increase resistance slightly... and making the coil increase its temperature exponentially as a result.

All is OK if your coil is already speced for 500-600khz or so. However, if you put the fets into a relatively low load scenario and you already reach into the 70c range at 300khz, you essentially kill any potential they have.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The problem here is that "missing" just a couple of turns is enough to increase resistance slightly... and making the coil increase its temperature exponentially as a result.
> 
> All is OK if your coil is already speced for 500-600khz or so. However, if you put the fets into a relatively low load scenario and you already reach into the 70c range at 300khz, you essentially kill any potential they have.


So, you are telling me that less wire wounds are going to increase the coils resistance ?


----------



## PsyM4n

If you make it thin enough.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The problem here is that "missing" just a couple of turns is enough to increase resistance slightly... and making the coil increase its temperature exponentially as a result.


.... How less turns are going to *increase* resistance ?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> .... How less turns are going to increase resistance ?


The more you keep bugging me, the more I will be messing with you. Just in case you haven't noticed yet.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The more you keep bugging me, the more I will be messing with you. Just in case you haven't noticed yet.


The most intriguing question is:
Why would you keep on trying to discuss things that you had proven ( over and over, and over ) to have absolute *zero* clues about ?


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> The most intriguing question is:
> Why would you keep on trying to discuss things that you had proven ( over and over, and over ) to have absolute *zero* clues about ?


one word - Troll.


----------



## chew*

Ok enough of that....here is something to discuss.

I wonder what the dip switch box was that was removed on release. To the right of the top of the vcore vrm

Also hi c caps on soc pwm...cleaning something up?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> are those swiftech blocks?


Kind. I call it Swiftair block.









@chew*

With the last bios there is no way I can get my ram above 2666MHz, I have had the exact same behavior while updating the Prime Pro to bios 0604. No matter ODT, XMP/manual, step increasing frequency.
Any tips on that ?

Thanks!


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> one word - Troll.


Hey, I'm not the one who tries to fish for responses specifically from one person by writing obviously wrong comments.

If you take a look at the post history in this thread you'll see that my comments are either correct by directly stating something, or open to interpretation by selectively using key words with ambiguous meaning exactly where an answer should be given.


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok enough of that....here is something to discuss.
> 
> I wonder what the dip switch box was that was removed on release. To the right of the top of the vcore vrm
> 
> Also hi c caps on soc pwm...cleaning something up?


this on the MSI? maybe they had more features planned; but the margin - or the sales predictions (both I guess?) were not where they wanted it.
so they had to trim a few item?


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Hey, I'm not the one who tries to fish for responses specifically from one person by writing obviously wrong comments.
> 
> If you take a look at the post history in this thread you'll see that my comments are either correct by directly stating something, or open to interpretation by selectively using key words with ambiguous meaning exactly where an answer should be given.


if the responses are open to interpretation because you are using ambiguous statements - that's paramount to trolling.
the statement is being made, you are purposely using ambiguity to hide the fact that you don't know what you are actually talking about, so you leave it "open to interpretation" so there is no way you could ACTUALLY be wrong.

that is where the issue is - you either know what you are talking about and want to mess with people - so Trolling; OR you don't know what you are talking about, and am proven wrong - but claim ambiguity to not to admit to the truth.

My opinion on this doesn't matter; just explaining what you seem to have missed (see above statement)


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> this on the MSI? maybe they had more features planned; but the margin - or the sales predictions (both I guess?) were not where they wanted it.
> so they had to trim a few item?


@ pwm? I doubt it had to do with features. Possibly switching frequency but literally there are over 8 solder lines. Has to be more than just that.

Im still on way back from jersey...ill snap a pic after i finish eating.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> this on the MSI? maybe they had more features planned; but the margin - or the sales predictions (both I guess?) were not where they wanted it.
> so they had to trim a few item?
> 
> 
> 
> @ pwm? I doubt it had to do with features. Possibly switching frequency but literally there are over 8 solder lines. Has to be more than just that.
Click to expand...

Reference clock settings? Like the DKA 790 GX had?


----------



## drdrache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> @ pwm? I doubt it had to do with features. Possibly switching frequency but literally there are over 8 solder lines. Has to be more than just that.


not sure what switches would do in this situation - i'm not an EE expert







.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Reference clock settings? Like the DKA 790 GX had?


I guess that is very possible...or straps..but pwm side...kinda odd.

1866,2133,2400,2666,2933,3200 and i think there are lower to...1600,1333.

Thats 8...hmm


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *drdrache*
> 
> if the responses are open to interpretation because you are using ambiguous statements - that's paramount to trolling.
> the statement is being made, you are purposely using ambiguity to hide the fact that you don't know what you are actually talking about, so you leave it "open to interpretation" so there is no way you could ACTUALLY be wrong.
> 
> that is where the issue is - you either know what you are talking about and want to mess with people - so Trolling; OR you don't know what you are talking about, and am proven wrong - but claim ambiguity to not to admit to the truth.
> 
> My opinion on this doesn't matter; just explaining what you seem to have missed (see above statement)


You are right that it's my fault too. Guess I'll be a bit more considerate... just a bit.


----------



## chew*

Here you go instead of bickering put your minds to work..

I count way more than 8..


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I guess that is very possible...or straps..but pwm side...kinda odd.
> 
> 1866,2133,2400,2666,2933,3200 and i think there are lower to...1600,1333.
> 
> Thats 8...hmm


or higher? 3600 and up?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Reference clock settings? Like the DKA 790 GX had?
> 
> 
> 
> I guess that is very possible...or straps..but pwm side...kinda odd.
> 
> 1866,2133,2400,2666,2933,3200 and i think there are lower to...1600,1333.
> 
> Thats 8...hmm
Click to expand...

Placement would be odd , that's for sure.


----------



## chew*

16 total dip switch spots basically...numerous resistors mia..solder pads exist.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 16 total dip switch spots basically...numerous resistors mia..solder pads exist.


The traces to such soldering pads are coming from the controller then the solder points then memory VRM ?Nevermind, I got an image of it with the dipswitches

edit: I think it is directly related to giving the user some control over the dLDO of Ryzen's



Do they land in the processors pins ?
Which ?
What these pins do ?


----------



## yendor

@virpz good catch, saw it in other pics but angle sucked.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 16 total dip switch spots basically...numerous resistors mia..solder pads exist.


Would be a tad inconvenient for someone on big air.


----------



## PsyM4n

I haven't seen an msi board with these traces before. Too big for phase leds and the placement says no.

The only thing I can think of that could remotely find its way at that spot was that wide thin capacitor fujitsu made some years ago, and even that should be too wide to fit.


----------



## chew*

There were dip switches there on pre release boards shown pre launch. Bet google can find a pic.


----------



## cssorkinman

We are probably over thinking it.... it's most likely a giant flashing RGB " XFR" light.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> We are probably over thinking it.... it's most likely a giant flashing RGB " XFR" light.


likely for heatsink light.
.
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/msi_ryzen_x370_xpower_gaming_titanium_review/1


----------



## PsyM4n

Maybe it's test pins for the board design interfaces they use.


----------



## chew*

Ahh thats a better angle...
Rgb lights...
Now it makes sense.


----------



## virpz

If someone can find a good picture then we can see the traces going and coming from there. That painting definitely not helping with that.

@yendor

Ahh, too much hope I had


----------



## AlphaC

Alternate theory: 20 pin USB 3.1 header


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Alternate theory: 20 pin USB 3.1 header


Nah, it misses protection fuses/ics.

Plot twist: msi forgot them during the design stage, so the header was ditched.

Notice how the header placement was left out of the equation. I mean, for msi it seems like a fine spot for a usb header.


----------



## chew*

It is an awfull weird spot for anything and very inconvenient placing for anything ocing related.

12 pins each side whatever it was for. Definitely looks like a jumper based dip switch in video.


----------



## yendor

Looks like a button or switch facing vrm? Covers a lot of jumpers .



Did not want it bumped.


----------



## bloot

Gigabyte Aorus X370 Gaming K7 PCB breakdown by Buildzoid




My temps after 1 hour Prime 2.91 custom blend 90% of memory (no vrm direct cooling)


----------



## chew*

Msi unbox no thrills

https://youtu.be/oh0tvWfwmes


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Msi unbox no thrills
> 
> https://youtu.be/oh0tvWfwmes


I can't wait to see you put it through its paces.


----------



## chew*

Your chip is clearly better. The power draw from 1.41 is not linear

Not that your test is not valid by any means..

But its not valid in my comparison because it is not this exact chip swapped from board to board to board.

Make sense?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Msi unbox no thrills
> 
> https://youtu.be/oh0tvWfwmes


You're the man, again!
Looking forward to see how the VRM temps look like above, bellow and inside.


----------



## chew*

Well hw is clearly not reliable for this board.

1,164C peak temps...0 c min


----------



## chew*

Ignore power draw on both( i think its bugged ).....compare avg vcore SOC vdimm vddp. compare cpu temps and vrm temps peak and average.

Then break out the calculators screw the 125C standard and find out the real world efficiency

We can then debate heatsinks but I will only whip out the prime pro with comparatively sized heatsinks to the K7 and throw that completely out the window.......

So the big question is why is K7 or IR3553 sucking so bad temp wise......





As far as the msi goes booting and running 3200 ram is not the same as being stable @ 3200......that's Trident-Z and this is thread drops due to imc/memory.....

will try the flares maybe better luck....


----------



## cssorkinman

4ghz auto vcore LLC 2 1.37 Volts to the ram ( phase management disabled) 3200mhz cl 14 on 2x8gb in sig.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bloot*
> 
> Gigabyte Aorus X370 Gaming K7 PCB breakdown by Buildzoid
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIP_f2DFCzM
> 
> My temps after 1 hour Prime 2.91 custom blend 90% of memory (no vrm direct cooling)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I believe that is an indictment of the heatsink. Anyhow the datasheet for IR3553M suggests there is thermal derating to 25A if you have the operating temp of 75°C and zero airflow and no heatsink. 25 x 6 = 150A.

Your screenshot has about 115A to CPU.


----------



## chew*

Yah...could be heatsink....but what makes the nextfets not need an uber heatsink?

I mean size wise the prime pro vrm sinks are more than comparable and certainly not attached as well..


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 4ghz auto vcore LLC 2 1.37 Volts to the ram ( phase management disabled) 3200mhz cl 14 on 2x8gb in sig


I do not trust any board to control things lol. Its tuneable...im working on it...volts are a last resort. Far more knobs and configurations to try first. I almost have it sorted..

Keep in mind once again..my chip..all silicon is unique.


----------



## cssorkinman

1 hour prime 95 chew's way ( Near as I could figure







) 4 ghz auto vcore LLC 2



20C ambient - fans on both VRM heatsinks no airflow on back of board.

VRM temps haven't went anywhere since the last SS quite a while ago.... going to call it soon.


----------



## Artikbot

The K7/G5 has a small heatsink with no fins on the topside and a plastic shroud covering most openings.

Any hope for airflow is sticking a fan at one end of the heatsink.

Thermals-wise? Appalling decision.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 4ghz auto vcore LLC 2 1.37 Volts to the ram ( phase management disabled) 3200mhz cl 14 on 2x8gb in sig
> 
> 
> 
> I do not trust any board to control things lol. Its tuneable...im working on it...volts are a last resort. Far more knobs and configurations to try first. I almost have it sorted..
> 
> Keep in mind once again..my chip..all silicon is unique.
Click to expand...

It reports a maximum of about 1.38 volts with that configuration on my chip, but as you said every chip is different and mine is a higher bin for a reason.

I did have some trouble getting 3200 mhz completely stable in the hardest tests such as IBT maximum and p 95 the way you like to set it up. Disabling dram phase management seems to have helped.


----------



## chew*

Oh and now i am starting to wonder....the taichi i killed ocp.

The k7 has no option.

The msi i have set optimized vs auto..

Both the msi and taichi far exceeding giga.

Was it throttling back?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Well hw is clearly not reliable for this board.
> 
> 1,164C peak temps...0 c min


Looks perfectly normal for fan speed...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ignore power draw on both( i think its bugged ).....compare avg vcore SOC vdimm vddp. compare cpu temps and vrm temps peak and average.
> 
> Then break out the calculators screw the 125C standard and find out the real world efficiency
> 
> We can then debate heatsinks but I will only whip out the prime pro with comparatively sized heatsinks to the K7 and throw that completely out the window.......
> 
> So the big question is why is K7 or IR3553 sucking so bad temp wise......
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As far as the msi goes booting and running 3200 ram is not the same as being stable @ 3200......that's Trident-Z and this is thread drops due to imc/memory.....
> 
> will try the flares maybe better luck....
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Switching frequency has been punted around as a reason for temp and power consumption differences.

If memory serves you were wondering bout switching with that gigabyte 5 board before it distracted you


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yah...could be heatsink....but what makes the nextfets not need an uber heatsink?
> 
> I mean size wise the prime pro vrm sinks are more than comparable and certainly not attached as well..


The empty space in the middle of the heat sink where the heatpipe should be is completely stupid.









Air is a good thermal insulator.

It would be interesting if someone spent $10-20 on Alphacool aluminum heatsinks or Enzotech copper mosfet heatsinks and then found the difference in temps without airflow.

P.S. where is buildzoid seeing voltage read points on the k7?


----------



## Artikbot

Could be. I suppose the only way is by ensuring cooling is not a limiting factor, then trying again.

I have decent thermal pads somewhere in the workshop. It might be worth a try next time it is due for maintenance (not soon).


----------



## chew*

Seems manual i need to figure something out...if i go xmp and 60 ODT currently it has gotten pretty far along.

Like i said i am close to sorting it out.

Plug and play was not happening though with this imc.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The empty space in the middle of the heat sink where the heatpipe should be is completely stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Air is a good thermal insulator.
> 
> It would be interesting if someone spent $10-20 on Alphacool aluminum heatsinks or Enzotech copper mosfet heatsinks and then found the difference in temps without airflow.
> 
> P.S. where is buildzoid seeing voltage read points on the k7?


They are labeleled coupon or something like that top of dimm slots. Gigabyte has been doing that for a long time.


----------



## AlphaC

these?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Looks perfectly normal for fan speed...
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> Switching frequency has been punted around as a reason for temp and power consumption differences.
> 
> If memory serves you were wondering bout switching with that gigabyte 5 board before it distracted you


Yah gigabyte has no switching frequency option in bios. I requested it....still not there. Also needs ocp...

Or i break out the soldering iron...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 
> 
> these?


Yah those 4 little dots..


----------



## AlphaC

They couldn't label them V_Core , etc?









CH VI Hero has them all labeled like older Intel based Gigabyte boards









It lists from left to right:
SB
1.8_PLL
VDDP
DRAM
NB_SOC
VCORE


----------



## chew*

Yah but that ground is in lala land. I dont trust it at least for vcore and soc


----------



## AlphaC

I couldn't find anything in the Gigabyte X370 K7 manual about which voltages the coupons are for... any idea? They ought to add that into the manual. The people with K7 over in that thread could probably put it in the OP.


----------



## cssorkinman

Patience ran out


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Included a cool down pic , the heatsinks are very good.


----------



## chew*

Ok so like the other boards vr T1/2 i think is completely bunk...

I will let it run 3 hours if it passes then onto the IR to confirm and dmm to confirm volts in video.

What i think is VRM temps is Aux/System.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok so like the other boards vr T1/2 i think is completely bunk...
> 
> I will let it run 3 hours if it passes then onto the IR to confirm and dmm to confirm volts in video.
> 
> What i think is VRM temps is Aux/System.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


vr t1/2

two phase vrm for ram?

but 60 + .. eh.. flir's of dubious value did show two phase vrm for other board appearing that hot.

Dimms themselves at considerably less.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> vr t1/2
> 
> two phase vrm for ram?
> 
> but 60 + .. eh.. flir's of dubious value did show two phase vrm for other board appearing that hot.
> 
> Dimms themselves at considerably less.


Doubt that is memory vrm. Im seeing 46c there right now with IR vr t1/2 59c/58c in fictional monitor.

You can get awesome readings off the nice silver reflective cover over SB and VRM sinks...be careful not to hit the black dull part of sink....reality check...

Hoping the paint itself on board does not interfere with readings...black tape to the rescue..

1 hour left then its board flipping time...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok so like the other boards vr T1/2 i think is completely bunk...
> 
> I will let it run 3 hours if it passes then onto the IR to confirm and dmm to confirm volts in video.
> 
> What i think is VRM temps is Aux/System.


That's either socket or cpu temp without the offset.

I've played around with the airflow over the heatsinks to know that VR 1 in the top window is for cpu and the VR 2 is the VRM for the Ram.


----------



## chew*

Or you effectively cooled the sensor.

Highly doubt my IR is 10c off and we have already verified it is not. Less somehow the fet is internal 11c different than the top of the fet...

48c hottest fet (component in memory vrm) at memory 60c hw monitor. Not buying it...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Or you effectively cooled the sensor.
> 
> Highly doubt my IR is 10c off and we have already verified it is not. Less somehow the fet is internal 11c different than the top of the fet...


Hwinfo has been a little wonky for you compared to my rig - are you running w7 on the titanium?


----------



## chew*

Nope win 10 for end user support.

My win 7 stuff is for benching only.

Im not worried about memory vrm it seems cool enough stressing this hard.

Real temps lower who can complain lol.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Nope win 10 for end user support.
> 
> My win 7 stuff is for benching only.
> 
> Im not worried about memory vrm it seems cool enough stressing this hard.
> 
> Real temps lower who can complain lol.


Ah ok.

I hope you get around to figuring out what the best timings you can get at 3200 mhz on the Titanium - I could use the tips.

I've managed to get 12 12 12 at 2933 mhz 2x8 but haven't gotten better than 14 14 14 @ 3200


----------



## chew*

That is easy you need to give b die voltage.

Anyway...

Look at this...and i think my question may be answered as far as prime pro..

Must get a glimpse under the hood...i think this is pros pcb..and possibly an ICS chip i spot...

https://m.cclonline.com/product/232777/90MB0UI0-M0IAY0/Motherboards/ASUS-ROG-STRIX-X370-F-GAMING-Socket-AM4-ATX-Motherboard/MBD2163/

B 350 looks like it might have got some loving to..no ICS but it has much better heatsinks than current b350

https://m.cclonline.com/product/232776/90MB0UJ0-M0AAY0/Motherboards/ASUS-ROG-STRIX-B350-F-GAMING-Socket-AM4-ATX-Motherboard/MBD2162/


----------



## ozlay

Strix B350-F Gaming





Strix X370-F Gaming


----------



## Artikbot

That Strix 370 looks pretty...


----------



## ozlay

I wonder if that Strix B350-F Gaming is 4+4 or 6+2









Strix X370-F Gaming looks like 6+2 ?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ozlay*
> 
> I wonder if that Strix B350-F Gaming is 4+4 or 6+2


It doesn't make sense to be 4+4 (unless it's a complete con and they're running 4+2 PWM with doubled SOC) and I doubt it is 5+3 ... the SOC is minimal amperage unless you are running an iGPU.









If it's 6+2 it might not have a doubled low side (the B350 Prime Plus has a doubled low side), stay focused on that too. The H270-F and Z270-F have 9 and 10 chokes respectively while this B350-F has 8.

4+2 with doubled low side & SOC high side would be 4 high side fets for CPU V_core + 4 SOC high side fets + 8 low side fets for CPU V_Core + 4 SOC low side fets = total 20 mosfets.
6+2 with no doubled low side but doubled SOC low side would be 6 high side fets for CPU V_Core + 2 SOC high side fets + 6 low side fets for CPU V_Core + 4 SOC Low side fets = total 18 mosfets , a cost savings

Then again they could pull Asrock's B350 shenanigans , with 3 phases doubled up to 6 and improperly (via doubled components but no phase interleave).

----

I did a rough estimation for 110A and 1.4V it seems a true 6 phase solution with 4C09N high side and 4C06N low side (no doubling) would have about 21W power loss. This calculation includes: Losses P_sw high side , Losses Q_rr (Reverse recovery power) low side , Losses P_cond High Side , Losses P_cond Low Side , deadtime Losses - low side , Gate drive losses (Q_G losses), negligible Output capacitance loss- high side / low side. The X370 Prime Pro with 6 NexFETS at 500KHz instead of 300kHz f_sw has less losses than that (about 17W).

The Asrock X370 K4 with SM4337+SM4337 and MSI (a bunch of them including B350 Pro Carbon) 4 phases with 2 mosfets per phase I'm getting higher than that (about 28-30W). Of course the SM4336/SM4337 , PK616/PK632 datasheets are worthless since the V_GS=4.5V dynamic values simply aren't listed so don't take these rough calculations as pure fact , reality is higher losses than that likely. You also have to account for junction temp : 60°C = 1.2X the RDS(on) for conduction losses, 75°C = 1.3X the RDS(on) for conduction losses , which would give you an additional 5W or so for the whole CPU VRM for the MSI boards and about 7W or so extra for the Asrock X370 K4.


----------



## PsyM4n

A 1plus2 fet config for two phases is close to worthless, so I'm guessing it's 2plus2.


----------



## chew*

I have a high res shot. The strix x370 is definitely using x370 prime pro "base" pcb layout.

It sure looks like that is indeed an ICS chip. Its using the identical memory vrm as prime pro.

I want to see whats under the vcore vrm...did they just add a better sink with heatpipe or double up on fets as well...


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have a high res show. The strix x370 is definitely using x370 prime pro "base" pcb layout.
> 
> It sure looks like that is indeed an ICS chip. Its using the identical memory vrm as prime pro.
> 
> I want to see whats under the vcore vrm...did they just add a better sink with heatpipe or double up on fets as well...


If they doubled on mosfets at the CPU V_core then it's a bargain but I highly doubt it given that the CH VI Hero has 8 NexFETs for CPU V_core (4 doubled). 6 more mosfets at ~$2 each costs them $12 in parts so it's possible but highly unlikely. The ~$20 MSRP difference I'm guessing is from the better board quality in non-VRM items such as proper audio EMI shielding.


----------



## chew*

The ground work was already done....i think they left themselves options for future proofing.


----------



## AlphaC

The problem is product positioning , can you imagine the backlash from launch day CH VI owners?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The problem is product positioning , can you imagine the backlash from launch day CH VI owners?


Oohh for certain...

Honestly have not looked under that sink...maybe it has this to..

In other news.

MSI video vrm vcore readings etc

https://youtu.be/E9yook-cIcA

System temp = VRM peak/avg confirmed.

71c peak 61c? avg ( check video correction 64.4c avg ) in worst case scenario no air gap behind board no fan on vrm.

Board should be fine for anyone running air/water with even the worst airflow..

I will rerun prime for a minimum 6 hours and post up a screen since i knocked out system live on camera ....ooops.

Highlight = me slipping with dmm knocking out system...cpu still kicking...tough little dud refuses to die..


----------



## AlphaC

It might be because the NCT6795 is different to the other SuperIO. On github and on other places

Quick google search shows this https://github.com/openhardwaremonitor/openhardwaremonitor/issues/926


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Oohh for certain...
> 
> Honestly have not looked under that sink...maybe it has this to..
> 
> In other news.
> 
> MSI video vrm vcore readings etc
> 
> https://youtu.be/E9yook-cIcA
> 
> System temp = VRM peak/avg confirmed.
> 
> 71c peak 61c? avg ( check video) in worst case scenario no air gap behind board no fan on vrm.
> 
> Board should be fine for anyone running air/water with even the worst airflow..
> 
> I will rerun prime for a minimum 6 hours and post up a screen since i knocked out system live on camera ....ooops.
> 
> Highlight = me slipping with dmm knocking out system...cpu still kicking...tough little dud refuses to die..


See? I've been telling you it's a good board for pages! Low temps, user error protection, it only doesn't make coffee. Maybe the unoccupied spot near the cpu was for a coffee machine module.


----------



## chew*

Just realized my meter was shadowed out in video...not looking forward to reprobing this board with the dmm again

@ psyman...if it came with the coffee machine....maybe worth $300. Can not resist coffee.

They need vddp...it really helps with imc/memory.

Flagship board should not need fine tuning to run rated speed/volts but ill post settings up later.

I got it sorted without the need for 1.37 vdimm now.

I will explain what voltages are what in next video..


----------



## PsyM4n

Yeah the price point is big issue. No arguments there.

As if they couldn't just put the fairchild drmos they use instead and keep everyone happy. MSI always has some way to mess things up.


----------



## AlphaC

Any idea what switching frequency the Xpower uses out of the box? AFAIK you can adjust it.

Would be interesting to see 300kHz (similar to every board) vs 400kHz (IR3553/IR3555) vs 500kHz (what the NexFETs quote).


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Just realized my meter was shadowed out in video...not looking forward to reprobing this board with the dmm again


It's ok sparky , I'll take your word on the voltages, thanks for the video.

Voltage at the socket was very close to the bios settings yes?

Curious differences in temps between your HWINFO and mine though - I'll have to do some more snooping. My version of HWINFO labels SOC cpu-nb just as the msi bio does was one difference I noticed. The VR 1 and VR 2 temps are never that close together on mine.


----------



## chew*

I see no vrm switching but i will recheck maybe i overlooked it.

Im on latest hwmonitor so no clue.

My temps should be worse than yours. No airgap benching on a box is actually worse than a case if not actively cooling. Just flipping board on its side alone can change results by 2c better.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Any idea what switching frequency the Xpower uses out of the box? AFAIK you can adjust it.
> 
> Would be interesting to see 300kHz (similar to every board) vs 400kHz (IR3553/IR3555) vs 500kHz (what the NexFETs quote).


Adjustments


----------



## PsyM4n

I wonder how long will the high fets last at 1000khz


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> I wonder how long will the high fets last at 1000khz


Heh, I'm in no hurry to find out.

I'm going to assume they default to the lowest setting, but I don't know for sure.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> I wonder how long will the high fets last at 1000khz


switching frequency isn't squared for losses, unlike current output

The MSI board may be allowing 1 MHz f_sw for waterblocks / LN2 , but the IR35201 PWM is the one driving that.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Heh, I'm in no hurry to find out.
> 
> I'm going to assume they default to the lowest setting, but I don't know for sure.


Higher is cleaner. Do not think it would hurt on vdimm or soc









Less vdimm needed


----------



## PsyM4n

Well,
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> switching frequency isn't squared for losses, unlike current output
> 
> The MSI board may be allowing 1 MHz f_sw for waterblocks / LN2 , but the IR35201 PWM is the one driving that.


Actually, with a high pressure pump and a big radiator it might be a viable option.


----------



## Alastair

So how good is the X370 Prime Pro really? I really like the looks of the Pro. It really looks like the spiritual successor to my M5A99FX Pro. It's got what appear to be functional heatsinks with fins and stuff. Not like what appear to be hunks of metal like CH6, and Gigabyte boards. And it also doesn't have the IO shroud/shield thing which I honestly think are GHASTLY. Can someone please explain to me what the purpose is of these IO shroud shield thing are besides being a fantastic way of trapping in heat?

I can't really zoom in on the Strix 370 pics. Can anyone give me an idea on what those heatsinks are like? They don't look very "finny" to me. But I like the fact that it looks like it might have power delivery a bit better than the pro.

I guess what I am asking is. What is THE undisputed champion of the mid level AX370 boards? I've been recommending the Pro to my friends. And I'm starting to do my research in preparation for a new build next year.


----------



## AlphaC

~ $160 X370 Prime Pro is using the NexFETs the CHVI Hero / Taichi use. It just has less of them (6 vs 8 on CH VI Hero or 12 on Taichi).

It doesn't have OC features such as ref clock gen, Debug LED, V-check points, etc but it's a solid midrange board in just about every continent if you're not into RGB everything (Gigabyte boards).

The MSI X370 Pro Carbon uses NIKOs PK616/PK632 mosfets that are the same configuration as the B350 Pro Carbon board / X370 SLI PLUS / X370 Krait Gaming. MSI is only using ALC1220 in the Pro Carbon (and Xpower which isn't midrange by any stretch of the imagination) so I wouldn't look at the other boards. Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 is a large step down from Asrock X370 Taichi in power delivery & a crapshoot as to what you get under the heatsink. All of those have their own downsides.

The B350 Pro Carbon is essentially MSI X370 Pro Carbon without the 2nd M.2 and comes with B350 chipset. It's $135 though.

The Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 is about 20% pricier than the X370 Prime Pro but has IR3553 (minutely more efficient due to integrated driver) and OC features such as power/reset button , Debug LED, thermistor header ,etc. The K7 is a bit more than that , with ref clock, and is close to Taichi pricing in North America so it isn't as good a value if you aren't looking to RGB everything.

Asrock's Taichi is sold out everywhere but if you get one for < $200 it's a good value especially if you require a second M.2 slot and/or wifi+BT. Top tier VRM, solid audio, etc.

The Biostar X370 GT7 is a good value at ~ $180 if you can withstand the lack of BCLK gen but it lacks Intel LAN (important to some people). Other than that I can't think of anything really standing out , maybe the audio isn't as filtered/amplified but relative to X370 Prime Pro this should not be an issue.

If you can wait I'd wait to see what the Asus B350-F STRIX / X370-F brings to the table.


----------



## PsyM4n

Essentially, a biostar x370gt7, an asrock x370 Gaming k4 or x370 killer are better choices near that price range.

Edit: Never mind the asrock ones. No 1plus2 config. Do not get.


----------



## Alastair

The Biostar GT7 isn't available in my country. Otherwise that would probably be at the top of my to get list. I was actually curious as to how good the MSI SLI plus was. It also at least appeared to have functional heatsinks and less RGB cancer.

I've spent the entire evening going from page 1 right through till my post.









From what Chew has uncovered. The Gigas don't seem to be all that great as they get quite warm. Useless heatsinks?

The X370 pro certainly seems solid. I'm only buying next year at Ryzen 2 X470. But at least the current crop of boars should be an indication on what next year offers me.


----------



## br0da

@chew*: Isn't your DMM able to measure frequency?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alastair*
> 
> The Biostar GT7 isn't available in my country. Otherwise that would probably be at the top of my to get list. I was actually curious as to how good the MSI SLI plus was. It also at least appeared to have functional heatsinks and less RGB cancer.
> 
> I've spent the entire threading going from page 1 right through till my post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what Chew has uncovered. The Gigas don't seem to be all that great as they get quite warm. Useless heatsinks?
> 
> The X370 pro certainly seems solid. I'm only buying next year at Ryzen 2 X470. But at least the current crop of boars should be an indication on what next year offers me.


Problem with Gigabyte X370 boards is either cheap VRM (K3/K5) or heatsinks with corners insides cut (Gaming 5/K7).

The thing to remember with MSI's SLI Plus is while the VRM is similar (to the Pro Carbon/Krait Gaming) the black capacitors with supposedly 10K hour rating are dropped to 5K hours normal style. Compared to the X370 Prime Pro it also has less total capacitance. In addition it lacks ALC1220 , opting for ALC892 without EMI shielding while also dropping the Intel LAN from the X370 Pro Carbon. The M.2 slot is under the GPU as well.

These 3 factors would compel me to spend an extra $20 on the X370 Prime Pro : VRM + audio + board layout.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I did a rough estimation for 110A and 1.4V [...]. This calculation includes: Losses P_sw high side , Losses Q_rr (Reverse recovery power) low side , Losses P_cond High Side , Losses P_cond Low Side , deadtime Losses - low side , Gate drive losses (Q_G losses), negligible Output capacitance loss- high side / low side.


This isn't rough at all.








E.g. even Buildzoid is only including switching- and on-state-losses of all FETs in his calculations.
I'm quite curious about your deadtime losses, how do you get to know how long the deadtime will be in the specific design you are caluclating losses for?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> This isn't rough at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E.g. even Buildzoid is only including switching- and on-state-losses of all FETs in his calculations.
> I'm quite curious about your deadtime losses, how do you get to know how long the deadtime will be in the specific design you are caluclating losses for?


It's rough enough because I have no clue if it's completely accurate.









t_deadtime is approximated by t_delay_rise and t_delay_fall.

P_DIODE = t_DEADTIME •F_SW • V_F •I_OUT

V_F = forward voltage from specsheet

EDIT: https://www.fairchildsemi.com/application-notes/AN/AN-6005.pdf & www.ti.com/lit/an/slyt664/slyt664.pdf


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alastair*
> 
> The Biostar GT7 isn't available in my country. Otherwise that would probably be at the top of my to get list. I was actually curious as to how good the MSI SLI plus was. It also at least appeared to have functional heatsinks and less RGB cancer.
> 
> I've spent the entire evening going from page 1 right through till my post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what Chew has uncovered. The Gigas don't seem to be all that great as they get quite warm. Useless heatsinks?
> 
> The X370 pro certainly seems solid. I'm only buying next year at Ryzen 2 X470. But at least the current crop of boars should be an indication on what next year offers me.


The IR fets on the gigabyte g5 and k7 boards are very similar in characteristics to the TI fets on the asus prime and hero boards. This specific kind of fets really shine in pairs. They are not all that great performers when single though (still better than the typical 1plus1 powerpacks). Even the asus hero would probably reach a dead-end if we had processors with higher overclocking headroom.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's rough enough because I have no clue if it's completely accurate.


The datasheet of the CSD87350 is pretty awesome to check if such calculators are accurate since there is a graph for the power loss at conditions you can set for your calculator and there are all the informations about both FETs.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> t_deadtime is approximated by t_delay_rise and t_delay_fall.


Ah ok, your are still just calculating FET losses and not including losses caused by the delay of the controller or driver.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> @Chew*: Isn't your DMM able to measure frequency?


Maybe but i have nothing to compare it with accuracy wise atm. I trust the voltages i see on it for this stuff since i have verified it but thats about it.

Although...come to think of it...if i change frequency on a board that allows it and i get correct values....hmmmm that could work...

Guess the msi is going to get poked and prodded some more









I should actually just go to sears buy a decent true rms craftsman dmm tonight...my service van wants this meter back anyway.

Grab some damn needle points to so i don't kill a board or cpu...


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's rough enough because I have no clue if it's completely accurate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> t_deadtime is approximated by t_delay_rise and t_delay_fall.
> 
> P_DIODE = t_DEADTIME •F_SW • V_F •I_OUT
> 
> V_F = forward voltage from specsheet
> 
> EDIT: https://www.fairchildsemi.com/application-notes/AN/AN-6005.pdf & www.ti.com/lit/an/slyt664/slyt664.pdf


I'd suggest to put the docs away for a bit and concentrate on asking yourself some questions:

Do the physical characteristics of various packages affect their performance? Why? Check -> IR3553/NEXFET vs IR3550/IR3555/DRMOS vs independent fets.

Why adding second low fet increases performance so much while high count remains the same? Maybe it's duty cycle related? What if the phase count was <=2?

There's no reason to even go into calculations to understand some things. Not only that, your calculation result accuracy will increase exponentially after that. I mean dead-on accuracy.

PS: When doing some kind of hard to believe claims a few pages back, I sorta cheated in a related way.


----------



## chew*

I personally am not an expert at this stuff but i have used and seen designs long enough to know what goes pop.

Then there are curve balls...

Like why is prime pro running cool while giga runs crazy hot with comparable designs fets and heatsink mass.

Sometimes its as simple as some companies hit or miss in a product cycle and nothing you do on paper can explain those misses.

I think i am going to check gigas switching frequency though...400k?

All hope is lost..

1000k still can be saved.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> I'd suggest to put the docs away for a bit and concentrate on asking yourself some questions:
> 
> Do the physical characteristics of various packages affect their performance? Why? Check -> IR3553/NEXFET vs IR3550/IR3555/DRMOS vs independent fets.
> 
> Why adding second low fet increases performance so much while high count remains the same? Maybe it's duty cycle related? What if the phase count was <=2?
> 
> There's no reason to even go into calculations to understand some things. Not only that, your calculation result accuracy will increase exponentially after that. I mean dead-on accuracy.
> 
> PS: When doing some kind of hard to believe claims a few pages back, I sorta cheated in a related way.


It's easy to see why low side is doubled. When you add a second low side fet you halve RDs(on) for low side conduction loss. This is the dominant loss for the low side.

When you double the high side (without adding a phase) it halves current being output by each high side fet but since you have two of them it won't halve the power loss.
High side switching loss:
P_sw = 0.5*(V_in*I_out)*f_sw*(t_r+t_f)

No matter how you cut it, whether you halve the current or halve the power loss, it's the same.

Due to duty cycle being low (normally 1.2 or 1.4 over 12V , so about 11%) doubling the high side without an additional PWM phase results in half the RDs(on) you don't halve current per phase (current is squared). The dominant loss for high side fet is switching loss not conduction loss.
P_cond_highside= I_out^2*(*0.5**R_DS(on),HS)*D
if you had double the PWM phases it would be P_cond_highside= (*0.5**I_out)^2*(R_DS(on),HS)*D

When I say I have "no clue if it's completely accurate" it's because Sinopower / NIKOS datasheets are garbage. The forward voltage provided is based on duty cycle of 2% ; rise time and fall times are only provided for V_GS=10V.

For IR PowIRStages the driver losses are included in the design procedure and Schottky diode loss isn't applicable since it is integrated into the package (along with driver).
For NexFETs the dynamic characteristics @ V_GS =4.5V are superior to the other mosfets at V_GS=10V let alone V_GS=4.5V. That's why in terms of low side losses it doesn't benefit as much.


----------



## chew*

Here you go cosorkinman.

quick sum up benches look roughly on par for a non ref clock board @ 3.9

Ran out of room to fit more benches on screen..

Aida read write a tad low..makes up for it in latency.
Its a common trend I see across vendors

Settings in a small window.

B die is pretty tough.

You won't hurt it on AMD.

No hassle booted right up. Doubt its prime stable. Call it bench stable.

32m pi ran and passed so thats fairly stable imc/memory wise without using maxxmem.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Here you go cosorkinman.
> 
> quick sum up benches look roughly on par for a non ref clock board @ 3.9
> 
> Ran out of room to fit more benches on screen..
> 
> Aida read write a tad low..makes up for it in latency.
> Its a common trend I see across vendors
> 
> Settings in a small window.
> 
> B die is pretty tough.
> 
> You won't hurt it on AMD.
> 
> No hassle booted right up. Doubt its prime stable. Call it bench stable.
> 
> 32m pi ran and passed so thats fairly stable imc/memory wise without using maxxmem.


Outstanding! - nice latency on AIDA , best I've managed was a 69 + 1 rep Thanks!


----------



## AlphaC

I was thinking about the chokes on the X370 Prime Pro.

Just got a thought. If you can measure resistance across inductor, you can get equivalent series resistance. In turn, ESR x I_out^2 = power lost through inductor

http://www.richtek.com/en/Design%20Support/Technical%20Document/AN005
no idea on material so this doesn't apply:
Quote:


> The calculated and/or measured core loss is often directly provided by the inductor supplier. If not, a formula can be used to calculate the core loss as bellow :
> 
> 
> 
> The PL is the power loss (mW),
> 
> Fsw : operating frequency
> 
> B : peak flux desity in Gauss
> 
> Ve : effective core volume
> 
> The specific value of C, X and Y are core loss parameters for each material


The people at Richtek don't proofread. The technical document is misspelled, it should be "peak flux density"

...
It could just be that NexFETs are running at higher frequency such as 500kHz (vs 300kHz of other mosfets) so higher f_sw gets them hotter


----------



## Nighthog

Seems someone burned their lower tier MSI Nikos board with a overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 @ 4.0Ghz 1.472V. MSI B350 Tomahawk.
Didn't cool their VRM properly doing BOINC.
Though I wonder if that was the clock used when it burned.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1628508/official-ryzen-5-1600x-1600-1500x-1400-owners-club/340#post_26073929


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Maybe it's duty cycle related?


Duty cycle is only affected by Vin and Vout, nothing else.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> What if the phase count was <=2?


Too much current needs to be push through each phase. Losses for the whole converter will be higher than losses with three or more phases.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> There's no reason to even go into calculations to understand some things.


Calculations can help you unterstand those things.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> P_sw = 0.5*(V_in*I_out)*f_sw*(t_r+t_f)


I think it should be 0.25 instead of 0.5 in there, shouldn't it?
I can't find this formula in the PDFs you've linked but I'm refering to these formulas: https://www.mikrocontroller.net/articles/FET#Schalt-Verluste
By bringing them together you'll get the bottom one of these: https://img.tweakpc.de/images/2017/05/01/losses.jpg
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> For NexFETs the dynamic characteristics @ V_GS =4.5V are superior to the other mosfets at V_GS=10V let alone V_GS=4.5V. That's why in terms of low side losses it doesn't benefit as much.


It isn't as unrealistic as it seems since the NexFETs are designed for being driven at 4.5V VGS so most likely ASUS is driving them at 4.5V VGS.
The NIKO FETs on the MSI board e.g. are driven by Richtek hardware that is able to drive those FETs at 12V VGS and because the FETs do perform the best @12V VGS most likely MSI is driving those FETs @12V VGS.
We'd need someone to confirm that by checking the hardware but I'd expect the MSI boards to be driven @12V VGS and the ASUS boards with NexFETs @5V VGS.


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> We'd need someone to confirm that by checking the hardware but I'd expect the MSI boards to be driven @12V VGS and the ASUS boards with NexFETs @5V VGS.


newb question: what's the benefit of driving with a 12V or a 5V?


----------



## br0da

Usually lower on-state resistance and lower rise- / fall times.
Take the 4C06N as an example:

Max RDS(on) @VGS=4.5V: 6.0 mOhm
Max RDS(on) @VGS=10V: 4.0 mOhm

Typical Rise + Fall Time @VGS=4.5V: 37.0 ns
Typical Rise + Fall Time @VGS=10V: 31.0 ns


----------



## chew*

Set the cpu fan on "tolerable" overnight.

final conclusion.

VRM active cooling optional and not necessary but recommended. I would prefer to be sub 60c

peak 73c avg 65c

Highlighted what we confirmed to match IR reading as mosfet temps



So far we end up with this.

Keep in mind that we have seen on various boards peak is literally peak temp of hottest part of vrm and they all seem to have hotter spots and cooler spots.

Taichi 55c peak 50c avg 5C delta
Titanium 73c peak 65c avg 8c delta
Gigabyte k7 93c peak 80c avg 13c delta


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Set the cpu fan on "tolerable" overnight.
> 
> final conclusion.
> 
> VRM active cooling optional and not necessary but recommended. I would prefer to be sub 60c
> 
> peak 73c avg 65c
> 
> Highlighted what we confirmed to match IR reading as mosfet temps
> 
> So far we end up with this.
> 
> Keep in mind that we have seen on various boards peak is literally peak temp of hottest part of vrm and they all seem to have hotter spots and cooler spots.
> 
> Taichi 55c peak 50c avg 5C delta
> Titanium 73c peak 65c avg 8c delta
> Gigabyte k7 93c peak 80c avg 13c delta


Interesting it seems all the Gigabyte boards are running the hottest out of everybody so far. My Gigabyte Gaming 3 mATX hits 84C on VCORE VRM without active cooling with Prime95 (the version on thier forums that fixes AVX for Ryzen) and that is at 3.7ghz boost speed. I have yet to see SOC VRM hit 50C


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Duty cycle is only affected by Vin and Vout, nothing else.
> Too much current needs to be push through each phase. Losses for the whole converter will be higher than losses with three or more phases.
> Calculations can help you unterstand those things.
> I think it should be 0.25 instead of 0.5 in there, shouldn't it?
> I can't find this formula in the PDFs you've linked but I'm refering to these formulas: https://www.mikrocontroller.net/articles/FET#Schalt-Verluste
> By bringing them together you'll get the bottom one of these: https://img.tweakpc.de/images/2017/05/01/losses.jpg
> It isn't as unrealistic as it seems since the NexFETs are designed for being driven at 4.5V VGS so most likely ASUS is driving them at 4.5V VGS.
> The NIKO FETs on the MSI board e.g. are driven by Richtek hardware that is able to drive those FETs at 12V VGS and because the FETs do perform the best @12V VGS most likely MSI is driving those FETs @12V VGS.
> We'd need someone to confirm that by checking the hardware but I'd expect the MSI boards to be driven @12V VGS and the ASUS boards with NexFETs @5V VGS.


@ br0da I checked it on the methodology. Keep in mind it is f_sw not the switching time "T".

 from AN-6005

also same in http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/AppNotes/01471A.pdf

and http://rohmfs.rohm.com/en/products/databook/applinote/ic/power/switching_regulator/power_loss_appli-e.pdf



and http://www.electronicdesign.com/power/fundamentals-buck-converter-efficiency


Sometimes those wiki type sites have mistakes so I try to use multiple sources.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zhany*
> 
> Interesting it seems all the Gigabyte boards are running the hottest out of everybody so far. My Gigabyte Gaming 3 mATX hits 84C on VCORE VRM without active cooling with Prime95 (the version on thier forums that fixes AVX for Ryzen) and that is at 3.7ghz boost speed. I have yet to see SOC VRM hit 50C


My board averaged about 65c running p95 blend test after about an hour. Chip was at 4Ghz 1.4v. I guess temp varies on location and the chip.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> @ br0da I checked it on the methodology. Keep in mind it is f_sw not the switching time "T".


Yepp I noticed that and just went through a calculation to check if the formulas come to the same result - they don't:

So I thought it was just a typo in your post but you're definetly right, the document from On Semi is telling you to just divide by half. I think I'll have to doublecheck my source.
I would always trust someone like On Semi more than the page I've linked but I can't remember any case mikrocontroller.net did such huge mistakes...

Edit: Hadn't seen your edit before posting this, thanks for all the alternative sources! I'll talk to mikrocontroller.net.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> My board averaged about 65c running p95 blend test after about an hour. Chip was at 4Ghz 1.4v. I guess temp varies on location and the chip.


my tests are worst case.

Flaky chip more likely to represent the majority of chips in the wild.....

No air gap behind board. No fans on anything but cpu heatsink so basically a case with 0 airflow.....

realistic ambients @ 74f imagine what it will be like during the summer.

Once again I will point out its the same chip......and that matters a lot compared to anyone else getting anything else on a different chip.

The variables must be kept as close as possible.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Set the cpu fan on "tolerable" overnight.
> 
> final conclusion.
> 
> VRM active cooling optional and not necessary but recommended. I would prefer to be sub 60c
> 
> peak 73c avg 65c
> 
> Highlighted what we confirmed to match IR reading as mosfet temps
> 
> 
> 
> So far we end up with this.
> 
> Keep in mind that we have seen on various boards peak is literally peak temp of hottest part of vrm and they all seem to have hotter spots and cooler spots.
> 
> Taichi 55c peak 50c avg 5C delta
> Titanium 73c peak 65c avg 8c delta
> Gigabyte k7 93c peak 80c avg 13c delta


If you still have the Titanium set up it would be interesting to see what placing fans on different parts of the motherboard do for temps in HWINFO .

Examples :


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Fans on both heatsinks

Fan on just the lower heatsink


----------



## chew*

I have it set up but doing other stuff.

Due to the heatsink design a fan does wonders on the vrm and I highly recommend it.

My temps dropped significantly when I tossed one on the vcore vrm.

Specifically the SYSTEM/AUX temp dropped which btw in a beta is called MOTHERBOARD


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have it set up. but doing other stuff.
> 
> Due to the heatsink design a fan does wonders on the vrm and I highly recommend it.


Ah , no big deal , thanks.

It has as good a heatsink setup as I've had on a board.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> my tests are worst case.
> 
> Flaky chip more likely to represent the majority of chips in the wild.....
> 
> No air gap behind board. No fans on anything but cpu heatsink so basically a case with 0 airflow.....
> 
> realistic ambients @ 74f imagine what it will be like during the summer.
> 
> Once again I will point out its the same chip......and that matters a lot compared to anyone else getting anything else on a different chip.
> 
> The variables must be kept as close as possible.


That's why I love your vids. Same chip and all of the popular x370 boards. Great stuff.


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> realistic ambients @ 74f imagine what it will be like during the summer.


74F... i wish. average ambient temps we got here is between 89-96F.
definitely, taichi for me.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> 74F... i wish. average ambient temps we got here is between 89-96F.
> definitely, taichi for me.


Very soon. I live on second floor and R.I. has high humidity.

No AC in the PC room temps will be getting brutal......


----------



## Zhany

@chew* Are you going to do any testing of the B350 boards if you can get them cheap?


----------



## chew*

Yes.

I am really interested in the strix. With the improved heatsinks it may prove to be a winner.

I have seen a lot of people saying 4 gig 24/7 on b350. I want what they are smoking..

On r5 sure. On r7...puff puff pass me what your smoking because if its not magic smoke...its not realistic.

If i pulled strings i could probably get b350 boards tossed at me for reviews but been there done that. I played that game in the past.

Gave up multi vendor sponsorship to keep my sanity. My own dime causes me less drama.

I will just stick with the help from AMD and the occasional memory sample to test.


----------



## bardacuda

^


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I am really interested in the strix. With the improved heatsinks it may prove to be a winner.
> 
> I have seen a lot of people saying 4 gig 24/7 on b350. I want what they are smoking..
> 
> On r5 sure. On r7...puff puff pass me what your smoking because if its not magic smoke...its not realistic.
> 
> If i pulled strings i could probably get b350 boards tossed at me for reviews but been there done that. I played that game in the past.
> 
> Gave up multi vendor sponsorship to keep my sanity. My own dime causes me less drama.


Lol I got a good chuckle out of that, yeah once I saw my VRM temps under synthetic loads I went hmm welp an overclock is not going to happen realistically in my setup at least, which is fine in my case as I need rock solid stability anyway. I'm tempted to get a Noctua 40mm fan and put it on the VRM heat-sink with some VHB tape.

I think the 4 gig 24/7 on b350 could be ok in terms of power delivery if one can keep the VRM from melting itself, but I agree not really all that realistic.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I am really interested in the strix. With the improved heatsinks it may prove to be a winner.
> 
> I have seen a lot of people saying 4 gig 24/7 on b350. I want what they are smoking..
> 
> On r5 sure. On r7...puff puff pass me what your smoking because if its not magic smoke...its not realistic.
> 
> If i pulled strings i could probably get b350 boards tossed at me for reviews but been there done that. I played that game in the past.
> 
> Gave up multi vendor sponsorship to keep my sanity. My own dime causes me less drama.
> 
> I will just stick with the help from AMD and the occasional memory sample to test.


I can see 4 gig 24/7 on a b350 with no stress testing and gaming only.


----------



## bardacuda

I could see it with a few bucks spent on heatsinks and epoxy (and some air flow)...but you would have to void your warranty....


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> I could see it with a few bucks spent on heatsinks and epoxy...but you would have to void your warranty....


I wouldn't even bother with the b350 boards that don't have heat-sinks unless you are on the 4 core R5


----------



## chew*

My breakdown is this.

Stock on r7 1800x....sure i can see that. AMDs power saving/throttling features should make that viable.

Now knowing that and 1800x is 3.6 24/7 a 24/7 3.6 oc around 1.3v is more than realistic on say a 1700.

Beyond that with current vrms and heatsinks or the lack of... Hell no.

I think alot of vendors are missing the bus on b350.

Would love to see an "impact" overbuilt small form factor on b350 with ref clock.

X370 chipset offers little over b350 for anyone running a single card and add ref clock into the mix dual card is kinda pointless on x370.

B350 is more than capable of 4.1 in short bursts. I have done it and will again once i get back to testing a bios on prime b350 plus.


----------



## bardacuda

Ah didn't realize the gigabyte b350s had heatsinks already. I still don't understand why they run so hot.

I agree about having a well-built B350. I was originally going to go that route. I think most people don't need SLI or a couple USB/SATA ports. Whichever company makes one first could have a huge hit.


----------



## cssorkinman

Huge difference in power demand between running the stock configuration and all cores 4 ghz on my 1800X . From what I see that increase in power demand hits the lower SKU's even harder. Might run contrary to convention but I could easily
see an 1800X being easier to push 3.8 on all cores than one of the other 8 cores.


----------



## chew*

Maybe with a really good chip but you really need to assume everyone has a mediocre chip when making recommendations and assume they will stress test.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Maybe with a really good chip but you really need to assume everyone has a mediocre chip when making recommendations and assume they will stress test.


Just pointing out that once you overclock, all bets are off. Lots of people mistakenly equate TDP with power draw - leading someone to think the 1700 might be easier on a mother board than an 1800X if both were running a mild overclock on all cores.

Like always it will depend on the individual chip, but the binning on the 1800X seems to be pretty tight compared to lesser models.

Over-riding advice for anyone wanting to overclock Don't risk hardware you can't afford to replace, don't risk data that you aren't willing to lose and don't make poor choices when it comes to motherboard, psu or cooling.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Over-riding advice for anyone wanting to overclock Don't risk hardware you can't afford to replace, don't risk data that you aren't willing to lose and don't make poor choices when it comes to motherboard, psu or cooling.


Pretty much that. That's why I advocate the use of fets with integrated thermal shutdown function and recommend not exceeding the maximum specified voltage of the processor to anyone asking me overclocking related questions.

If you feel the need to ask, just don't do it. The end.

I've witnessed quite a few horror stories just because the user didn't know what he was doing.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Ah didn't realize the gigabyte b350s had heatsinks already. I still don't understand why they run so hot.
> 
> I agree about having a well-built B350. I was originally going to go that route. I think most people don't need SLI or a couple USB/SATA ports. Whichever company makes one first could have a huge hit.


The problem for the Gigabyte B350 Gaming 3 is one of the low side is on the back of the board. No matter how efficient it is it needs to be cooled at least by air when you're pushing over 15-20A per phase. If it's on the back of the motherboard the air is more or less stagnant.

----

The Ryzen 7 1800X disables power saving once you overclock. Also the all core turbo is not 4GHz , it's 3.7GHz. It's 4.1GHz for XFR and 4GHz for 2 cores out of 8.




http://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2
Quote:


> First up is the 1800X, which is a 4+4 configuration with a maximum TDP of 95W. One fully loaded core gets 22.6W, and represents the core at its maximum frequency with XFR also enabled. The same thing happens with two cores fully loaded, but at 20.6 W apiece. Moving onto three cores loaded is where XFR is disabled, and we see the drop to 3.7 GHz is saving power, as we only consume +1.33W compared to the two cores loaded situation. Three to four cores, still all on the same CCX, shows a decrease in power per core.
> 
> As we load up the first core of the second CCX, we see an interesting change. The core on CCX-2 has a bigger power allocation than any core in CCX-1. This can be interpreted in two ways: there is more dark silicon around, leading to a higher potential for this core on CCX-2, or that more power is required given the core is on its own. Technically it is still running at the same frequency as the cores on CCX1. Now as we populate the cores on CCX-2, they still consume more power per core until we hit the situation where all cores are loaded and the system is more or less equal.


----------



## br0da

Some VRM shots of the Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming K3 came up @hardwareLUXX: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-19.html#post25528716
ISL95712 running in 4+3 mode, ISL6625As as external drivers, 4C06N as the lowside FET and 4C10N as the highside FET while the lowside is doubled for the CPU VCC.
So the VRM is nothing special and overpriced, but this time all FETs are on the "right side" and heatsinks definitely seem to be lager.


----------



## PsyM4n

So in short, at this time and age, after years of vrms dying on amd boards, manufacturers still cheap out on the vrm. Not only that, they now overprice them too.

Only a few boards so far have vrms that are actually capable of extreme load scenarios. So far we have like 5 boards... and two of them would reach their limit if current processors weren't so limited in overclocking potential.

MSI and Gigabyte in particular went really overboard with their pricing. Instead of putting their high end Fairchild/IR fets they opted for leftovers of second grade parts while pricing the boards ridiculously high.

Do not be surprised if current flagship boards kill their vrm if/when cpus with higher power draw (when overclocked) come out.


----------



## chew*

Surprise surprise...x power is running 600 for switching frequency @ auto.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Surprise surprise...x power is running 600 for switching frequency @ auto.


Interesting. That explains the overkill heatsinks, it'd be more lossy than the Pro Carbon and almost as lossy as Asrock B350 boards.

Since it only has 6 high side fets it'd be pushing ~3W per phase (or each high side mosfet) just for switching losses alone.

edit: I'm estimating 11cm x 4cm x 3cm tall for the heatsink dimension from board shots with 18 fins. Assuming base thickness 2mm and the fin thickness 2mm it results in :
air flow ... thermal resistance heatsink
0.5 m/s (~100 LFM) 1.03 °C/W
1.0 m/s (~200 LFM) 0.77 °C/W
1.5 m/s (~300 LFM) 0.65 °C/W

R_thetaJC is 4°C/W for PK616BA

We get T_J=T_A+P(R_thetaJC+R_theta_TIM+R_theta_heatsink) , ignoring R_theta_TIM
T_J=25°C+3W(4°C/W+R_theta_TIM+1.03°C/W)
T_J=40°C+(3*R_theta_TIM)

The package size is 5x6mm , 3M lists 0.9°C in^2/W for their thermal tape 8810 and 0.5 °C in^2/W for their 8805 tape
3M 8810 tape: 30mm^2 is ~0.0465in^2 so total TIM thermal resistance is around R_theta_TIM= 19.35°C/W ---> would be cooking....close to 100°C

3M 8805 tape: 30mm^2 is ~0.0465in^2 so total TIM thermal resistance is around R_theta_TIM= 10.75°C/W ---> would be hot....about 70°C

Fujipoly is about 0.3 °C in^2/W :
30mm^2 is ~0.0465in^2 so total TIM thermal resistance is around R_theta_TIM~ 6.5°C/W ---> ~60°C

Tl;DR I think it's a Fujipoly pad with an aluminum extruded heatsink based on chew*'s ~60°C temp with no airflow


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Surprise surprise...x power is running 600 for switching frequency @ auto.


Did power consumption results from various reviews just get interesting?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Interesting. That explains the overkill heatsinks, it'd be more lossy than the Pro Carbon and almost as lossy as Asrock B350 boards.
> 
> Since it only has 6 high side fets it'd be pushing ~3W per phase (or each high side mosfet) just for switching losses alone.


This also means that at this setting, the highs are the weakest link... and since externally controlled thermal shutdown has proven to be unreliable in this scenario, when the vrm reaches its limit it will go with a bang.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Surprise surprise...x power is running 600 for switching frequency @ auto.
> 
> 
> 
> Did power consumption results from various reviews just get interesting?
Click to expand...

Titanium was shown to be the most efficient in one review I saw .

How was the comparison among the boards chew tested - V-core measured at the socket vs bios setting vs hwinfo reporting?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium was shown to be the most efficient in one review I saw .
> 
> How was the comparison among the boards chew tested - V-core measured at the socket vs bios setting vs hwinfo reporting?


Its all over the place. Hw monitors off a tad to.


----------



## chew*

For anyone curious.

Here is what happens when you toss a sunon something model fan on titanium vrm I think its like 2k RPM.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium was shown to be the most efficient in one review I saw .
> 
> How was the comparison among the boards chew tested - V-core measured at the socket vs bios setting vs hwinfo reporting?


I would like to see top priced boards VRM temperatures with 50A Pdraw, *no heatsinks* attached to the VRM. Plosses undressed and in practice. What do you think about it?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I would like to see top priced boards VRM temperatures with 50A Pdraw, *no heatsinks* attached to the VRM. Plosses undressed and in practice. What do you think about it?


It would fry. Did you see the calculation I did for 110A + 1.4V on Xpower at 600kHz , just switching losses?

It would overheat even at ambient temp 25°C.
R_j_thetaJA (no heatsinks) = 57°C/W
T_J=25°C+3W*57°C/W =196°C/W = cooked

300kHz = half f_sw = half power loss
T_J=25°C+1.5W*57°C/W =110.5°C , basically cooking


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It would fry. Did you see the calculation I did for 110A + 1.4V on Xpower at 600kHz , just switching losses?
> 
> It would overheat even at ambient temp 25°C.
> R_j_thetaJA (no heatsinks) = 57°C/W
> T_J=25°C+3W*57°C/W =196°C/W = cooked


Yeah, try to tell that to some people on here.









Edit: Good job you did http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/1700_50#post_26076873


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium was shown to be the most efficient in one review I saw .
> 
> How was the comparison among the boards chew tested - V-core measured at the socket vs bios setting vs hwinfo reporting?
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to see top priced boards VRM temperatures with 50A Pdraw, *no heatsinks* attached to the VRM. Plosses undressed and in practice. What do you think about it?
Click to expand...

I think there is a good reason there's a large heatsink on the Titanium.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think there is a good reason there's a large heatsink on the Titanium.


Why they need such a large heatsink ?


----------



## chew*

Ok msi video part 2 no excitement no sparks. Voltages bios settings etc etc.

https://youtu.be/Ae-ixDDzI2k


----------



## AlphaC

For GB X370 K7 with 6x IR3553 ,~ 2.5W each phase x 1.1 normalized to 1.4V output voltage = 2.75W per phase

R__theta_JA = 22.2 °C/W
T_J=T_A+P*R_J_thetaJA
T_J=25°C+2.75W*22.2°C/W
*= 86°C*

* Thermal Resistance, Junction to Top (θJC_TOP) 23.2 °C/W & Thermal Resistance, Junction to PCB (pin 13) (θJB) 2.5 °C/W

edit: if they used the 50A PoWIRStages it'd be much better. It would be <2W per phase power dissipation and the larger surface area would have 21.1 °C/W thermal resistance to ambient , 17.5 °C/W to top of case & 2.1 °C/W junction to ground pin. This would mean 67°C without heatsink.

Biostar X370 GT7 with 8x IR3555
6x IR3553 ,< 1.4W each phase x 1.1 normalized to 1.4V output voltage = 1.54W per phase

R__theta_JA = 20.2 °C/W
T_J=T_A+P*R_J_thetaJA
T_J=25°C+1.54W*20.2°C/W
=56°C ... no sink required.
from IR3550 data :
* Thermal Resistance, Junction to Top (θJC_TOP) 14.3 °C/W & Thermal Resistance, Junction to PCB (pin 17) (θJB) 1.9 °C/W

For CH VI Hero with TI CSD87350 x8:
~ 1.8W per phase x 1.025 normalized to 1.4V output voltage = 1.845W ~~ 1.85W per phase
R_thetaJA = 50°C/W
T_J=T_A+P*R_J_thetaJA
T_J=25°C+1.85W*50°C/W
T_J = 117.5°C , within the limit but very hot ... no thermal adjustment required since it is below 120°C (see figure 2)

* Junction-to-case thermal resistance (top of package)(2) 20 °C/W & Junction-to-case thermal resistance (PGND pin)(2) 2 °C/W

For Asrock Taichi with TI CSD87350 x12:
< 1.3W per phase x 1.025 normalized to 1.4V ~~ 1.33W per phase
25°C+1.33W*50°C/W
=91.5°C , within the limit but hot ... no thermal adjustment required since it is below 120°C (see figure 2)

* Junction-to-case thermal resistance (top of package)(2) 20 °C/W & Junction-to-case thermal resistance (PGND pin)(2) 2 °C/W


----------



## TheBloodEagle

Are the big 4 (Asrock/MSI/ASUS/Gigabyte) also cheapening out on the Intel board that are somewhat equivalent? This is all making me a bit paranoid about my AMD build. Making me wonder if they're intentionally going lower grade for AMD builders to increase profit margins maybe out of the assumption AMD users wouldn't notice or care?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I think there is a good reason there's a large heatsink on the Titanium.
> 
> 
> 
> Why they need such a large heatsink ?
Click to expand...

The underlying parts on the 990 and 970 gaming boards are the same and they could keep pace with nearly any board made - IF you kept good airflow over those heatsinks , without it - they could not.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1577875/msi-990fxa-gaming-a-casual-review/80#post_24930329

http://www.overclock.net/t/1318995/official-fx-8320-fx-8350-vishera-owners-club/65670#post_25896191


----------



## cssorkinman

EDIT: dubbs on the post... sorry


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBloodEagle*
> 
> Are the big 4 (Asrock/MSI/ASUS/Gigabyte) also cheapening out on the Intel board that are somewhat equivalent? This is all making me a bit paranoid about my AMD build. Making me wonder if they're intentionally going lower grade for AMD builders to increase profit margins maybe out of the assumption AMD users wouldn't notice or care?


First round of motherboards for a new architecture, chipset and unknown market demand? I can give them a pass for the odd corner cutting bottom line helping move. Moving forward. knowing there's demand for product, that's another story.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> The underlying parts on the 990 and 970 gaming boards are the same....


Thanks, but I am not really asking about old tech that never costed anywhere close to $ 300.00.









Why the X370 Titanium needs a much bigger heat sink than it's competition ?

Why, despite the much bigger heat sink, it still performs worse than the competition, temp wise ?


----------



## chew*

Seems to be beating the prime pro when you look at certain factors...or maybe pro is running hot for another reason.

I coulda swore ti nextfets were specced to run at 500. Im seeing 80c in vrm with the IR back of board and oddly enough it defaults to 300 for switching frequency.

Btw cuda i have it ripping prime with the geil 3200 16-16-16 bin @ 2933. Wanted a legit pass first as this board has been a chore with 3200mhz on ram period.


----------



## virpz

I doubled too...sry


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I coulda swore ti nextfets were specced to run at 500. Im seeing 80c in vrm with the IR back of board and oddly enough it defaults to 300 for switching frequency.


They are specified at 500kHz.

How hot are the chokes ?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> They are specified at 500kHz.
> 
> How hot are the chokes ?


I have logged 91c at the two near end of heatsink furthest from soc pwm.

80c in the fet area back of board right near those chokes. Another pwm that has "hot" spots.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> The underlying parts on the 990 and 970 gaming boards are the same....
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, but I am not really asking about old tech that never costed anywhere close to $ 300.00.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the X370 Titanium needs a much bigger heat sink than it's competition ?
> 
> Why, despite the much bigger heat sink, it still performs worse than the competition, temp wise ?
Click to expand...

Add a fan and it magically becomes one of the best. Amazing eh? I'm starting to think you are unworthy of any interaction.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I have logged 91c at the two near end of heatsink furthest from soc pwm.


That's hot.

You are running 3.9GHz and 1.4ishVcore ?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Add a fan and it magically becomes one of the best. Amazing eh? I'm starting to think you are unworthy of any interaction.


Just answer the question with a short sentence.

Why the X370 Titanium needs a much bigger heat sink over it's VRM ?


----------



## cssorkinman

Buildzoid seems to be enjoying his Tiachi

https://youtu.be/F-ndTMeRT3s


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> That's hot.
> 
> You are running 3.9GHz and 1.4ishVcore ?


1.4 @ socket yes caps considerably higher but cpu temps peak 75c indicate my 1.4 socket is spot on with the other boards and voltage i used.

Hw monitor forget it...logged 1.537 so far lol


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Buildzoid seems to be enjoying his Tiachi
> 
> https://youtu.be/F-ndTMeRT3s


Ehh he is actually whining alot.

If you make a profile you can skip all the headaches. Works fine. I made some at various bclks.

Had no issues once i did that.

If you dont touch bclk board works like every other board just fine.

He does not use it anyway he benches it...he thinks thats bad...wait till he gets a giga and gets e6 post codes when he bclks without auto multiplier.

Can not wait to see that rant..


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Buildzoid seems to be enjoying his Tiachi
> 
> https://youtu.be/F-ndTMeRT3s
> 
> 
> 
> Ehh he is actually whining alot.
> 
> If you make a profile you can skip all the headaches. Works fine. I made some at various bclks.
> 
> Had no issues once i did that.
Click to expand...

He's a bit of a clown - has he found an AM4 board he likes yet?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Buildzoid seems to be enjoying his Tiachi
> 
> https://youtu.be/F-ndTMeRT3s


I got a good chuckle out of it.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 1.4 @ socket yes caps considerably higher but cpu temps peak 75c indicate my 1.4 socket is spot on with the other boards and voltage i used.
> 
> Hw monitor forget it...logged 1.537 so far lol


I got really crazy Vdroops and "LLC spikes" on HWinfo64 with the Prime Pro but never noticed VRMs running that high .


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Buildzoid seems to be enjoying his Tiachi
> 
> https://youtu.be/F-ndTMeRT3s
> 
> 
> 
> I got a good chuckle out of it.
Click to expand...

Me too - someone should clue him in on Chew's method


----------



## virpz

Hope someone can teach me on the SoC voltage of Ryzens. Why the limit is 1.2Vish or why not ?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Me too - someone should clue him in on Chew's method


Taichi bios needs work. If his video complaint helps that happen... plus I needed a good laugh.

What he really needs to do is go revisit some older motherboards. I'm sure we could suggest a few that would make him really want to get back to the Taichi and it's simple tricks.


----------



## chew*

Well i could tell him but im enjoying it to much...but theres a new page where you can set timings and retry counts without the resets...

But the comedy relief is worth not mentioning it to him..i need something to watch while i eat popcorn.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Me too - someone should clue him in on Chew's method
> 
> 
> 
> Taichi bios needs work. If his video complaint helps that happen... plus I needed a good laugh.
> 
> What he really needs to do is go revisit some older motherboards. I'm sure we could suggest a few that would make him really want to get back to the Taichi and it's simple tricks.
Click to expand...

Youtuber's with large followings can get companies attention hopefully for the greater good.

lol yeah I was being sarcastic earlier, thought people might get a kick out of his frustration. 990 UD5 was the worst high end board I've had bios wise ( awesome hardware though), but my dabbling in ECS and foxconn boards has taught me to appreciate a good bios.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Taichi bios needs work. If his video complaint helps that happen... plus I needed a good laugh.
> 
> What he really needs to do is go revisit some older motherboards. I'm sure we could suggest a few that would make him really want to get back to the Taichi and it's simple tricks.


That 2.2 is muuucchh better than the 2.0 - Now if you change refclk it will just reset you Ram speed and voltage, that's a two seconds task. Like chew said a profile will sort everything out in a blink. On my side I still need to disable AM4 trainning after I got the memory wer I want, otherwise it will crap on my ram by the next restart. On the OC side of things now I can get get solid stable 3000MHz on some crucial memory rated at 2666 XMP. I also managed to get 4050 on the cpu with just 1.35Vcore, but only by having SoC at 1.35V







.
Sure AsRock can still improve a few things here and there.


----------



## chew*

I can just skype message nick shih ( he already knows ive already mentioned it ). No need for all the drama but once again im enjoying the show to much.

He does not really know me or knew who i was so probably thinks i knpw nothing. I can play along and act dumb


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Seems to be beating the prime pro when you look at certain factors...or maybe pro is running hot for another reason.
> 
> I coulda swore ti nextfets were specced to run at 500. Im seeing 80c in vrm with the IR back of board and oddly enough it defaults to 300 for switching frequency.
> 
> Btw cuda i have it ripping prime with the geil 3200 16-16-16 bin @ 2933. Wanted a legit pass first as this board has been a chore with 3200mhz on ram period.


Are you sure that wasn't the chokes you were measuring? The IRT doesn't measure exactly where the laser is but actually about 3/4 inch below it. You can test it by holding your hand up in front of something that's at ambient and slowly moving the laser up. You'll see the temp won't actually change to 35° or whatever until the dot is almost an inch up from the bottom of your hand.

Seems weird the sink would be 37/38° and the fets be 80° on the back of the board, but I never did get a measurement from the back side myself so it's possible.

Is your Geil set dual rank E-die? Like I say I've been able to run my RAM at 2666 without errors but I can't get it to boot at that speed (not sure how I got it to boot the one time...just lucky I guess). I wouldn't be surprised if it could run higher if it could actually boot. I could try booting at stock and then applying OC with Ryzen Master but I haven't bothered to try it yet. Like I say just hoping they add access to VDDR Boot, but if it's not there in the next BIOS I'll start trying more stuff.

Thanks for the videos and revisiting the Prime Pro. We need someone doing thorough apples to apples testing across multiple boards, because most reviews don't even scratch the surface. They fail to mention any shortcomings for most products and are basically just ads and a stamp of approval.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> First round of motherboards for a new architecture, chipset and unknown market demand? I can give them a pass for the odd corner cutting bottom line helping move. Moving forward. knowing there's demand for product, that's another story.


The problem here is that first generation high end boards from various companies give plenty of power output headroom for like 6-7 years now.


On Ryzen high end boards the best we currently have is a single Biostar board.
Gigabyte uses literally cut versions of what Biostar uses.
Asus uses fets that are like 6-7 years old, in single configuration per phase, with close to half of the power output compared to their many years old previous high end ROG AMD board.
Asrocks uses the same fets as Asus, just more, essentially presenting us with more crap.
MSI uses what's more or less a bunch of hacks to push more power from a vrm configuration that was common like 10 years ago, when mosfets were limited in power output capabilities.
This is 2017, not 2007. Every high end vrm should use, if not the most powerful, at least the most safe relatively strong components you can have. (ie: https://www.fairchildsemi.com/datasheets/FD/FDMF5823DC.pdf)
Even the top IR parts, essentially the strongest on the market, lack on the safety department, relying on their (admittedly plentiful) power to avoid catastrophic failure scenarios.

Taking everything into account, we are not moving forward. We are moving backwards.


----------



## cssorkinman

If I were a motherboard manufacturer and AMD told me that they plan on using the AM4 socket for 4 years - what would I do in order to to be most profitable? I wouldn't put out a product on launch day that left absolutely no room for improvement that's for sure







. TIck Tock motherboards..... that's the key to financial success I tell's ya!


----------



## chew*

Prime pro video covers alot of stuff. No excitement nothing goes boom yet...

https://youtu.be/7dK0fJNH_Gg


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If I were a motherboard manufacturer and AMD told me that they plan on using the AM4 socket for 4 years - what would I do in order to to be most profitable? I wouldn't put out a product on launch day that left absolutely no room for improvement that's for sure
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . TIck Tock motherboards..... that's the key to financial success I tell's ya!


Its really simpler that that. In my opinion it has less to do with milking the cow. More to do with ES samples vs retails having slightly different electrical properties which the vendors tune there boards around.

In almost all scenarios round 2 boards are better. They make mistakes they fix them. If they do not then break out the torches and pitchforks.

Do i think round 2 will magically clock higher? Nope but im fairly certain they can fine tune and squeeze a little more out and certainly improve imc/memory related issues.


----------



## Artikbot

The way I look at it is similar to Trinity -> Richland.

Trinity brought a whole lot of new stuff to the table, and while it was a fantastic proof of concept, it left room for improvement - mostly due to the fundamental changes it introduced. Richland was basically identical to Trinity but could clock the memory, IGP and CPU far higher while keeping the same power envelope.


----------



## bardacuda

@Chew*

Thanks for the video! I've basically been ignoring VDDCR CPU and watching SVI2 Core voltage, but I see that is even showing 20mV less than what you were reading. Guess that might mean I was getting less droop than I thought I was.

Did you notice if the CPU was downclocking/downvolting at idle? When I was using manual voltage it wasn't downvolting for me so that's why I'm using offset now. I never tried manual multiplier because I thought I had read that that would also disable downvolting so I've been using DID/FID for that.

When I tried using LLC 2 it was even less stable for me than 1...and LLC 3 wouldn't even boot, but maybe that's because I wasn't in manual mode. I will have to revisit that.

I'm very interested to see what changing switching frequency will do.

Thanks again!


----------



## chew*

Increases heat. Aborted test. Saw 86 @ 1.3v 3.6 on cpu. Maybe later on i will try. Prefer a board not to take out my cpu until testing is done.

Usually when a pwm goes pop it takes prisoners in my experience.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> In almost all scenarios round 2 boards are better. They make mistakes they fix them. If they do not then break out the torches and pitchforks.


Gigabyte weakened the overclocking performance of the 970A-UD3P in its 2.0 revision, although it upgraded the audio. The Stilt said some components were removed. I had asked why lots of common things couldn't be adjusted in BIOS, like NB voltage, offsets, HT voltage, etc. The 2.0 board also has a multiplier boot bug. Any multiplier higher than 22 causes the board to fail to boot when restarted or started after shutdown. By contrast, the board will happily boot at higher multipliers if they're entered from BIOS. So, the boot sequence isn't programmed correctly.

It smells to me like they didn't want the 2.0 board to compete with their more expensive boards so they weakened it in two very significant ways. If booted from BIOS the board will run most benchmarks at 5 GHz on my 8370E and loop. At 4.7 GHz, it will do an hour of Prime at 700-900K FFTs with VRM temps that are above spec, even with strong cooling, but low enough not to burn up. But, simply change the multiplier to 22.5 or more and then do a normal boot and you'll get the failure screen.

Another thing that gets me is how ASUS never bothered to add the BIOS setting to set FX chips to one core per module in its top-of-the-line Crosshair board, even in the revision. My cheap UD3P board has that. ASUS also never bothered to add a VRM temperature sensor! Again, my cheap Gigabyte board has that, too. Truly bizarre.

Board makers really boggle my mind with their decisions sometimes.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> If I were a motherboard manufacturer and AMD told me that they plan on using the AM4 socket for 4 years - what would I do in order to to be most profitable? I wouldn't put out a product on launch day that left absolutely no room for improvement that's for sure
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . TIck Tock motherboards..... that's the key to financial success I tell's ya!


Yes, it's possible that we'll see something as basic as feature parity with Intel boards circa 2013, with at least one board being offered with a hybrid air/water VRM sink.

However, in terms of Zen performance, AMD's process is the main reason why overclocking isn't too impressive. I, for one, am very happy that AMD was able to greatly exceed skeptical estimates from reputable commentators - with this first iteration of Zen, in terms of what the process would be able to make available for stock clocks.

Planned obsolescence is central to your post. It is absolutely a huge part of business planning and has been for decades. Give people the minimum while charging the maximum is also the most basic philosophy of the profit-seeker. Since corporations aren't people there is no morality to get in the way of that. Hopefully, once AI takes over, a more rational approach will replace that philosophy: Give people the most you can while still being able to stay in business. That's the one people like to pretend motivates companies today but it's only a side-effect, sometimes, when a David is facing a Goliath in the market and isn't controlled by that Goliath enough to render that angle of competition moot.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> @Chew*
> 
> Thanks for the video! I've basically been ignoring VDDCR CPU and watching SVI2 Core voltage, but I see that is even showing 20mV less than what you were reading. Guess that might mean I was getting less droop than I thought I was.
> 
> Did you notice if the CPU was downclocking/downvolting at idle? When I was using manual voltage it wasn't downvolting for me so that's why I'm using offset now. I never tried manual multiplier because I thought I had read that that would also disable downvolting so I've been using DID/FID for that.
> 
> When I tried using LLC 2 it was even less stable for me than 1...and LLC 3 wouldn't even boot, but maybe that's because I wasn't in manual mode. I will have to revisit that.
> 
> I'm very interested to see what changing switching frequency will do.
> 
> Thanks again!


My experience with it was that the LLC1 had more Vdroop and shoot peak prone at the VDDCR_CPU than any other LLC setting.

Stability wise LLC0 was also much better than LLC1 and HWinfo64 seemed to kind of confirm what I was experiencing.

Here is the CPU at 3.8GHz 1.264Vcore set in BIOS. The graph is the result of with HWinfo logs on the OCCT: linpack run set to 5 minute.

LLC0, LLC1 and LLC2

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/198u6ien8G2s7X3vafELAVQpzVzTbZDzfw7VwmOocrC4/pubchart?oid=39052279&format=interactive


----------



## chew*

Except for the fact that im not at a cap i am on a pad behind socket and that is reading 1.40...cap is what i see in hwinfo and all over the place.

Llc 0 =auto which is not 0.

Pretty certain a scope would see variations but oh well. This is not high fidelity audio. Its ocing and there is bound to ripple and variations.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Llc 0 =auto which is not 0.


Which is ?

I called it 0 in the sheet, it was set auto in the bios and I had a much higher vdroop than say llc2, but then it was less Vdroop/shoot peaks prone than all the other llc settings if having sudden load in the context.

LLC0 (auto ) = Vdroop prone, more linear V curve than LLC1.

LLC1= Shoot prone, Vdroop prone, less linear V curve than all the others - worst overall performer.

LLC2= Shoot prone, Less Vdroop, more linear V curve than all the others. Best performer.


----------



## chew*

I think its actually 3. I would have to verify.


----------



## bloot

Received the antec spot cool 10mm fan, tested it with the same settings

With active cooling (Sysem 5 pump fan) and 25C ambient temp


Without active cooling and 21C ambient temp


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Seems to be beating the prime pro when you look at certain factors...or maybe pro is running hot for another reason.
> 
> I coulda swore ti nextfets were specced to run at 500. Im seeing 80c in vrm with the IR back of board and oddly enough it defaults to 300 for switching frequency.
> 
> Btw cuda i have it ripping prime with the geil 3200 16-16-16 bin @ 2933. Wanted a legit pass first as this board has been a chore with 3200mhz on ram period.


I have several theories which I want to run by you









*ONE* - TIM and/or heatsink deficiency (ala Gigabyte)

I'm calculating 2.6W lost per NexFET on the x370 Prime Pro w/ 500kHz so it has the same thermal load as the Gigabyte X370 K7 roughly.

Junction-to-case thermal resistance (top of package) of 20 °C/W is much higher than that of the PK616 's supposed 4°C/W so once massive heatsinks are involved the Xpower could be much cooler. NexFET Junction-to-case thermal resistance to ground pin is 2°C/W though.

The end farthest from SOC has the heatsink tapered off so maybe it's less fin area? It looks to be 3in x 1in heatsink from the top of the board effectively with 3 fins horizontal (perpendicular in relation to front to back case airflow).

80°C or 90 °C eh? Maybe it needs more mounting pressure?

Reverse solving, 90°C-25°C = 2.6W*R_thetaJA_effective
25°C/W=R_theta_JA_effective _effective thermal resistance_

R_theta_JA_effective=R_theta_JC+R_theta_TIM_+R_theta_heatsink

package size is 5x6mm = 0.0465in^2 , assume cheaper 3M thermal tape with 0.9°C in^2/W ---> R_theta_TIM = 19.35°C/W
top tier Fujipoly Ultra Extreme with full mounting pressure is 0.21°C in^2/W ---> R_theta_TIM = 4.52°C/W

This means that the thermal resistance to ground pin of 2°C/W is applicable to a certain extent unless the thermal resistance of the heatsink + TIM Is less than 5°C/W.

*Unwanted phase shedding under "optimized" or non "turbo" / "extreme" style modes*
If it turns of phases when it shouldn't , the load will be spread among 2-4 CPU phases instead of 6. The hottest mosfet is furthest from SOC suggesting this could be the mosfet left on when phases are shed.

*f_Sw* aka switching frequency

As far as f_sw , it shouldn't affect the NexFET much _if TI is to be believed_. (+5% vs 300kHz)


I am unsure why you had such high heat with the higher switching frequency.

*Chokes*

If the chokes are getting so hot it could just be the chokes are lower than 0.3uH , or the equivalent DC resistance is high for those parts.

*Board thickness*
All datasheet values base off a 0.06-in (1.52-mm) board with 1-in2 (6.45-cm2), 2-oz (0.071-mm) copper PCB.

PsyM4n , there's supplier agreements. MSI is likely locked in with NIKOs. Asrock probably has a deal with Sinopower along with Biostar. ASUS/Gigabyte probably have deals with On Semi conductor.
The most likely to use Fairchild parts are MSI and Asrock due to prior use on X99 , although Fairchild was acquired by On Semi.

Also those Fairchild parts are not cheap either, they're ~$2 each. At 6 or 8 of them that's around $20.

The Nuvoton and ITE SuperIO chips are supposed to help with thermal monitoring for the current crop of boards.

The winner this time around is Biostar because any way you cut it their ITX board is the only one on the market right now. Also the IR3555 used is the newer generation not the older IR3550. 6 x IR3555 is what ASUS uses on the RX 480 / RX 580 STRIX with over 220W peak power draw...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I have several theories which I want to run by you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ONE* - TIM and/or heatsink deficiency (ala Gigabyte)
> 
> I'm calculating 2.6W lost per NexFET on the x370 Prime Pro w/ 500kHz so it has the same thermal load as the Gigabyte X370 K7 roughly.
> 
> Junction-to-case thermal resistance (top of package) of 20 °C/W is much higher than that of the PK616 's supposed 4°C/W so once massive heatsinks are involved the Xpower could be much cooler. NexFET Junction-to-case thermal resistance to ground pin is 2°C/W though.
> 
> The end farthest from SOC has the heatsink tapered off so maybe it's less fin area? It looks to be 3in x 1in heatsink from the top of the board effectively with 3 fins horizontal (perpendicular in relation to front to back case airflow).
> 
> 80°C or 90 °C eh? Maybe it needs more mounting pressure?
> 
> Reverse solving, 90°C-25°C = 2.6W*R_thetaJA_effective
> 25°C/W=R_theta_JA_effective _effective thermal resistance_
> 
> R_theta_JA_effective=R_theta_JC+R_theta_TIM_+R_theta_heatsink
> 
> package size is 5x6mm = 0.0465in^2 , assume cheaper 3M thermal tape with 0.9°C in^2/W ---> R_theta_TIM = 19.35°C/W
> top tier Fujipoly Ultra Extreme with full mounting pressure is 0.21°C in^2/W ---> R_theta_TIM = 4.52°C/W
> 
> This means that the thermal resistance to ground pin of 2°C/W is applicable to a certain extent unless the thermal resistance of the heatsink + TIM Is less than 5°C/W.
> 
> *Unwanted phase shedding under "optimized" or non "turbo" / "extreme" style modes*
> If it turns of phases when it shouldn't , the load will be spread among 2-4 CPU phases instead of 6. The hottest mosfet is furthest from SOC suggesting this could be the mosfet left on when phases are shed.
> 
> *f_Sw* aka switching frequency
> 
> As far as f_sw , it shouldn't affect the NexFET much _if TI is to be believed_. (+5% vs 300kHz)
> 
> 
> I am unsure why you had such high heat with the higher switching frequency.
> 
> *Chokes*
> 
> If the chokes are getting so hot it could just be the chokes are lower than 0.3uH , or the equivalent DC resistance is high for those parts.
> 
> *Board thickness*
> All datasheet values base off a 0.06-in (1.52-mm) board with 1-in2 (6.45-cm2), 2-oz (0.071-mm) copper PCB.
> 
> PsyM4n , there's supplier agreements. MSI is likely locked in with NIKOs. Asrock probably has a deal with Sinopower along with Biostar. ASUS/Gigabyte probably have deals with On Semi conductor.
> The most likely to use Fairchild parts are MSI and Asrock due to prior use on X99 , although Fairchild was acquired by On Semi.
> 
> Also those Fairchild parts are not cheap either, they're ~$2 each. At 6 or 8 of them that's around $20.
> 
> The Nuvoton and ITE SuperIO chips are supposed to help with thermal monitoring for the current crop of boards.
> 
> The winner this time around is Biostar because any way you cut it their ITX board is the only one on the market right now. Also the IR3555 used is the newer generation not the older IR3550. 6 x IR3555 is what ASUS uses on the RX 480 / RX 580 STRIX with over 220W peak power draw...


Wait, the itx biostar also uses the ir3555's? no. sadness..

Why is this board using an x370 chipset? It's not like it has any lane sharing contention to resolve

Tinfoil hat theory for msi fet choice includes contractual obligation to use nikos products for amd motherboards at an insanely discounted volume price. Thermals on the motherboards without the titanium's heatsink are not pretty.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Wait, the itx biostar also uses the ir3555's? no. sadness..
> 
> Why is this board using an x370 chipset? It's not like it has any lane sharing contention to resolve
> 
> Tinfoil hat theory for msi fet choice includes contractual obligation to use nikos products for amd motherboards at an insanely discounted volume price. Thermals on the motherboards without the titanium's heatsink are not pretty.


The IR3555 is used in Biostar GT7


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> PsyM4n , there's supplier agreements. MSI is likely locked in with NIKOs. Asrock probably has a deal with Sinopower along with Biostar. ASUS/Gigabyte probably have deals with On Semi conductor.
> The most likely to use Fairchild parts are MSI and Asrock due to prior use on X99 , although Fairchild was acquired by On Semi.
> 
> Also those Fairchild parts are not cheap either, they're ~$2 each. At 6 or 8 of them that's around $20.


MSI could use FC fets just on one board, their deal with them should still be on. They could always use nikos for ram etc.

Gigabyte had base boards designed with 3550s in mind and not one of them had them, they have no excuse. The only good thing is that the 3553s inherit the same technological advancements as the 3550s making them adequate so far, although I still worry for the low side at very high loads, considering its physical size.

No matter the agreements, having a very powerful package like the 3555 lacking thermal shutdown in 2017 is unacceptable.

Recall MSI's run with fried mosfets. They had such incidents on boards they made for all sockets released up until 2011, for like 6-7 years or something... and then, it suddenly stopped.
It was because of this: https://www.renesas.com/en-eu/doc/products/transistor/001/r07ds0200ej_r2j20655np.pdf
They had no vrms frying themselves on lga2011... and they are, well, msi. Of course some time later, when using other fets, they kept up with the tradition.

Anyway, enough with the ranting.

I suspect that it's just a slightly high resistance messing with the coil temperature on the prime. Even a slight deviation can have major consequences. The only way to be sure however, is having someone test their resistance and inductance (no number on it for inductance I assume?).

Maybe the circuit feeding the furthest fets is too thin, or something else affects its resistance, increasing temperature? Should be a traceable scenario with a thermometer.

Edit: typos.


----------



## chew*

Taichi looks like 350k for switching but not 100%....issue is they are like surface mounted chokes so i have to hit a leg on a capacitor right at the connection on back of board...anyway since i have no option to change it i can not verify...but 350k was what i was getting...

Im bored b350 time...


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Im bored b350 time...


and maybe after that an OC guide?


----------



## chew*

git em b350 show them $200 boards how its done..........and that's with the industrial mosfet white surprise paste....time to remount


----------



## SuperZan

Ha! Nice to see that a DIY guy on a budget can still do some damage with a budget board. That's roots overclocking.


----------



## chew*

More so than you can imagine ASUS stole .100 vcore from me.......

give me a few days to order parts ill fix that issue. Weller soldering station mode activate


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> More so than you can imagine ASUS stole .100 vcore from me.......
> 
> give me a few days to order parts ill fix that issue. Weller soldering station mode activate


I'm not sure what the asus bios has gained. I lack the crappy ram to see if any improvements have been made on that end.

I do notice the lower vcore. Since asrock now says it's cheapest b350 board is 'for 65w ryzen cpu's only'

I imagine the primary gain is that asus will be less annoyed by end users who made magic smoke....


----------



## chew*

well.....I thought I was being conservative at 1.3.......apparently not conservative enough.

Fanless on its side ive seen 62c and prime is just getting started......good news is......its 3.6 @ 1.2v with 3200 ram.

Bad new is 1.3v will be pushing it FO SHO in a case.....

pc 3200 14-14-14 was borderline before on this board yendor. bench stable insta failing prime 2933 was fine....now its ripping 3200 stable in prime so latest bios did something....

can still make magic smoke, default is 200 switching frequency........jack to 350k and 1.3875 vcore run prime @ 4.0

Puff the magic dragon


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> well.....I thought I was being conservative at 1.3.......apparently not conservative enough.
> 
> Fanless on its side ive seen 62c and prime is just getting started......good news is......its 3.6 @ 1.2v with 3200 ram.
> 
> Bad new is 1.3v will be pushing it FO SHO in a case.....
> 
> pc 3200 14-14-14 was borderline before on this board yendor. bench stable insta failing prime 2933 was fine....now its ripping 3200 stable in prime so latest bios did something....
> 
> can still make magic smoke, default is 200 switching frequency........jack to 350k and 1.3875 vcore run prime @ 4.0
> 
> Puff the magic dragon


Oh yeah, have never suffered delusions about the thermals. It only needs a little fan.
120mm at 2k
on the vrm
on the back of the board at the vrm
and a cold night

Then it runs prime at 4+ and the vrm temps don't get over 80 ..in the lighter parts of a prime run. sometimes.









One hour, that's all I was willing to do. Decided magic smoke was not what i wanted to find and nothing to prove other than I can be stupid on the table. . I went to check the wee boards switching afterwards thinking perhaps I could set it lower but 200 is the lowest setting.


----------



## Nighthog

And I'm here with 4.0Ghz 1.500V...

Though I never stressed the system above 3.95Ghz @ 1.477V









I know it's not prime95 stable with 1.500V so not gonna try. I'll likely fry it all before I see that it's "stable"









edit:
Just for funs I did try a 3thread run but something strange happened. My VCore spiked to 1.630V...

Though VIN0 stayed the same in hwinfo64... I started to lower voltage in RyzenMaster to my usual 1.500 but VIN0 kept going down but vcore stayed up with a higher offset. I think the software was wrong on Vcore for some reason. System froze as voltage went to low for Vin0 that is the voltage I usually have checked.

Trying to replicate.

My cpu temps are ridiculous though.. 58-60C with 1 thread Prim95 29.1... Something isn't as it should.

edit 2:
4threads 64C CPU, 58C VRM(I realized the many temp sensors built into the cpu, it picked the one hottest at all times to the core running the load.)

Could not get that 1.6+ voltage again...

edit 3:
1hour 4threads worked, So 8 threads.
CPU: 66C VRM: 85C just beginning.

edit 4:
And it kept freezing/black screening with 8threads reaching those temps above after a few more minutes.








So I am ~4 thread stable but not 8 thread stable


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> well.....I thought I was being conservative at 1.3.......apparently not conservative enough.
> 
> Fanless on its side ive seen 62c and prime is just getting started......good news is......its 3.6 @ 1.2v with 3200 ram.
> 
> Bad new is 1.3v will be pushing it FO SHO in a case.....
> 
> pc 3200 14-14-14 was borderline before on this board yendor. bench stable insta failing prime 2933 was fine....now its ripping 3200 stable in prime so latest bios did something....
> 
> can still make magic smoke, default is 200 switching frequency........jack to 350k and 1.3875 vcore run prime @ 4.0
> 
> Puff the magic dragon


3.6ghz @ 1.2v seems to be the sanity limit for eight cores in cheap boards.

Friend of mine is likely going to end up with that board and a R5 1600x. He isn't super technically skilled so I pushed him toward the 1600x. I didn't want him to worry about OCing to get pretty much top tier air cooling clocks.


----------



## AlphaC

Nighthog, your T_ambient and humidity (maybe?) is likely lower than others due to being in Sweden.

Anyhow I would not mess around with 1.5V unless you plan on buying a new CPU in the near future.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> 3.6ghz @ 1.2v seems to be the sanity limit for eight cores in cheap boards.
> 
> Friend of mine is likely going to end up with that board and a R5 1600x. He isn't super technically skilled so I pushed him toward the 1600x. I didn't want him to worry about OCing to get pretty much top tier air cooling clocks.


i.e. buy a stock Ryzen 7 1700X if you have a cheapo motherboard.









It's 3.5GHz all core turbo with 3.9GHz XFR 2 cores 4 threads (http://www.overclockers.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-1700-cpu-review/)


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> 3.6ghz @ 1.2v seems to be the sanity limit for eight cores in cheap boards.
> 
> Friend of mine is likely going to end up with that board and a R5 1600x. He isn't super technically skilled so I pushed him toward the 1600x. I didn't want him to worry about OCing to get pretty much top tier air cooling clocks.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Nighthog, your T_ambient and humidity (maybe?) is likely lower than others due to being in Sweden.
> 
> Anyhow I would not mess around with 1.5V unless you plan on buying a new CPU in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i.e. buy a stock Ryzen 7 1700X if you have a cheapo motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's 3.5GHz all core turbo with 3.9GHz XFR 2 cores 4 threads (http://www.overclockers.com/amd-ryzen-7-1700x-1700-cpu-review/)


Asrock AB350M HDV "supports 65 w ryzen cpu's only. "


----------



## chew*

B350 cool little board.

Fyi not in video

Flare x = fail

Geil evo = fail

Trident z = pass

0609 bios

Covered alot of stuff...
https://youtu.be/yrjxZQOoAdY

Moving on to an r5 6 core now...


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Asrock AB350M HDV "supports 65 w ryzen cpu's only. "


1.2v is likely an undervolt for the higher speed chips. I know that the R5 1400 I have was hitting 1.25v for its boost clock of 3.4ghz, so 3.6ghz/1.175v is an overclock and undervolt from stock.


----------



## chew*

Not for all. Chip i am on now is a perfect example for stilts explanation of ryzen. Really overclocking it is pointless. Undervolting it is not...but..stock with cpb it runs 3.7 with 4.1 xfr...oced with -.100 it runs 3.8 across the board.

Over clocking a chip like this is like winning the hughes lee


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Not for all. Chip i am on now is a perfect example for stilts explanation of ryzen. Really overclocking it is pointless. Undervolting it is not...but..stock with cpb it runs 3.7 with 4.1 xfr...oced with -.100 it runs 3.8 across the board.


Yeah, if you need the high ST performance OCing is useless if XFR will get you to 4.1. Unless you have a REALLY good chip or more extreme cooling. If you need MT performance overclocking to anything above the base frequency is useful.

If you are starting with a non X series chip, any OC is pretty useful. The R5 1400 only boosts to 3.45, so OC/UV makes sense. It makes no sense on a R5 1600x though. Which leads to my recommendation of the X series chips for non-overclocking users. If you are going to OC though, I would recommend the cheapest processor with the number of cores you want.

I really wonder if custom boost profiles are something in the works for the X series chips. It would make them much more attractive for overclocking.


----------



## chew*

Now I am on the 1600 and this chip makes far more sense to overclock......3750 @ 1.3v on the b350


----------



## bloot

Received the Taichi, same settings as K7

No vrm direct cooling 25C ambient


----------



## chew*

everything look in line except your previous 21c ambient no fan avg temps makes no sense on the gigabyte vs your 25c ambient active cooling.

If you were idle for a significant amount of time with hw monitor running it can greatly skew avg temps.....

but your taichi is holding 5c like mine is from peak to avg.

As you ramp vcore up it still holds......

The gigabyte temps just run away


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> everything look in line except your previous 21c ambient no fan avg temps makes no sense on the gigabyte vs your 25c ambient active cooling.
> 
> If you were idle for a significant amount of time with hw monitor running it can greatly skew avg temps.....
> 
> but your taichi is holding 5c like mine is from peak to avg.
> 
> As you ramp vcore up it still holds......
> 
> The gigabyte temps just run away


Yea forgot to reset hwinfo stats... avg temps are not reliable on that run.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Asrock AB350M HDV "supports 65 w ryzen cpu's only. "


If br0da is right and that board has the same VRM as B350 Gaming K4 then it's more of the fact that it doesn't have a heatsink (i.e. the K4 says 95W air cooling). edit: The AB350M and AB350M HDV have a different layout

the AB350M has "95W air cooling" as well.


----------



## chew*

R5 4core is where current b350 vrms shine.

I can pull out all the stops...jack up switching frequency run 1.4vcore with soc up and still maintain 60c manageable vrm temps..

Got this little short straw draw on the imc 1500x running 3.9 prime now..this is a pretty bad sample.


----------



## virpz

X370 Taichi bricked


----------



## chew*

Wow...any idea what happened?

You pull heatsink and check vrm?


----------



## cssorkinman

That's kinda scary, ASROCK am3+ boards had a habit of taking the CPU with them when they went.


----------



## virpz

From what I can tell it self bricked.

Had my normal settings, [email protected], Ram3000, no abusive voltages, nothing on auto, the only thing I had set different this time was SMT that I had off.

Woke up, turned system on, bios cycled well till it reached Q-code 99, then it self-restarted. The next thing is that it got stuck at Q-code E4 to never get past that again.
I have tried all the traditional approaches, from clr cmos to remove all components - change ram slot, change gpu, measure PSU voltages, change PSU, remove battery, reseat cpu, all the previous together + let it sit for a few hours.

Now, that E4 code seems to be related to "S3 Resume Progress" but then, I always have had sleep/hibernate disabled.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> From what I can tell it self bricked.
> 
> Had my normal settings, [email protected], Ram3000, no abusive voltages, nothing on auto, the only thing I had set different this time was SMT that I had off.
> 
> Woke up, turned system on, bios cycled well till it reached Q-code 99, then it self-restarted. The next thing is that it got stuck at Q-code E4 to never get past that again.
> I have tried all the traditional approaches, from clr cmos to remove all components - change ram slot, change gpu, measure PSU voltages, change PSU, remove battery, reseat cpu, all the previous together + let it sit for a few hours.
> 
> Now, that E4 code seems to be related to "S3 Resume Progress" but then, I always have had sleep/hibernate disabled.


Pulled battery, short cmos at motherboard jumper instead of rear io panel?


----------



## chew*

Yah some of these boards are weird my giga hung after a shutoff. Another board to.

Took alot of futzing around repeatedly to wake it the heck back up.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Pulled battery, short cmos at motherboard jumper instead of rear io panel?


@yendor
Tried both methods many times. The board is sitting here on my desk with the jumper on clr position for 6§ hours now. Ill give it one more try later.

@chew*
Had a visual inspection over the board with a magnifier - ic's looking good and kind of smelling good too







. Found three sinopower fets on the board, did not bother to trace.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> @yendor
> Tried both methods many times. The board is sitting here on my desk with the jumper on clr position for 6§ hours now. Ill give it one more try later.
> 
> @chew*
> Had a visual inspection over the board with a magnifier - ic's looking good and kind of smelling good too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Found three sinopower fets on the board, did not bother to trace.


Old school cmos clear. it has worked for others despite being "wrong" . Luck!


----------



## chew*

this is b350's comfort zone in my opinion.

Full tweaks 300K switching frequency, maxxed out vrm running full bore with LLC with full voltage for a Ryzen chip.

This chip is not that great, IMC is a bit trash. Core frequency is a tad behind the curve.

Going to let it rip overnight its in the mid to low 60c vrm range with cpu fan at the lowest setting no fans on vrm mobo tipped on its side.

I would be a tad happier with 50C vrms but this is about the best your going to be able to get with current b350 ripping hard in stability tests.......


----------



## virpz

@AlphaC

Got what you have asked me a few days ago. Inductors are 220nH, no brand or model markings, just inductance and case size...I would definitely say Eaton FP1110V1-R22-R, pretty sure they are the manufacturers of the asus blackwing too.

http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Electronics/Resources/product-datasheets/bus-elx-ds-10427-fp110v.pdf


----------



## chew*

yah those littler buggers ring a tad bit.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> this is b350's comfort zone in my opinion.
> 
> Full tweaks 300K switching frequency, maxxed out vrm running full bore with LLC with full voltage for a Ryzen chip.
> 
> This chip is not that great, IMC is a bit trash. Core frequency is a tad behind the curve.
> 
> Going to let it rip overnight its in the mid to low 60c vrm range with cpu fan at the lowest setting no fans on vrm mobo tipped on its side.
> 
> I would be a tad happier with 50C vrms but this is about the best your going to be able to get with current b350 ripping hard in stability tests.......


That Asus 4 phase VRM is pretty bad. I get similar temps when pulling ~105w on the MSI 3+2 VRM while using low fan speeds in a 20 year old case.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> That Asus 4 phase VRM is pretty bad. I get similar temps when pulling ~105w on the MSI 3+2 VRM while using low fan speeds in a 20 year old case.


Those are measurements with IR not software. Specifically the chokes. Still part of the vrm...so it counts as far as i am concerned.

You can not trust wattage in hwmonitor nor temps for that matter till you know which temp to trust if any..

In this case i trust the circled stuff. Rest is useless. The cpu temp is accurate compare to ryzen master which displays correct temps.

Also keep in mind...i jacked up switching frequency...another factor that must be accounted for.


----------



## AlphaC

virpz:
Ah that means the chokes account for additional 2-5% power loss at mosfets.

The chokes themselves have 0.23milliohms equivalent DC resistance. multiply by square of current = power loss of inductor , then use Eaton's chart:
For 12 phases, 110A = ~ 9.2A per phase
which means inductor has power loss = 0.23/1000 ohms *(9.2A)^2 = 0.02W roughly

The alternative method is Bp-p = K * L * ΔI * 10 ^(-3) and use the graph. The ripple current is completely unknown.
K factor 278
L inductance 220nH
ΔI = ripple current in amps

From Eaton's chart it only rises 10 °C at 0.2W (a factor of ten larger).

----
If the Prime Pro is using chokes labeled "R68" maybe it's the 680nH.

This one looks more like the "microfine" ones
http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Electronics/Resources/product-datasheets/bus-elx-ds-4449-hcm1103.pdf

from this sheet looks like 21A

2.9-3.4 milliohms equivalent DCR

If it's true 6 phases for 110A is stressing it to the limits , 18.34^2*3.4/1000 is more than 1W per choke. From graph it's +40° Celsius thermal rise at 1W.

If the CH VI hero w/ 8 phases uses it you get ~0.64W per choke which is about +26 or +28°C.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Those are measurements with IR not software. Specifically the chokes. Still part of the vrm...so it counts as far as i am concerned.
> 
> You can not trust wattage in hwmonitor nor temps for that matter till you know which temp to trust if any..
> 
> In this case i trust the circled stuff. Rest is useless. The cpu temp is accurate compare to ryzen master which displays correct temps.


I used the poke and feel method ATM, my IR gear is in a box somewhere among 20-30 other boxes. Though I developed the my touch and guess method to be at least ballpark accurate through years of tuning RC nitro engines.









I would put a decent amount of money on not getting temps over ~60c with my current setup at 3.9ghz under AVX Linpack or something similar. Haven't used the IBT variation though, so that may be a significant difference.

I can get an IR probe this weekend from a friend to get empirical results though.


----------



## chew*

Rc nitro.

Hpi15fe novarossi or pico ofna .21 were my favorites but man those things cost me some loot. I had a novarossi mugen .15 rear exit exhaust that was nasty to...

Miss the good old days of rc nitro.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Rc nitro.
> 
> Hpi15fe novarossi or pico ofna .21 were my favorites but man those things cost me some loot. I had a novarossi mugen .15 rear exit exhaust that was nasty to...
> 
> Miss the good old days of rc nitro.


Ermahgerd yes. Didnt have any NR stuff myself though, Italians are too rich for my blood.

Had some hand me down Kyosho truggies/buggies with Ofna .21 and .28 and engines, and tons of Traxxas stuff to abuse off the track.

Ill post up more conclusive data on things when I get my modern case and IR probe in hand.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> virpz:
> Ah that means the chokes account for additional 2-5% power loss at mosfets.
> 
> The chokes themselves have 0.23milliohms equivalent DC resistance. multiply by square of current = power loss of inductor , then use Eaton's chart:
> For 12 phases, 110A = ~ 9.2A per phase
> which means inductor has power loss = 0.23/1000 ohms *(9.2A)^2 = 0.02W roughly
> 
> The alternative method is Bp-p = K * L * ΔI * 10 ^(-3) and use the graph. The ripple current is completely unknown.
> K factor 278
> L inductance 220nH
> ΔI = ripple current in amps
> 
> From Eaton's chart it only rises 10 °C at 0.2W (a factor of ten larger).
> 
> ----
> If the Prime Pro is using chokes labeled "R68" maybe it's the 680nH.
> 
> This one looks more like the "microfine" ones
> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Electronics/Resources/product-datasheets/bus-elx-ds-4449-hcm1103.pdf
> 
> from this sheet looks like 21A
> 
> 2.9-3.4 milliohms equivalent DCR
> 
> If it's true 6 phases for 110A is stressing it to the limits , 18.34^2*3.4/1000 is more than 1W per choke. From graph it's +40° Celsius thermal rise at 1W.
> 
> If the CH VI hero w/ 8 phases uses it you get ~0.64W per choke which is about +26 or +28°C.


You're like the Charles Xavier of geek math









Yes, choke labeling follows like that:

6R8 means 6.8uH
R68 means 680nH

So microHenrys before the R, nanoHenrys come after the R.

I like the idea of having those high current able inductors there as they don't suffer much the effects of inductance vs current vs temperature you would be dealing with. I don't like the fact that my board bioses seems to have self bricked and there is no way to recover. As far as post codes are to be belived, bios can't get past all the memory checks, it is only after the 50's and BX's that it fails.


----------



## chew*

Ok I am calling it with this chip. Circled are the only relevant and confirmed reliable info in HW monitor for this board.

Time to put the hammer down and grab a chip that clocks higher so in theory should pull more power......


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Old school cmos clear. it has worked for others despite being "wrong" . Luck!


No good, still got q-code E4.


----------



## PsyM4n

Disconnect all psu cables, take the battery off, wait an hour, put everything back and see if boot succeeds.

If that doesn't work, reseat the cpu.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> From what I can tell it self bricked.
> 
> Had my normal settings, [email protected], Ram3000, no abusive voltages, nothing on auto, the only thing I had set different this time was SMT that I had off.
> 
> Woke up, turned system on, bios cycled well till it reached Q-code 99, then it self-restarted. The next thing is that it got stuck at Q-code E4 to never get past that again.
> I have tried all the traditional approaches, from clr cmos to remove all components - change ram slot, change gpu, measure PSU voltages, change PSU, remove battery, reseat cpu, all the previous together + let it sit for a few hours.
> 
> Now, that E4 code seems to be related to "S3 Resume Progress" but then, I always have had sleep/hibernate disabled.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Disconnect all psu cables, take the battery off, wait an hour, put everything back and see if boot succeeds.
> 
> If that doesn't work, reseat the cpu.


----------



## PsyM4n

Ah, I missed that post.

Well, under the circumstances there is only one thing remaining. You're not gonna like this, CPU is probably resting in peace.


----------



## chew*

Or cpu is being dumb.

Toss it in another board see what it does.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Ah, I missed that post.
> 
> Well, under the circumstances there is only one thing remaining. You're not gonna like this, CPU is probably resting in peace.


I doubt that.
I had little current going, all protections enabled, settings wer working the other days plus, If you do a little research the E4 code happens to be way past CPU checkings.


----------



## CrazyElf

The more I think about it, the more I think it is best to wait. We need to see what BIOSes mature well and which ones have good overclocking. Hardware is decent on the Asrock for example, but BIOS is not.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> The problem here is that first generation high end boards from various companies give plenty of power output headroom for like 6-7 years now.
> 
> 
> On Ryzen high end boards the best we currently have is a single Biostar board.
> Gigabyte uses literally cut versions of what Biostar uses.
> Asus uses fets that are like 6-7 years old, in single configuration per phase, with close to half of the power output compared to their many years old previous high end ROG AMD board.
> Asrocks uses the same fets as Asus, just more, essentially presenting us with more crap.
> MSI uses what's more or less a bunch of hacks to push more power from a vrm configuration that was common like 10 years ago, when mosfets were limited in power output capabilities.
> This is 2017, not 2007. Every high end vrm should use, if not the most powerful, at least the most safe relatively strong components you can have. (ie: https://www.fairchildsemi.com/datasheets/FD/FDMF5823DC.pdf)
> Even the top IR parts, essentially the strongest on the market, lack on the safety department, relying on their (admittedly plentiful) power to avoid catastrophic failure scenarios.
> 
> Taking everything into account, we are not moving forward. We are moving backwards.


Agree with that assessment. +Rep

Interestingly enough the Intel Z270 boards generally shipped with decent VRMs. Fun fact - MSI higher end X99 boards had 12 of those very Fairchild 55A Mosfets in their power delivery (6 phase doubled). They have been mostly well built boards. Depending on whether or not MSI releases a solid version for Ryzen E (the 16 core variant), I might go buy MSI again for Zen+.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JasonMZW20*
> 
> I think the Titanium is overpriced for what it offers and I have one (only because the Taichi was out of stock for a month or so). I got it for a decent price at $260, but I still think that's too much. I've rarely spent more than $200 for a mobo.
> 
> Anyway, it looks like MSI is going to pull a fast one on us, likely because they know the rev. 1.0 boards are **** compared to the competition (maybe someone saw this VRM thread?).
> 
> See my image here: http://imgur.com/CJKuG9H
> 
> Why are there already -002 and -02S models? These are distinct model numbers for new boards (at least, I think they are; do set me straight on that; B350 Mortar is 7A37-001, Mortar Arctic is -002, but the image shows the same Titanium name for all 3 models ... hmm). I know mine is a -001. I was reporting some temp and voltage reporting oddities to MSI when I stumbled upon this.
> 
> My VRMs are staying under 60C (with 2 200mm fans, top and side with 120mm exhaust) at 3.9GHz/1.35v, but still, was I disappointed? Yep. It's like they allocated all of their good VRM stock for Z270 Titanium boards. Lame. At the MSRP of $299, it better have the best components on the market.
> 
> If you're curious about the oddities I was reporting on, see them here: http://imgur.com/9WqWJXx
> 
> Lovely, right? Occurs after long idle overnight, since "stable" BIOS 1.4. CPU temp has completely dropped signal to mobo, thankfully it can be read directly. Fan signals are coming up at random when I only have 1 fan (CPU sense only). A lot of other voltage readings have dropped out at one point, and there are even some I haven't seen before. WITAF is this mess? So sloppy.


Thank I did not know about these. +Rep

My current board, the X99A XPower was actually a revision released a few months after the X99S XPower which was released when X99 was first released. The X99A revisions featured 2 USB 3.1 ports and an OC socket.

It is not at all inconceivable that MSI would release an updated version so quickly because negative feedback has spread so quickly. They need to anyways to protect their brand. The XPower line would face the same problem the other brands have faced - brand dilution. It's like when Intel called the Prescotts Pentium or AMD called Bulldozer FX for marketing reasons. XPower should represent premium components - the best MSI can offer (although strictly speaking the MSI X99A Godlike Carbon is their flagship right now).

My guess is that they were forced to rush out a flagship. The entire lineup of AMD boards got rushed. It usually takes a few months to design a motherboard. I think that we will see motherboards come out from Asus, Asrock, and Gigabyte too. Probably more mature boards at that.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Never claimed im not an ahole.
> 
> Quite the contrary. Im a major ahole but i am damn good at what i do.
> 
> My personality has no impact on my skill.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Facts remain.
> 
> Over priced.
> 
> Cheaper quality parts. Lets forget about all other vendors and just compare titanium to titanium.
> 
> This one can not hold a candle to the rest of them in the vrm department.
> 
> This is an undeniable fact.
> 
> Msi makes great products. Lightning for example. If they made a lightning fury x and slapped a lightning sticker on a stock ref card i would be complaining about that to.
> 
> Lightning moniker means x anything less is disappointing.
> 
> Since i have worked with in the past and been one of the few sponsored by multi top tier all at the same time i cant tell you this.
> 
> Keeping the status quo stagnates.
> 
> Making waves innovates.
> 
> 
> 
> Want a better product? Then don't act satisfied with sub par quality.
> 
> Also i should add. I have the liberty of knowing behind closed doors info.While i may not be able to comment about it...once you know...kind of hard to forget the info.


While I won't ask you to disclose NDA information, I just hope that they release something good - and fast. The Ryzen platform is likely to be quite popular. I have also urged them for Ryzen E to make the XPower a true flagship.

I don't know how much weight customer feedback has but the fact that they may have a release 2 so quickly suggests that it does have at least some impact.

The fact that there has been a lot of backlash though may very well have helped shape their opinion.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I know you read this thread gigabyte so here you go.
> 
> The shortcomings of IR3553 and not making an AM4 specific heatsink tuned and tailored to your vrm with load on r7.....
> 
> SOC sink is acceptable.......vcore vrm sink is far from acceptable.......73c with a fan over vrm peak so far...
> 
> shall I take the fan off vrm and keep testing or do you get it now?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [


That is very disappointing. I think that it would have been better if Gigabyte had used IR3555M - that would have been comparable to the Biostar.

So that leaves 2 underwhelming products then at the mid-high end. The X370 XPower and the X370 Gaming K7.

If anyone has an email about where to send feedback to Gigabyte on this one, I think it's worth sending. More powerful phases and a better heatsink.

So that leaves us the Asrock X370 Taichi/Pro Gaming, the Biostar X370 GT7, and perhaps the Asus X370 Crosshair.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Thanks, but I am not really asking about old tech that never costed anywhere close to $ 300.00.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the X370 Titanium needs a much bigger heat sink than it's competition ?
> 
> Why, despite the much bigger heat sink, it still performs worse than the competition, temp wise ?


It just isn't a good value for a board, certainly not at $300 USD.

If a board has a bigger and better heatsink, but performs worse temperature wise, then logically the power delivery (and specifically the Mosfets) are giving off more waste heat due to losses from switching. The only possible reason is that the Mosfets are less efficient.

There really isn't any other way around it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> @AlphaC
> 
> Got what you have asked me a few days ago. Inductors are 220nH, no brand or model markings, just inductance and case size...I would definitely say Eaton FP1110V1-R22-R, pretty sure they are the manufacturers of the asus blackwing too.
> 
> http://www.cooperindustries.com/content/dam/public/bussmann/Electronics/Resources/product-datasheets/bus-elx-ds-10427-fp110v.pdf


Thanks for the choke models +Rep.

Just curious, but does anyone have the model number for the MSI "SFC" and "Ti" Chokes?

I suspect that they are the same 60A chokes that everyone else uses. I don't expect anything radically better amongst the motherboard makers, but it would be nice to have a list so that we know.

I remember from X99, Gigabyte was using Cooper Bussman 76A FLAT-PAC chokes. Those are IR3555M Mosfets IIRC.



They seem pretty solid to me and I have not heard about any problems with them, at least in terms of hardware. Immature BIOS early on was a problem though.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I doubt that.
> I had little current going, all protections enabled, settings wer working the other days plus, If you do a little research the E4 code happens to be way past CPU checkings.


Maybe chipset took a dive?


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> Just curious, but does anyone have the model number for the MSI "SFC" and "Ti" Chokes?


They use a variety of different coils under the same "branding". The only visible spec on it is the inductance, assuming it's printed.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Maybe chipset took a dive?


I still have the impression than he killed the processor.

Testing on another board would tell us what died anyway.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Maybe chipset took a dive?


I can measure a few things later for the sake of checking.

I don't know chew, I had the same settings on bios that I was running since day one with the Taichi, no abusive voltages, all protections on. All I did was power on the system, it went trough all checks related to cpu & ram then restarted byitself directly to self brick.
I see some guys complaining about the board not entering S3 status, my board is stuck at E4 code that is also related to S3 resume status, then you had the CHVI bricking issues that were related to S3 too . Now AsRock launches two bios ( 2.20 & 2.30 ) with a 5 day time frame. I would say yes, something smells bad there.

I really miss the old times wer they provided us with bios changelog reports.


----------



## chew*

Ok I'm going let this slow roast for a day....or maybe 2. Got a trip to NJ tonight so best time to do it.....

Btw...yes this the same chip that ran on phase @ 1.6v @ 4.6 in pi, 1.4v in cine @ 4.4.

4050 on air stable prior to cold abuse.

1.41vcore socket
1.050 SOC socket
1.35 vdimm
1.80 pll
1.050 chipset
60 ohm ODT
Full phase ( extreme )
LLC vcore extreme
LLC SOC extreme
350K switching frequency
Mid 50c's Fets
Mid 60c's Chokes


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok I'm going let this slow roast for a day....or maybe 2. Got a trip to NJ tonight so best time to do it.....
> 
> Btw...yes this the same chip that ran on phase @ 1.6v @ 4.6 in pi, 1.4v in cine @ 4.4.
> 
> 4050 on air stable prior to cold abuse.
> 
> 1.41vcore socket
> 1.050 SOC socket
> 1.35 vdimm
> 1.80 pll
> 1.050 chipset
> 60 ohm ODT
> Full phase ( extreme )
> LLC vcore extreme
> LLC SOC extreme
> 350K switching frequency
> Mid 50c's Fets
> Mid 60c's Chokes


I loled at the Thor.







:thumb:

I see fire on the VRM if not throttle capable


----------



## chew*

It will be fine. I would not do it if i was not confident it can handle it.

Cpu will thermal out first.

Its riding the edge @ 74c peak.


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok I am calling it with this chip. Circled are the only relevant and confirmed reliable info in HW monitor for this board.
> 
> Time to put the hammer down and grab a chip that clocks higher so in theory should pull more power......


sorry if i missed it, did you point out which readings on hwinfo were reliable for taichi?


----------



## chew*

Vrm mos is accurate for vrm peak/avg temp on taichi.

Basically hottest part of vrm will be reported +/- 1c


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Vrm mos is accurate for vrm peak/avg temp on taichi.
> 
> Basically hottest part of vrm will be reported +/- 1c


thanks.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok I am calling it with this chip. Circled are the only relevant and confirmed reliable info in HW monitor for this board.
> 
> Time to put the hammer down and grab a chip that clocks higher so in theory should pull more power......


In hwinfo under asus prime section I thought that temperature 3, 4,5, 6 was vrm. or as close to it as hwinfo is going to get.

motherboard is chipset.

current section, soc and core.. wrong. not possible to get that much out of board


----------



## chew*

Nah i doubt any of them are fets or vrm...its in 50-60 range. None of those temps are.


----------



## FoamyV

Hey guys, got a question for you, i had to rma my Taichi and they can't get me a new one, they refunded me and i'd like to hear your opinions on these boards:

Gigabyte K7, Asrock Fatal1ty Pro, Asus Hero and Msi Titatinium. (k7 cheapest, Fat Pro priciest - $50 range between em)

I was pretty satisfied with the Taichi until it failed, don't know what might be a good replacement. I have a 1800x and i'm watercooling looking for best clocks, mem are KFA2 3600.

Any help is much appreciated, pretty torn on what to pick. I liked how the k7 looked but from what i read it's at the bottom concerning vrm's and quality parts?


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FoamyV*
> 
> Hey guys, got a question for you, i had to rma my Taichi and they can't get me a new one, they refunded me and i'd like to hear your opinions on these boards:
> 
> Gigabyte K7, Asrock Fatal1ty Pro, Asus Hero and Msi Titatinium. (k7 cheapest, Fat Pro priciest - $50 range between em)
> 
> I was pretty satisfied with the Taichi until it failed, don't know what might be a good replacement. I have a 1800x and i'm watercooling looking for best clocks, mem are KFA2 3600.
> 
> Any help is much appreciated, pretty torn on what to pick. I liked how the k7 looked but from what i read it's at the bottom concerning vrm's and quality parts?


My taichi has failed on me too, stuck at q-code E4. I really liked the board.

If I had to put on a ranking it would look like that:

VRM capability

1# Biostar GT7
2# Taichi
3# CHVI
4# GA-K7/MSI Expensivetanium - both have much worse thermals, attention and alot of active cooling would be very desirable if confined inside a case. The MSI uses the cheap Nikos fets and lacks refclk feature.

As far as vrm is concerned I am going to replace it with the CHVI, it is 3rd place in the VRM quality, it's but that's just because the biostar is lacking refclk feature and the Taichi is lacking any bios recovery options.

Now our friend chew* has been putting on a impressive amount of work ( and money ) on finding real world VRM's efficiency, you may want to have a look at his videos.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPCRzey5fS3cuIauRXZoTiQ/videos?shelf_id=0&view=0&sort=dd


----------



## b0oMeR

I don't believe Ryzen motherboards come with VRM. Serious flaw on AMD's part imo.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> I don't believe Ryzen motherboards come with VRM. Serious flaw on AMD's part imo.


What do you mean ?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FoamyV*
> 
> Hey guys, got a question for you, i had to rma my Taichi and they can't get me a new one, they refunded me and i'd like to hear your opinions on these boards:
> 
> Gigabyte K7, Asrock Fatal1ty Pro, Asus Hero and Msi Titatinium. (k7 cheapest, Fat Pro priciest - $50 range between em)
> 
> I was pretty satisfied with the Taichi until it failed, don't know what might be a good replacement. I have a 1800x and i'm watercooling looking for best clocks, mem are KFA2 3600.
> 
> Any help is much appreciated, pretty torn on what to pick. I liked how the k7 looked but from what i read it's at the bottom concerning vrm's and quality parts?


Titanium has both the top validation and stable daily clocks on the forum lists. I wouldn't trade mine for any other board. My nephew has the k7 and has battled one issue after the other. Instability, USB drops, ram issues. Great looking board but it's not a finished product it seems. Hero would be my second choice. Feel free to browse my screenshots and judge for yourself how capable the Titanium is.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium has both the top validation and stable daily clocks on the forum lists. I wouldn't trade mine for any other board. My nephew has the k7 and has battled one issue after the other. Instability, USB drops, ram issues. Great looking board but it's not a finished product it seems. Hero would be my second choice. Feel free to browse my screenshots and judge for yourself how capable the Titanium is.


Your results look really good with the titanium VRM's, as opossed to everybody else. How many 120mm fans above it ?


----------



## bloot

Gigabyte K7 is a wonderful board, not a single problem in my experience, 3200MHz with my B-Die kit no problem. On board audio is terrific, pretty loud and Soundblaster X-Fi software is really nice, dual bios is a fantastic feature and is the most beautiful board out there imho.

The only real downside are vrm temps, heatsinks are too weak to dissipate the heat. I would have kept it if temps were better, but it reached 86ºC with 4GHz oc at 1.38V and 21ºC ambient. With a fan attached temps are better though, about 7-9ºC less. Also didn't like the m.2 placement.

I have now a Taichi and vrm temps are superb without the need of a fan, max I have seen is 60ºC with 4GHz oc at 1.39V and 25ºC ambient. But front panel audio is weaker, K7 was way louder and better quality when using X-Fi controls.


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Your results look really good with the titanium VRM's, as opossed to everybody else. How many 120mm fans above it ?


My observation is that most, if not all, people who actually own the Titanium do not have any problems with VRM temperatures. Even Chew's testing with the Titanium in a worse case scenario proves that the VRMs and hestsink perform adequately temperature wise. Adding airflow to it only makes the situation even better.

So to the user who asked about MB choice, if the price is not a factor to you, and the features fit your needs, then the Titanium is an acceptable choice to make.


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> I can measure a few things later for the sake of checking.
> 
> I don't know chew, I had the same settings on bios that I was running since day one with the Taichi, no abusive voltages, all protections on. All I did was power on the system, it went trough all checks related to cpu & ram then restarted byitself directly to self brick.
> I see some guys complaining about the board not entering S3 status, my board is stuck at E4 code that is also related to S3 resume status, then you had the CHVI bricking issues that were related to S3 too . Now AsRock launches two bios ( 2.20 & 2.30 ) with a 5 day time frame. I would say yes, something smells bad there.
> 
> I really miss the old times wer they provided us with bios changelog reports.


Only way to now for sure is with another board.

Agree though that they need to give a BIOS changelog. This should be common across all motherboards.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> They use a variety of different coils under the same "branding". The only visible spec on it is the inductance, assuming it's printed.
> I still have the impression than he killed the processor.


Thanks. They often are not discussed in reviews nor a key point in photographs I'm afraid, which makes it hard to know. Some only have very limited labelling too.

Here's the Z68 G80 for example:


R47 means 470nH I presume.

Clearly labelled on this Z77 board:


1R2G - 1.2 uH?

I think this is the NL252018T

Datasheet:
https://www.westfloridacomponents.com/mm5/graphics/F08/NL252018TR68J.pdf

Later versions of the Ti chokes and SFC will need a closer look to see if there is labelling. I think that most reviewers don't pick it up.

 

The Hawaii era GPUs have the labelling LR25 - otherwise power design looks solid

  

Text is faded, but I think it is LR25.

I think there is some labelling on the TI boards, but the text is too small for me to figure it out:


My guess though is that the Ti and SFC aren't really that special - they are very similar or the same as what everyone else uses.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok I am calling it with this chip. Circled are the only relevant and confirmed reliable info in HW monitor for this board.
> 
> Time to put the hammer down and grab a chip that clocks higher so in theory should pull more power......
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Your best option might be to buy one from Silicon Lottery. It will be a premium though to get the 4.1 GHz versions. But otherwise unless you get a binned, there's no assurance of a good clocking CPU.

I am wondering if Asrock should compensate you for that fried CPU, assuming it is actually dead.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> My taichi has failed on me too, stuck at q-code E4. I really liked the board.
> 
> If I had to put on a ranking it would look like that:
> 
> VRM capability
> 
> 1# Biostar GT7
> 2# Taichi *Note from CrazyElf - the Asrock X370 Professional Gaming Fata1ty has the same VRM*
> 3# CHVI
> 4# GA-K7/MSI Expensivetanium - both have much worse thermals, attention and alot of active cooling would be very desirable if confined inside a case. The MSI uses the cheap Nikos fets and lacks refclk feature.
> 
> As far as vrm is concerned I am going to replace it with the CHVI, it is 3rd place in the VRM quality, it's but that's just because the biostar is lacking refclk feature and the Taichi is lacking any bios recovery options.
> 
> Now our friend chew* has been putting on a impressive amount of work ( and money ) on finding real world VRM's efficiency, you may want to have a look at his videos.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPCRzey5fS3cuIauRXZoTiQ/videos?shelf_id=0&view=0&sort=dd


Yeah I"m inclined to agree with this ranking. A case could be made that the Taichi and Biostar might be flipped (8 phases of IR3555M and I think 4 more for SOC versus 12 phases of NextFET + 4 phases for SOC), but the GT7 has a better SOC VRM and I think the IR3555M has a faster switching speed, so a case could be made it is the leader too. I will inspect that data sheets later on when I have more time.

Here's the Biostar X370 GT7.


The only question is which of these 2 has the most mature BIOS. That's especially going to become important with the RAM AGESA update.

They need to update the Taichi with BIOS recovery if possible and a new revision of the GT7 with Refclock.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Your results look really good with the titanium VRM's, as opossed to everybody else. How many 120mm fans above it ?


The other question worth asking is the rpm of the fans. If the other person is running say, 1500 rpm fans, it is going to be loud enough for many people that the noise will be a turnoff.

The reason must be that the large heatsink with fins has a lot of surface area to dissipate excess heat. To be honest I wish that all motherboards used this type of "functional" heatsink versus one for the looks. Good VRMs like the IR3555M plus a well built heatsink would be a win in my book. Best of both worlds - efficient heatsink and cool VRMS less likely to require such a heatsink to begin with.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> My observation is that most, if not all, people who actually own the Titanium do not have any problems with VRM temperatures. Even Chew's testing with the Titanium in a worse case scenario proves that the VRMs and hestsink perform adequately temperature wise. Adding airflow to it only makes the situation even better.
> 
> So to the user who asked about MB choice, if the price is not a factor to you, and the features fit your needs, then the Titanium is an acceptable choice to make.


This thread is about the VRM on AM4 boards and all the other boards have overall better VRM and also refclk adjustments. Also, the worse case would be having it inside a case.
The Titanium has by far the cheapest VRM among all these boards, hence the need of the giant heatsink, still, even with such a big heatsink it performs bellow all the other options in the same scenario.
I can't see how one would get the Titanium over the CHVI, GT7 or even the Taichi. I would never trade quality IC's for some eye candy painting but you are free to believe whatever you want, Fact wise it offers less for more money.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium has both the top validation and stable daily clocks on the forum lists. I wouldn't trade mine for any other board. My nephew has the k7 and has battled one issue after the other. Instability, USB drops, ram issues. Great looking board but it's not a finished product it seems. Hero would be my second choice. Feel free to browse my screenshots and judge for yourself how capable the Titanium is.


Less expensive!

The leaderboard needs attention.

http://valid.x86.fr/fux301 appears to be top validated speed.

tldr, crosshair.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> All the other boards have better overall VRM and also refclk adjustments that it lacks. Also, the worse case would be having it inside a case. This thread is about the VRM, the user came in here asking for directions on that subject, the titanium has by far the cheapest VRM among all these boards, hence the need of the giant heatsink, still even with such a big heatsink it performs bellow all the other options in the same scenario.
> I can't see how one would get the Titanium over the CHVI, GT7 or even the Taichi. I would never trade quality IC's for some nice eye eye candy painting but you are free to believe whatever you want, Fact wise it offers less for more, the Titanium is the most expensive Am4 board.


biostar has no refclck

titanium power consumption, cheap fets and all, still is worth noticing .. "why" .


----------



## virpz

@CrazyElf
The much bigger and efficient heatsink of the Titanium is still not enough to correct it's very low efficient vrm. The Titanium runs hotter than the Taichi/Fatality, CHVI and Biostar because it's VRM dissipates more power and does that mostly due to cheap and inefficient fet's it uses .

My processor is fine, that guy is just throwing baloney non-stop









@yendor

Yes, forgot to mention that. Still, the biostar has amazingly good VRM for a board that costs almost $ 100 less than the titanium.


----------



## chew*

Summer time is a coming...not everyone has A/C.

Blowing hot air on a hot heatsink has 0 effect then...

Biostar is waiting for me at home.

Hopefully a still alive b350 and 1400 as well.

As far as silicon lottery goes...i will take my chances in the wild.

There idea of 4.1 stable vs mine 100% opposite


----------



## bloot

Is there a vrm switching frequency setting on the taichi?


----------



## chew*

Not yet...its somwhere in 300-350 range.


----------



## chew*

Made it home.

B350 still going strong.

Need sleep will let it roast more...

I will leave you with this for the time being.


Oh and btw settling for high heat now?

What do you think will happen with x399 if you put your blinders on to the current heat issues









Tomorrow we explore one of the great mysteries of the world..like what is a 5050 fun zone?...


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> My observation is that most, if not all, people who actually own the Titanium do not have any problems with VRM temperatures. Even Chew's testing with the Titanium in a worse case scenario proves that the VRMs and hestsink perform adequately temperature wise. Adding airflow to it only makes the situation even better.
> 
> So to the user who asked about MB choice, if the price is not a factor to you, and the features fit your needs, then the Titanium is an acceptable choice to make.


The price is not acceptable at MSRP so unless someone would rather dump another $50-150 into motherboard instead of into CPU/GPU/RAM I don't see reason to recommend it.

I don't know people keep backtracking on this. Anyone who has an unbiased outlook can see it is not a $300 board. $200-220 _maybe_ if you value added PCI-e power (moot with Biostar TB350 BTC out). Both microcenter and newegg agree , they have had them on sale for $250-270 already , with MIR for another $10-20 off.

A. The VRM components are at least $20 cheaper than any other high end board in terms of mosfets , chokes/inductors, output capacitance
B. no refclock chip
C. not that many extra USB 3.1/3.0 ports
D. does not match feature parity with Intel Xpower boards (OC DASH, v-check pts, PCI-E slot disable switches, tantalum caps, etc) , it's close to Mpower at best and I don't think I would knock it so hard if it were sold as and priced as an Mpower
E. lack of Dual BIOs / Multi-BIOs , thermistor temp headers, etc (overclocking features)
F. no VRM cooling monoblocks out yet
G. audio results are lackluster in some reviews despite use of ALC1220, I've see -88dBa and -89dBa SNR in the madshrimps review / -90dBA on eteknix and -93dBA on kitguru. There's no excuse for this since some other reviews have it at -107 or -110dBA SNR

The Gigabyte K7 board should have been 50-60A PowIRStages but the VRM cooling "issue" can be likely alleviated with $20-30 worth of aluminum or copper mosfet heatsinks + fujipoly pads. Unlike the Xpower its efficiency doesn't run away with thermals (i.e. the graph for power loss vs temp for Xpower is scaled with roughly ambient as baseline vs 110+°C for NexFETs). Even with no heatsinks and 70°C ambient temperature it will be able to push out 20A per phase.

If anyone wants a true high end board and not a mid-range board with some tacked on overclocking features , there's none on the market. The Crosshair VI Hero comes close but it isn't a true high end board once you compare to Intel chipsets.
----

@ chew* , OCP on results in 26A max per phase according to the Stilt on his Anandtech thread.

side note: Maybe the K7 / Xpower money went into making shiny boxes...


----------



## PsyM4n

Maybe we, who participated in this thread, should make a thread intended to notify the users and manufacturers for the current state of high end AM4 boards as whole. I mean complete, with coverage from the main OC net page, coverage from other sites that are associated with cpu/mobo reviewers, enthusiasts etc.

I mean, we all agree that AM4 motherboards are so far underwhelming at best... maybe except from the Biostar, maybe.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Maybe we, who participated in this thread, should make a thread intended to notify the users and manufacturers for the current state of high end AM4 boards as whole. I mean complete, with coverage from the main OC net page, coverage from other sites that are associated with cpu/mobo reviewers, enthusiasts etc.
> 
> I mean, we all agree that AM4 motherboards are so far underwhelming at best... maybe except from the Biostar, maybe.


Biostar isn't ace either but it's alright given the pricepoint.

Problems with Biostar board:
* need to add audio shielding and/or DAC + AMP (reflected in ~ -99 dBa SNR)
* supposedly 5K caps
* need to add BCLK gen
* doesn't appear to have v-check points
* ITE IT8625E SuperIO isn't the best
* single phase memory VRM
* VIVID LED DJ --> change to "GT7" or "RYZEN"...
* Its inclusion of Realtek LAN might be important to some people
* Need to drop DVI for more USB 3.0 ports (USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the same thing), it already has DP + HDMI

edit: see opinion piece I wrote earlier in April http://www.overclock.net/a/am4-motherboard-manufacturers-make-overclocking-effortless-on-motherboards-people-want-am4-board-revision-2-or-am4-refresh-opinion


----------



## chew*

I need to pop the sinks off...upon inspection i saw no "drivers" on underside for a doubled up phase.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Biostar isn't ace either but it's alright given the pricepoint.
> 
> Problems with Biostar board:
> * add audio shielding and/or DAC + AMP (reflected in ~ -99 dBa SNR)
> * supposedly 5K caps
> * add BCLK gen
> * doesn't appear to have v-check points
> * ITE IT8625E SuperIO isn't the best
> * single phase memory VRM
> * VIVID LED DJ --> change to "GT7" or "RYZEN"...
> * Its inclusion of Realtek LAN might be important to some people
> * Drop DVI for more USB 3.0 ports , it already has DP + HDMI


Indeed, even though audio "quality" enhancements make no difference from a point, they add up into justifying the price.

Then you have the dvi being digital only, making it unnecessary due to the other ports.

All things considered, I guess "less underwhelming" is a more fitting title.

So, are we into it? If we make a thread dedicated into drawing attention to the matter, the user-base might see results.


----------



## chew*

You guys can use my info screens whatever as you see fit.

I will not recommend any vendor I am merely just providing results so others can form they're own opinion.

I see a rather alarming defeciency in mother board reviews that i feel needs addressing so i am doing what i can do and what i am good at.

Im only just getting started...

There is functionality and performance comparison motherboard roundups.

All ref clock boards need ref clock used in a comparison as well besides the base 99.80 or whatever..

And of course even then...i still can not for lack of the proper hardware or testing methods and or knowledge cover it all.

For example storage speed tests...


----------



## chew*

Ok guess i need not be concerned.

R33 on choke for those that care.


----------



## AlphaC

Inductor should be a nonissue on the GT7 unless the inductor itself is the one that is hot.


^ IR3550 spec vs inductor (60A PowIRStage) , so assume IR3555 would be similar



IR3553 spec vs inductor


----------



## Despoiler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Biostar isn't ace either but it's alright given the pricepoint.
> 
> Problems with Biostar board:
> * need to add audio shielding and/or DAC + AMP (reflected in ~ -99 dBa SNR)
> * supposedly 5K caps
> * need to add BCLK gen
> * doesn't appear to have v-check points
> * ITE IT8625E SuperIO isn't the best
> * single phase memory VRM
> * VIVID LED DJ --> change to "GT7" or "RYZEN"...
> * Its inclusion of Realtek LAN might be important to some people
> * Need to drop DVI for more USB 3.0 ports (USB 3.1 Gen 1 is the same thing), it already has DP + HDMI
> 
> edit: see opinion piece I wrote earlier in April http://www.overclock.net/a/am4-motherboard-manufacturers-make-overclocking-effortless-on-motherboards-people-want-am4-board-revision-2-or-am4-refresh-opinion


*I'd prefer motherboards have basic audio rather than "audiophile" audio which they use to increase the cost. Who uses onboard audio anyways?
*Yes 5k caps.
*Given the GT7 can adjust refclk in the BIOS, it doesn't need an external gen.
*The Realtek Dragon LAN isn't giving me any issues. My Intel NIC is gathering dust atm. I feel like the need for an Intel NIC is a sacred cow that needs to be sacrificed.


----------



## chew*

Biostar overview

https://youtu.be/ut6715MmWzw


----------



## chew*

Cranking videos out today....

Final conclusion on B350.

https://youtu.be/ZAm-2NX_3mU


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Despoiler*
> 
> I feel like the need for an Intel NIC is a sacred cow that needs to be sacrificed.


Maybe someone can post some recent review data that gives insight into this debate?


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> The other question worth asking is the rpm of the fans. If the other person is running say, 1500 rpm fans, it is going to be loud enough for many people that the noise will be a turnoff.
> 
> The reason must be that the large heatsink with fins has a lot of surface area to dissipate excess heat. To be honest I wish that all motherboards used this type of "functional" heatsink versus one for the looks.


As well as basic feature parity with Intel land, circa 2013.

Some day perhaps board makers will decide AMD buyers deserve the same choices, like not having to put fans on the VRMs at all because the board lets buyers take advantage of the loop they already paid for.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> The more I think about it, the more I think it is best to wait. We need to see what BIOSes mature well and which ones have good overclocking. Hardware is decent on the Asrock for example, but BIOS is not.


I know I am. I'm not going to fork over cash for substandard boards because board makers thinks they can get away with not offering feature parity with Intel boards.

Things like hybrid air/water VRM coolers generally only appear on overpriced boards but the alternative is to pay a lot for a 3rd party VRM block. And, having the premium boards have actual premium features generally means the tier below that top level will offer more for the money than if that tier is sold as the top.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> Interestingly enough the Intel Z270 boards generally shipped with decent VRMs. Fun fact - MSI higher end X99 boards had 12 of those very Fairchild 55A Mosfets in their power delivery (6 phase doubled). They have been mostly well built boards.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> My guess is that they were forced to rush out a flagship. The entire lineup of AMD boards got rushed. It usually takes a few months to design a motherboard.


That explanation doesn't add up. It's not like it's more difficult to use more recent components and designs. They cheaped out. They saw the opportunity to use old parts and save bucks. DRAM makers have been caught colluding multiple times over the years. Maybe the board makers had a little chat about the level of quality they would use in the first round of Zen boards? Or, it could be down to mutual espionage. Who knows? What's clear is that there is no hybrid water/air sink on any boards and people are commenting on there being better VRM systems on Intel boards as well.

It doesn't speed up design to use worse components. That's fallacious unless the better components are bleeding edge which they aren't. The post you responded to characterized it as "not being 2007" anymore. 2007 was a decade ago.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I think that we will see motherboards come out from Asus, Asrock, and Gigabyte too. Probably more mature boards at that.


Of course. It's in their interest to keep the carrot on the stick. Planned obsolescence. The more companies can speed it up by withholding this and that the more they'll do it. Sell less for more.


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Biostar overview
> 
> https://youtu.be/ut6715MmWzw


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Cranking videos out today....
> 
> Final conclusion on B350.
> 
> https://youtu.be/ZAm-2NX_3mU


Keep'em coming.







Looking forward to voltage measurements on cpu socket of the GT7.


----------



## Despoiler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Maybe someone can post some recent review data that gives insight into this debate?


That's the thing. I've looked and no one has done any reviews. Out of curiosity I've been testing the Dragon LAN since I put my system together. All I can say is that the drivers are stable. I've not had any hangs, drops, or hiccups on the networking front. I'm *not* using the Killer NIC like software. I also disabled all of the many power saving modes available in the settings. I haven't looked at CPU utilization. I mean I have an 8c/16t Ryzen. Moar cores doing their jobs if it happens to be more than a comparable competitor.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Cranking videos out today....
> 
> Final conclusion on B350.
> 
> https://youtu.be/ZAm-2NX_3mU


Great.

Board looks like a very solid choice for those going with the quads and OC.

I must add that you are answering to questions in a way that even all the reviews sites together could not get close to.

I truly appreciate what you already did and what you are doing there.

Much respect for you, Mr. Mclachlan !


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Cranking videos out today....
> 
> Final conclusion on B350.
> 
> https://youtu.be/ZAm-2NX_3mU


Did you realize when posting those videos that you provide a ton of information that overclockers need, that motherboard reviewers don't even know (or care about)?

The video format isn't the best way to present those findings though. I'm going through the videos you posted these 2 days and you provided a great deal of useful information.

For example:
* Don't bother to OC Ryzen 5 1600X since it disables turbo and turbo is more than the average overclocked R5 1600X on a B350 board
* 1.3V for Ryzen 5 1600 @ 3.750GHz for that particular sample on a B350 Prime Plus, worth overclocking
* Ryzen 5 1600X 3.6GHz , 3.7GHz , XFR 4.1GHz ---> better to undervolt (1.38 VID)
* 3692 MHz turbo on that particular sample of ryzen 5 1600 at auto
* No more than 1.3V on B350 boards for hexcores
* Ryzen 5 1400 quadcore can be run @ 4GHz on a B350 Prime Plus with no throttling
* use cinebench to find the clocks , use -100MHz for Prime
* black screen memory retry counts
* B350 Prime Plus doesn't have p-state overclocks (P.S. X370 Prime Pro does via ZenStates)

It would also be interesting if you got a MSI B350 Pro Carbon or ASUS B350-F STRIX for the hexcores


----------



## chew*

Wandering bee's find the honey.

I am known to be quite cryptic however...people who notice little things may learn a thing or two









Im also OCD and ADD/ADHD...distracted very easily but when i (block everything out) can focus on something....i can be dangerous..


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Biostar overview
> 
> https://youtu.be/ut6715MmWzw


The very board where rgb improved pi?


----------



## PsyM4n

chew*, in this day and age everyone seems to be suffering from some kind of mental disorder. Being considered "normal" has become abnormal.

So don't mention that OCD and co stuff again if you can. Just do what you do best and become the best version of yourself


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> chew*, in this day and age everyone seems to be suffering from some kind of mental disorder. Being considered "normal" has become abnormal.
> 
> So don't mention that OCD and co stuff again if you can. Just do what you do best and become the best version of yourself


Eh just pointing out i have 2 modes...scatterbrain and super focus aka brilliant idiot so just try to bear with me.









Btw its not a disorder...it is a gift if you learn to control it.

Dangerous was meant in a good way. Brilliant minds are dangerous to an extent..


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> The very board where rgb improved pi?


The one and only


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The one and only


undocumented feature


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Eh just pointing out i have 2 modes...scatterbrain and super focus aka brilliant idiot so just try to bear with me.


Dude, we're living in a world where some people with zero education and over-inflated egos think they own us all, other people blow themselves up cause "god" told them to and other people feel proud cause they "won" an argument over the internet.

By these standards, we're all Einsteins in here.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> * use cinebench to find the clocks , use -100MHz for Prime


Cinebench, eh? That's a change from FX where trying to find stability with Cinebench did one of three things:

1) Not stress enough. (Passing Cinebench was pretty easy when compared with larger LinX numbers or Prime.)
2) Have score saving corruption issues. (This is a minor issue but indicates that getting a score doesn't really say much about stability, since there is obvious corruption happening.)
3) Freezing Windows. (This is the biggest annoyance about using Cinebench to test for stability.)

I used LinX at a low RAM size (2048 or so, then another round with a bigger number) to try to get a quick idea of stability because it was less demanding than Prime and gave GFLOP numbers so one could look to see if they are higher or lower with tweaks as well as relatively stable from iteration to iteration.

But, Zen is a very different chip and AM4 is a different platform. So, I suppose Cinebench might somehow not have those three problems I mentioned, or at least not as much.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Cinebench, eh? That's a change from FX where trying to find stability with Cinebench did one of three things:
> 
> 1) Not stress enough. (Passing Cinebench was pretty easy when compared with larger LinX numbers or Prime.)
> 2) Have score saving corruption issues. (This is a minor issue but indicates that getting a score doesn't really say much about stability, since there is obvious corruption happening.)
> 3) Freezing Windows. (This is the biggest annoyance about using Cinebench to test for stability.)
> 
> I used LinX at a low RAM size (2048 or so, then another round with a bigger number) to try to get a quick idea of stability because it was less demanding than Prime and gave GFLOP numbers so one could look to see if they are higher or lower with tweaks as well as relatively stable from iteration to iteration.
> 
> But, Zen is a very different chip and AM4 is a different platform. So, I suppose Cinebench might somehow not have those three problems I mentioned, or at least not as much.


oddly I find unstable ram settings with cinebench faster than anything else.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Cinebench, eh? That's a change from FX where trying to find stability with Cinebench did one of three things:
> 
> 1) Not stress enough. (Passing Cinebench was pretty easy when compared with larger LinX numbers or Prime.)
> 2) Have score saving corruption issues. (This is a minor issue but indicates that getting a score doesn't really say much about stability, since there is obvious corruption happening.)
> 3) Freezing Windows. (This is the biggest annoyance about using Cinebench to test for stability.)
> 
> I used LinX at a low RAM size (2048 or so, then another round with a bigger number) to try to get a quick idea of stability because it was less demanding than Prime and gave GFLOP numbers so one could look to see if they are higher or lower with tweaks as well as relatively stable from iteration to iteration.
> 
> But, Zen is a very different chip and AM4 is a different platform. So, I suppose Cinebench might somehow not have those three problems I mentioned, or at least not as much.


The only failure mode I have run into on air is the whole system freezing/blackscreening and rebooting. I have not run into prime/LinX/Linpack errors at all.

It seems to just work or outright fail.

This is up to 3.9ghz/1.4v in the UEFI.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The only failure mode I have run into on air is the whole system freezing/blackscreening and rebooting. I have not run into prime/LinX/Linpack errors at all.
> 
> It seems to just work or outright fail.


eh, I get variety, prime can instantly black screen
start dropping threads instantly
run for a while then blackscreen
run for a while then drop threads one by one ...

cinebench sneers at my supposedly stable ram timings and blackscreens somewhere after being 60% complete.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> eh, I get variety, prime can instantly black screen
> start dropping threads instantly
> run for a while then blackscreen
> run for a while then drop threads one by one ...
> 
> cinebench sneers at my supposedly stable ram timings and blackscreens somewhere after being 60% complete.
> back to 14 14 etc


I can't get any tighter timings or higher frequency to even post, so I have not seen the more memory related issues yet.

The black screens seem to be lack of vcore or pushing frequency beyond what the chip is capable of thermally. But I have yet to get a simple program error from core overclocking. Nothing like anything Ive seen before, perhaps related to the supposed encryption going on in the memory/infinity fabric layer of the design? Any internal cache/register corruption causing a machine check for security purposes maybe?


----------



## chew*

Biostar bios options

Definitely a few bugs on this bios....sorted them out.

Pc3200 14-14-14-34 working so far...baby steps.....half of vrm runs a bit hot...fets probably 61c peak but vrm as a whole ( chokes included ) probably run hotter than 61c...i grade by peak total so...

Many of the great wonders of the world answered at end of video...

https://youtu.be/_Gq8IOp90oQ

Gonna be a chore to measure this properly...vrm sink is over edge of pcb...and can be "rocked"


----------



## chew*

Quite the contraption to say the least...but video card is straight but not stressed and propping motherboard up...





I am bored. Going to take a ride to microcenter.


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quite the contraption to say the least...but video card is straight but not stressed and propping motherboard up...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am bored. Going to take a ride to microcenter.


Gotta do what works









Wish I had a microcenter near me


----------



## chew*

Hour ride 3 hours round trip...1 hour is me getting lost in store...beats staring at prime 95 for 3 hours though...


----------



## Zhany

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Hour ride 3 hours round trip...1 hour is me getting lost in store...beats staring at prime 95 for 3 hours though...


That's for sure


----------



## chew*

Picture courtesy of savagebunny (OCN).

Edited for 1 missed item


----------



## ManofGod1000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Hour ride 3 hours round trip...1 hour is me getting lost in store...beats staring at prime 95 for 3 hours though...


The closest one to me is a 6 hour round trip, not including the time I spend in the store. That said, I took that trip on the day of the Ryzen release and upgraded my home machine. I then took the trip again on the 10th of March to upgrade my other computer, again with Ryzen. (Was going to wait but they put the 1700X at $50 off and the X370Pro at $10 off so I got $60 back and immediately spent it.







)


----------



## AlphaC

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8175/msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon-motherboard-review/index10.html

X370 Gaming Pro Carbon (same VRM as B350 Pro Carbon, essentially)
Quote:


> The VRM is in an 8+2 phase configuration, and it's actually the same exact VRM I found on the X370 SLI PLUS (different filter components). The Richtek RT8894A is the 4+2 phase PWM controller used to control the core and SOC rails. A Richtek RT9624F complements the three integrated ones from the PWM, and two more are used to drive the SOC rail.
> 
> Nikos PK616BA and PK632BA PowerPAK MOSFETs are used just like on the other X370 MSI motherboards we have reviewed. To get eight phases from the four, VRM components are doubled up on to each driver channel.


http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8171/msi-x370-sli-plus-gaming-motherboard-review/index3.html
Quote:


> The VRM is in an 8+2 phase configuration for the core and SOC power rails. The PWM controller is a 4+2 phase one from Richtek, the RT8894A. It offers three integrated drivers on the four phase channel, but none on the SOC channel. A Richtek RT9624F complements the three integrated one from the PWM, and two more RT9624F drivers are found driving the SOC rail.
> 
> To get eight phases from the four the PWM outputs, MSI just doubled the number of power stages components on each driver. Nikos PK616BA and PK632BA PowerPAK MOSFETs are used as the high-side and low-side MOSFETs. The capacitors are rated for 5K hours at 105C.


^ SLI PLUS uses different capacitors but same capacitance


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8175/msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon-motherboard-review/index10.html
> 
> X370 Gaming Pro Carbon (same VRM as B350 Pro Carbon, essentially)
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8171/msi-x370-sli-plus-gaming-motherboard-review/index3.html
> ^ SLI PLUS uses different capacitors but same capacitance


Not even 1plus2 config on them. If the asus prime pro didn't have the coil temperature issue, it'd be a far better choice.

This is the price range where the ir3553 and nexfets should have been used.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Not even 1plus2 config on them. If the asus prime pro didn't have the coil temperature issue, it'd be a far better choice.
> 
> This is the price range where the ir3553 and nexfets should have been used.


Technically its a 4+2 with 2x high side, 2x low side, and 2x filters. There is a "6+2" that is the same thing on a 3+2 PWM source.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Technically its a 4+2 with 2x high side, 2x low side, and 2x filters. There is a "6+2" that is the same thing on a 3+2 PWM source.


driver+high+low+coil=phase

That's how it is, with or without doubling, even if in regards to the modulator it isn't and you reduce the switching frequency.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> driver+high+low+coil=phase
> 
> That's how it is, with or without doubling, even if in regards to the modulator it isn't and you reduce the switching frequency.


Not true. A phase indicates that they are firing at different times, creating more wave forms and better voltage regulation. This is what dividers/doublers do, create a timing offset.

These, as far as I am aware, are firing at the same time. Which means that its still a 4 phase VRM (only 4 distinct wave forms) with higher amperage capacity.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> These, as far as I am aware, are firing at the same time.


The point of using a doubler when you're limited by the modulator is to work around this.


----------



## AlphaC

I believe KarathKasun has it right based on the waveforms.

A "true phase" is when the phase is interleaved with a PWM signal per phase. Otherwise you're just splitting the current load between two sets of components (i.e. doubled improperly).

The same thing happens with using a doubler without phase interleave (90° or 180° out of phase). If it's interleaved then the mosfets connected to the doubler turn on _out of phase_ and not at the same time (run at effectively 1/2 or 1/4 of the PWM input frequency).

Due to the use of RT9624F in addition to the RT8894A PWM (4+2 phase PWM) I doubt it's interleaved.
Per the RT9624F datasheet: _Drive Two N-MOSFETs_ , nothing on interleaving or "out of phase".



If you review the specsheet for the Intersil ISl6611A and IR3599 / IR3598 they definitely list interleaving.

Also https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7353/3/msi-x370-sli-plus-gaming-pro-carbon-a-krait-gaming-review-msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon
Richtek RT8894

http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-b350-tomahawk-am4-motherboard-review/3/
Quote:


> MSI uses a 4+2 phase power delivery system to feed the AM4 CPU and its accompanying components such as the SOC voltage rail and (probably) iGPU for upcoming APUs.
> 
> A Richtek RT8894A PWM controls the system. Four CPU phases use four NIKOS PK616BA and eight NIKOS PK632BA MOSFETs, in addition to a component marked '4P=3H V38' that I could not find information for but is likely a MOSFET driver. The 2-phase SOC power is handled by four NIKOS PK616BA and four NIKOS PK632BA MOSFETs, in addition to a pair of the aforementioned '4P=3H V38' components likely to be MOSFET drivers.
> 
> This is a decent enough power delivery solution for a roughly £100 AM4 motherboard. The primary MOSFETs are the same type used on MSI's £300 flagship X370 XPower Gaming Titanium motherboard. That point can be interpreted as a good thing for the B350 Tomahawk or a bad thing for the £300 XPower.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I believe KarathKasun has it right based on the waveforms.
> 
> A "true phase" is when the phase is interleaved with a PWM signal per phase. Otherwise you're just splitting the current load between two sets of components (i.e. doubled improperly).
> 
> The same thing happens with using a doubler without phase interleave (90° or 180° out of phase). If it's interleaved then the mosfets connected to the doubler turn on _out of phase_ and not at the same time (run at effectively 1/2 or 1/4 of the PWM input frequency).
> 
> Due to the use of RT9624F in addition to the RT8894A PWM (4+2 phase PWM) I doubt it's interleaved.
> Per the RT9624F datasheet: _Drive Two N-MOSFETs_ , nothing on interleaving or "out of phase".
> 
> 
> 
> If you review the specsheet for the Intersil ISl6611A and IR3599 / IR3598 they definitely list interleaving.
> 
> Also https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/7353/3/msi-x370-sli-plus-gaming-pro-carbon-a-krait-gaming-review-msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon
> Richtek RT8894
> 
> http://www.kitguru.net/components/motherboard/luke-hill/msi-b350-tomahawk-am4-motherboard-review/3/


While I do agree with what you're saying, and these are indeed valid ways to drive the phases, the most efficient way to drive phases in this configuration (on the x370 boards mentioned on the previous page) is by using doublers and interleaving them. If I make sure that doublers are missing from the back of the pcb, then I'll conclude that msi messed up and uses half of the phases in parallel.

The reason I doubt that they "doubled improperly" is that the cost difference would be insignificant, even for msi.









Edit: After finally finding a place where the back side of the board was shown, it turns out that MSI did indeed skip on using doublers. So yeah, my bad.


----------



## ozlay

I really like that Biostar X370GTN i only wish it had more m.2


----------



## chew*

Biostar part 1 on beta bios

https://youtu.be/j1LkqkK16CI

Unfortunately hw monitor has no temp that correlates to real in vrm...

So lets call it 56c avg 65c peak...

I never saw 65c but i was not there babysitting it with IR on it for 8 plus hours...I did see 61.9c so its realistic...

Biostar part 2 latest bios verify bugs again....

Decent board decent hardware for the money...but currently unless your aware of workarounds you will get bogged down in Bios*Tar*.

We already knew bios support was meh but it has potential...up to biostar to take the hardware to the next lvl with software.

Anyway vid 2...covering bugs.

https://youtu.be/jFay8uHw-OU

My suggestions.

Cpu_pll adjustable in bios

Fix vcore/llc bug...and unlock llc for soc...its got a bit of overshoot.

Straighten out your memory tables.

Install a better heatsink on the soc/vcore combo vrm..

Add promontory items for pci x gen2/1 or ref clock wont matter much once it is unlocked.

Spend less time/manpower polishing software for vivid led DJ and just call rgb ports...i dunno...rgb ports?


----------



## AlphaC

@ Chew* , when I saw the first Biostar video you posted it seems you can only adjust P0 state. Is that right?

If there is only P0 adjustment then Biostar should add P1 and P2 as well.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> @ Chew* , when I saw the first Biostar video you posted it seems you can only adjust P0 state. Is that right?
> 
> If there is only P0 adjustment then Biostar should add P1 and P2 as well.


From my own experience with the board, that is correct. Launch BIOS allowed you to edit more of them, I'm not sure why it was reduced to P0 alone.


----------



## chew*

Yah probably would not hurt...should add a non pstate to but tbh pstate works fine..


----------



## PsyM4n

MSI doesn't make sense sometimes...

They could take out 2 coils and 1 driver and add 2 fets and 3 doublers in a better performing 1plus2 config, at around the same cost, maybe even slightly cheaper, and they didn't.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ozlay*
> 
> I really like that Biostar X370GTN i only wish it had more m.2


I believe someone disagrees and would be happier with 1 m.2 more often...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *axiumone*
> 
> For anyone interested in the Biostar X370GTN, since it's the only ITX board on the market right now. So I had about a day so far to play around with this board. Very mixed feelings on my end.
> 
> - The rear I/O plate is a throwback to early 90's. Really cheap, thin metal that flexes when you look at it. There are tabs that you need to bend out of the way in order to install the board in a case.
> 
> -UEFI is very weak. No multiplier adjustments for the CPU in the UEFI! I feel like that's almost a deal breaker. You can overclock the CPU by adjusting the BCLK, but even that is limited to 100-108mhz. The only way use the multiplier is through the Ryzen Master utility. You have to start the utility manual with every windows boot and apply the overclock profile.
> 
> - Tons of options in the UEFI that have absolutely no description what so ever. The manual does not detail the UEFI at all, as in there's not even a section in the manual for it.
> 
> - All voltage adjustments are offset only. You can't set a definite value.
> 
> - M.2 nvme drives are finicky. The drive gets detected only on a fresh start. If you reboot from windows the m.2 drive disappears and you get the UEFI screen instead of a windows boot screen with no drive listed in boot options. At that point you have to power down and turn the pc on again.
> 
> - Memory support seems good. I was concerned about using a set for 2x16GB Corsair LPX 2666mhz dual rank, kit, but it booted without any issues and is running the rated XMP profile with no tweaking.
> 
> - The LED mosfet heatsink is very flimsy. It moves and flexes when you touch it, so you have to very cautious not to let any cable put pressure on it. The white stripe on the heatsink is a sticker and was falling off on my board.


Good news, still has 2 fun zone headers.

I wonder if it's the same mosfets as the other lower tier biostar boards.

and if anyone has received "assistane" from their e-support.


----------



## chew*

Tomorrow im taking day off. K7 air with new bios playtime and cold prepped C6H on Phase change play time..

Air C6H should be here sometime this week then i will wrap up this sort of real world VRM battle...for now..

Ran more prime in past few weeks...i need some 3d or 32m pi to keep my sanity


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> While I do agree with what you're saying, and these are indeed valid ways to drive the phases, the most efficient way to drive phases in this configuration (on the x370 boards mentioned on the previous page) is by using doublers and interleaving them. If I make sure that doublers are missing from the back of the pcb, then I'll conclude that msi messed up and uses half of the phases in parallel.
> 
> The reason I doubt that they "doubled improperly" is that the cost difference would be insignificant, even for msi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: After finally finding a place where the back side of the board was shown, it turns out that MSI did indeed skip on using doublers. So yeah, my bad.


AFAIK you cant actually double with that PWM controller because it drives the FETs directly.

Im still wondering what in the heck the board designers were doing for all the AM4 boards out. I don't think Ive ever seen this level of single cheek engineering. They are technically sufficient, but look extremely rushed and cheaped down. Perhaps they were building high margin boards for the worst case scenario and simply jacked up prices when they saw that the CPU's performed above expectations.

I honestly wouldn't pay over $200 for even the CH6. If I were looking for a decent board for the price, Taichi would be it but the UEFI seems to still be pretty bad.


----------



## PsyM4n

Well, you could use external drivers with your doublers and make it be... unfortunately that's not the case here.

Anyway, indeed the situation with all current AM4 boards leaves a lot to be desired. A pity too, considering we had some major breakthroughs in vrm power, efficiency and reliability in the last 5-6 years.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Well, you could use external drivers with your doublers and make it be... unfortunately that's not the case here..


No you can't since you already get the integrated drivers output from the controller instead of a raw PWM signal.
For doubling the phases you'd need to use a controller without any integrated drivers like the RT8877C (which also seems to be the ASUS ASP1106GGQW) instead of the RT8894A.


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Biostar part 1 on beta bios
> 
> https://youtu.be/j1LkqkK16CI
> 
> Unfortunately hw monitor has no temp that correlates to real in vrm...
> 
> So lets call it 56c avg 65c peak...
> 
> I never saw 65c but i was not there babysitting it with IR on it for 8 plus hours...I did see 61.9c so its realistic...
> 
> Biostar part 2 latest bios verify bugs again....
> 
> Decent board decent hardware for the money...but currently unless your aware of workarounds you will get bogged down in Bios*Tar*.
> 
> We already knew bios support was meh but it has potential...up to biostar to take the hardware to the next lvl with software.
> 
> Anyway vid 2...covering bugs.
> 
> https://youtu.be/jFay8uHw-OU
> 
> 
> 
> My suggestions.
> 
> Cpu_pll adjustable in bios
> 
> Fix vcore/llc bug...and unlock llc for soc...its got a bit of overshoot.
> 
> Straighten out your memory tables.
> 
> Install a better heatsink on the soc/vcore combo vrm..
> 
> Add promontory items for pci x gen2/1 or ref clock wont matter much once it is unlocked.
> 
> Spend less time/manpower polishing software for vivid led DJ and just call rgb ports...i dunno...rgb ports?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Tomorrow im taking day off. K7 air with new bios playtime and cold prepped C6H on Phase change play time..
> 
> Air C6H should be here sometime this week then i will wrap up this sort of real world VRM battle...for now..
> 
> Ran more prime in past few weeks...i need some 3d or 32m pi to keep my sanity


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> No you can't since you already get the integrated drivers output from the controller instead of a raw PWM signal.
> For doubling the phases you'd need to use a controller without any integrated drivers like the RT8877C (which also seems to be the ASUS ASP1106GGQW) instead of the RT8894A.


Yes you can and msi already does so.


----------



## chew*

Ok I did not do this for the VRM thread in general.......I was benching 3400 on my "flaky" chip then lost all of the ability to boot @ 3400 so just ran overnight to verify I did not smoke the IMC....

Fan on vrm......airgap under board. Also verified switching frequency for my own personal reasons........600hz vcore/600 SOC so I will be emailing them about adding switching frequency options........again.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Yes you can and msi already does so.


On which board?
I don't know any doubler IC that works with UGATE, LGATE and BOOT as an input instead of just the raw PWM signal for the highside.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> On which board?
> I don't know any doubler IC that works with UGATE, LGATE and BOOT as an input instead of just the raw PWM signal for the highside.


Since you already have one raw signal you can hook up a doubling scheme there.

Yeah, it's a bad approach. Applicable yet terrible.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok I did not do this for the VRM thread in general.......I was benching 3400 on my "flaky" chip then lost all of the ability to boot @ 3400 so just ran overnight to verify I did not smoke the IMC....
> 
> Fan on vrm......airgap under board. Also verified switching frequency for my own personal reasons........600hz vcore/600 SOC so I will be emailing them about adding switching frequency options........again.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Same switching frequency as titanium. If only heatpipe... copy paste then cut corner.. nice.
z270 have switching freq bios option?

I would guess that the subs not locked as they were in earlier bios and your imc can't find it's way back to them on it's own... except you're the king of baby steps. Money's on you chew*.

Had pi yet?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Same switching frequency as titanium. If only heatpipe... copy paste then cut corner.. nice.
> z270 have switching freq bios option?
> 
> I would guess that the subs not locked as they were in earlier bios and your imc can't find it's way back to them on it's own... except you're the king of baby steps. Money's on you chew*.
> 
> Had pi yet?


Testing effeciency atm with newer agesa on K7. Not impressed. Maybe i should enable rgb.

Tried the 3dmark 2001 tweak in bios....yah it got slower...must only work in xp...which we have yet to sort out installation on....really useful option..


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok I did not do this for the VRM thread in general.......I was benching 3400 on my "flaky" chip then lost all of the ability to boot @ 3400 so just ran overnight to verify I did not smoke the IMC....
> 
> Fan on vrm......airgap under board. Also verified switching frequency for my own personal reasons........600hz vcore/600 SOC so I will be emailing them about adding switching frequency options........again.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3034278/


You know you love us!









Anyhow defaulting to 600kHz f_sw is worrisome given the gutted middle of the heatsink for CPU. I would have thought it to be 350 or 400kHz.

The datasheets reflect 400kHz as baseline BUT losses are supposed to be ~3% more with 600kHz.



If you were messing with memory maybe it's the memory VRM?

Per tweaktown (sin's review) for Gaming 5
Quote:


> single phase VRM consists of three ON Semiconductor NTMFS4C10N in a doubled low-side configuration controlled by a Richtek RT8120D.


Given the use of a single memory VRM with so-so switching times any ripple from PSU would likely be a less stable voltage.


----------



## chew*

No clue psu is a modified (safeties off ) and fairly new recondition turbocool 1200 i dragged out of storage.

I blame the chip. I just know the chip, it acts dumb.

Have had no issues other than noise pollution.

Plan on gambling on a recon ax1200i next week..

Tbh i have 3 quality units here. The dinosaur clocks my fury x 10 mhz higher...otherwise...results are same.

Oh cool...rgb in color shift mode = slower effeciency....maybe i need pulse mode.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No clue psu is a modified (safeties off ) and fairly new recondition turbocool 1200 i dragged out of storage.
> 
> I blame the chip. I just know the chip, it acts dumb.
> 
> Have had no issues other than noise pollution.
> 
> Plan on gambling on a recon ax1200i next week..
> 
> Tbh i have 3 quality units here. The dinosaur clocks my fury x 10 mhz higher...otherwise...results are same.
> 
> Oh cool...rgb in color shift mode = slower effeciency....maybe i need pulse mode.


Zen's biostar board liked "breathe" iirc.

and vivid dj kicks msi a$$..........


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Zen's biostar board liked "breathe" iirc.
> 
> and vivid dj kicks msi a$$..........


That reminds me...one of my msi complaints...can not shut off led lights...no option in bios.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Since you already have one raw signal you can hook up a doubling scheme there.
> 
> Yeah, it's a bad approach. Applicable yet terrible.


Doubling one out of four phases is just nonsense and also shouldn't work in most of the cases I think. Doublers do divide the switching frequency by half so the second doubled phase isn't interleaved to the second true phase anymore.
There is a reason why everyone is just doubling all of the phases or not a single one.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Doubling one out of four phases is just nonsense and also shouldn't work in most of the cases I think. Doublers do divide the switching frequency by half so the second doubled phase isn't interleaved to the second true phase anymore.
> There is a reason why everyone is just doubling all of the phases or not a single one.


Well it works. There are configurations where only some of the phase outputs from the modulator are used and then doubled/quadrupled.

There are various doubling schemes.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> That reminds me...one of my msi complaints...can not shut off led lights...no option in bios.


Elmor gives the state of affairs on MSI:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/6atydw/open_but_personal_letter_to_the_pc_components/*
> It saddens me to see that our biggest competitors are not even trying anymore. I mean fine, you don't have to do LN2 but please do something more than slap LEDs on it and call it gaming. The MSI X370 Xpower paints a pretty good idea of where we're headed. Gigabyte has hicookie, one of the most seasoned overclockers in the world who's being outmanaged inside the company. Without him we wouldn't have products like X58-OC, Z97-SOC, X99-SOC Champion and Z170X-SOC Force. Asrock has Nickshih and his OC Formula boards who are unbeatable in raw DRAM frequency at the moment (we're coming for you) but didn't get to do a Z270 update. Vince and Tin still seem to be on top of things in the VGA department, I really hope there will be a 1080Ti Kingpin Edition. Unfortunately I'll have to put Nvidia in the corner of shame because of their reluctance to help us push the limits of PC hardware and locking things down more and more.


Impact is no more. Don't hold out for a ROG ITX AM4 board
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/6atydw/open_but_personal_letter_to_the_pc_components/dhhqtye/*
> I'm not saying you have to buy our boards, I'm saying we and a few other people in other companies are putting in a lot off effort for you guys and I hope it will show in sales. If it doesn't there's a risk we won't be allowed to keep doing boards like Apex, it's exactly why Impact is no more. Same for previous Z170(M) OC Formula for example. I can't speak for our audio or RGB solutions since I'm not working with those parts. And to show you why I feel media is lacking, a few examples: Crosshair VI Hero's main feature was the ability to adjust reference clock, how many reviews test this to get around the initial 2666-2933 max DRAM frequency? One review site, OC3D. And even then it's just two short paragraphs and CPU-Z screen. How many tested other memory kits than the worst possible kit provided by AMD to reviewers? How many reviews mentioned the bricking issues we were having? How many mentioned the platform DRAM "cold boot" problems? How many tested DRAM performance scaling before I put up graphs showing how much increase you get by running at 3200+? We have a great feature called "overclocking thermal control" on Z270 which works similar to AVX negative offset but is instead triggered on temperature ranges and allows you to set both ratio and voltage, it's not been tested anywhere. And since no media brings it up, it will most likely be difficult to do something similar in the future.


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> Well it works. There are configurations where only some of the phase outputs from the modulator are used and then doubled/quadrupled.
> 
> There are various doubling schemes.


Yeah, using just one phase and double / quadruple it up would work, you're right - but that's nothing for ATX motherboard VRMs in 2017.








To stick with this case, doubling with the VDD VR of the RT8894A is always a bad idea and will not happen.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Yeah, using just one phase and double / quadruple it up would work, you're right - but that's nothing for ATX motherboard VRMs in 2017.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To stick with this case, doubling with the VDD VR of the RT8894A is always a bad idea and will not happen.


Indeed.

When I initially saw the msi boards in question it made sense that they were using some sort of doubling scheme.
Turns out that not only did they lack doublers, the modulator was also not designed for such a configuration.


----------



## chew*

Alpha....

Professional overclocking is dying...it has been on the downslope since i "retired".

Partly due to manufacturer interference in the WR department...who wants to compete against manufacturer backed over clockers with endless budgets?

This is part of the reason i do not post scores officially on hwbot anymore nor will i interfere in this or any forums"oc" rankings.

While many like to see the max potential...when that max is used in competition...with backing behind it...avg joe just can not compete and just quits or does not bother.

With that happening it eventually has bit companies in the rear....what they pushed so hard for has come full circle.

I predicted this outcome 6 years ago.

I believe in leading by example. Show what the hardware can do but do not interfere in the competitive scene.


----------



## PsyM4n

It's all about profits and control unfortunately...


----------



## chew*

In no way tuning for efficiency.......just swapping sticks....they can or they can not....

So lets see.....chipset voltage. bios could use it everyone but gigabyte has chipset voltage option. switching frequency obviously....memory support would be nice...the ability to use anything other than auto multi for refclock? priceless.....to bad it still does not work.

Flare x 3200 and trident z 3600 ( the tighter bin ) can not do this.....but my 3200 bin trident z can.....btw of the 3 sets this one is the worst......

still used flaky chip....keeps my skills honed and keeps me on my toes.....reminds me of the wife....on a good day we get along just fine..

board would be capable of so much more.......I will look into the timings per dim later but.....I don't think its quite that. Effeciency looks bad but.....a lot of that is agesa



Had enough bug testing on this bios for one day......

time to bolt up my c6h to the phase.....which chip to test this time.......hmmm


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> In no way tuning for efficiency.......just swapping sticks....they can or they can not....
> 
> So lets see.....chipset voltage. bios could use it everyone but gigabyte has chipset voltage option. switching frequency obviously....memory support would be nice...the ability to use anything other than auto multi for refclock? priceless.....to bad it still does not work.
> 
> Flare x 3200 and trident z 3600 ( the tighter bin ) can not do this.....but my 3200 bin trident z can.....btw of the 3 sets this one is the worst......
> 
> still used flaky chip....keeps my skills honed and keeps me on my toes.....reminds me of the wife....on a good day we get along just fine..
> 
> board would be capable of so much more.......I will look into the timings per dim later but.....I don't think its quite that. Effeciency looks bad but.....a lot of that is agesa
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had enough bug testing on this bios for one day......
> 
> time to bolt up my c6h to the phase.....which chip to test this time.......hmmm


chocolate

Results from worst set with your flakiest imc is promising for end users.

more agesa change ahead yet.


----------



## chew*

Btw i run 32m because that besides stability "prime" is hardest to pass. All other benches...easy.
If you see
-1
-1
In my 32m pi...its much harder like that etc no max mem tweaks to gain stability.


----------



## TheBloodEagle

Read this post on TechPowerUp but one thing that stood out to me, even from the comments is people just mention the facade stuff, the easy to notice things but not talk or concern over stuff that's mentioned here like the ICs / VRM / Mosfets, etc. All the smaller components littering a board that are rarely in focus on articles.

https://www.techpowerup.com/233303/on-elmors-open-letter-or-the-state-of-the-industry


----------



## chew*

I slammed companies day 1 @ launch.

I don't need handouts so unlike others i will not pucker up and ? rear ends.

Gigabyte seemingly will not even respond to my emails currently.

Hopefully they read thread and interpret it as feedback/constructive criticism....as well as all the other vendors...no one is unscathed imo for round 1 am4.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Anyone else interested in Ryzen 9? Kinda wish I waited but then again, I don't need more than 8 cores for gaming at the moment. I'm sure that platform will cost hundreds more as well.


----------



## TheBloodEagle

So you're saying you wouldn't want to spend the money anyway and it's something you don't need for what you do but you still want it just because? That's the OCN way!


----------



## chew*

Guys need to be realistic. 3.0 with 3.6 turbo on top model. If R7 top sku is any indicator...400-500 mhz out of the top model...then there is the heat to deal with.

3.4-3.5 will not be very good at gaming not even with the small ipc boost from quad channel.

Lets not even discuss memory compatibility issues in quad channel...

If current vrm heat is any indicator of how vendors will do boards...gl with your 16 core upgrade.

Might be great at hosting a game server...after all...its a server chip and will fetch server chip pricing most likely.

Look on the brightside though...with the heat it generates...coldboot imc issues will not be a problem


----------



## bardacuda

lol "Threadripper"

The base/boost clocks on some of those SKUs are surprisingly high given the number of cores.

I think chew* is right...once we see the pricing of that platform nobody is going to be disappointed that they went with X370/B350.

I'm more interested in what they will be able to cram into Zen3 on the "7nm" node since it won't require a platform upgrade...but that is still a few years away. I don't expect Zen2 or Raven Ridge to be much different than what we have now given that it uses the same 14nm LPP.

Raven Ridge could be an awesome chip for making an inexpensive console killer though with its Vega cores.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Btw i run 32m because that besides stability "prime" is hardest to pass. All other benches...easy.
> If you see
> -1
> -1
> In my 32m pi...its much harder like that etc no max mem tweaks to gain stability.


9:16
10:03
9:55

I have no idea what I'm looking for with pi.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> 9:16
> 10:03
> 9:55
> 
> I have no idea what I'm looking for with pi.


Times at 4.0 should be 8:2x range with well tuned memory on w7. If not...slow bios/agesa.


----------



## b0oMeR

I have been told that ryzen cpus dont support vrms. Correct ne if im mistaken but sounds cost cutting to me.


----------



## bardacuda

It's true. They crumble under the weight. You need an ARM CPU for that.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> It's true. They crumble under the weight. You need an ARM CPU for that.


Hammer


----------



## CrazyElf

Just wanted to say thanks for the videos to Chew; a big +Rep on your end and thanks for the fast summary AlphaC; +Rep too.

Has anyone tried the new Asrock OC BIOS? They just released it on the X370 Fata1ty Professional Gaming:
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty%20X370%20Professional%20Gaming/index.asp#BIOS

Between the VRM, the 5 GbE LAN, and if this new OC BIOS is any good, I am thinking that this may be the best of the X370 motherboards. That's not saying much, but it's what we have to work with right now. Maybe if the Biostar has a really good BIOS, it is also worth a look at. We'll need to see once the new AGESA comes out.

The Gigabyte and the Asrock both have some Creative software. It probably won't get you very far (I very much prefer using a soundcard or external USB out DAC), but it is there.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> @CrazyElf
> The much bigger and efficient heatsink of the Titanium is still not enough to correct it's very low efficient vrm. The Titanium runs hotter than the Taichi/Fatality, CHVI and Biostar because it's VRM dissipates more power and does that mostly due to cheap and inefficient fet's it uses .
> 
> My processor is fine, that guy is just throwing baloney non-stop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @yendor
> 
> Yes, forgot to mention that. Still, the biostar has amazingly good VRM for a board that costs almost $ 100 less than the titanium.


Glad to hear your CPU is ok.

In regards to the temps, I agree - the thermal FLIR images earlier showed a higher maximum temperature on the XPower so that's plausible.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The price is not acceptable at MSRP so unless someone would rather dump another $50-150 into motherboard instead of into CPU/GPU/RAM I don't see reason to recommend it.
> 
> I don't know people keep backtracking on this. Anyone who has an unbiased outlook can see it is not a $300 board. $200-220 _maybe_ if you value added PCI-e power (moot with Biostar TB350 BTC out). Both microcenter and newegg agree , they have had them on sale for $250-270 already , with MIR for another $10-20 off.
> 
> A. The VRM components are at least $20 cheaper than any other high end board in terms of mosfets , chokes/inductors, output capacitance
> B. no refclock chip
> C. not that many extra USB 3.1/3.0 ports
> D. does not match feature parity with Intel Xpower boards (OC DASH, v-check pts, PCI-E slot disable switches, tantalum caps, etc) , it's close to Mpower at best and I don't think I would knock it so hard if it were sold as and priced as an Mpower
> E. lack of Dual BIOs / Multi-BIOs , thermistor temp headers, etc (overclocking features)
> F. no VRM cooling monoblocks out yet
> G. audio results are lackluster in some reviews despite use of ALC1220, I've see -88dBa and -89dBa SNR in the madshrimps review / -90dBA on eteknix and -93dBA on kitguru. There's no excuse for this since some other reviews have it at -107 or -110dBA SNR
> 
> The Gigabyte K7 board should have been 50-60A PowIRStages but the VRM cooling "issue" can be likely alleviated with $20-30 worth of aluminum or copper mosfet heatsinks + fujipoly pads. Unlike the Xpower its efficiency doesn't run away with thermals (i.e. the graph for power loss vs temp for Xpower is scaled with roughly ambient as baseline vs 110+°C for NexFETs). Even with no heatsinks and 70°C ambient temperature it will be able to push out 20A per phase.
> 
> If anyone wants a true high end board and not a mid-range board with some tacked on overclocking features , there's none on the market. The Crosshair VI Hero comes close but it isn't a true high end board once you compare to Intel chipsets.
> ----
> 
> @ chew* , OCP on results in 26A max per phase according to the Stilt on his Anandtech thread.
> 
> side note: *Maybe the K7 / Xpower money went into making shiny boxes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


MSI uses pretty standard packaging for all its high end boards:

Here's the Z270 XPower, which costs about the same (maybe 10% more) than the X370 XPower.





This was the older packaging for the X99S XPower. The hole you see on the IO panel is for a 2x2 Wifi Chip - it ships with the Intel 7260, but any M.2 Wifi chip should fit.




The X99A XPower was basically identical in packaging, although of course it had the OC Socket and 2 USB 3.1 ports.




Better VRM (ISL 6388. 6 phases doubled into 12 with Fairchild 55A FDMF5823DC Mosfets)
More USB ports
Presence of voltage checkpoints and other premium OC features (ex: Dual BIOS )
In the case of X99, one premium feature on the X99A high end MSI boards was the OC Socket - but on the AMD X370 XPower, there is no generator
Lots of USB ports and other features you'd expect on a premium board
Granted the X99A XPower is a bit more expensive at $400 USD at launch than the $300 X370.

Actually, if you want point H, the X370 Xpower had 7 layers, versus the Z170 and Z270 XPower, along with all the other XPowers which feature 8 layers PCB. The MPower features 6 layers usually.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Inductor should be a nonissue on the GT7 unless the inductor itself is the one that is hot.
> 
> 
> ^ IR3550 spec vs inductor (60A PowIRStage) , so assume IR3555 would be similar
> 
> 
> 
> IR3553 spec vs inductor


Agree. The only risk is if the inductors get overloaded. One of the fastest way to fry a Mosfet is to overload the inductors. Right now though, most of these inductors are rated for 60A or more, so we ought to be fine.

With a 60A choke, even the strongest phases that have the IR3555M should see no issues.









That said, I do want to know if we can track the real model numbers of these chokes. Names like Blackwing or Titanium chokes don't really mean much to me.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Elmor gives the state of affairs on MSI:
> Impact is no more. Don't hold out for a ROG ITX AM4 board


As an MSI customer, I just hope they pull it together. I'm not against the idea of high end "gaming" boards like the X99A Godlike Carbon, but at least the Godlike was a real flagship. Yes it had LEDs and a Gaming NIC (2x E2400 IIRC), but it also shipped with decent quality audio approaching a discrete GPU and the same excellent 12 phase (doubled 6 phase) 55A Fairchild Mosfets as seen on the X99A XPower.
 

I kind of like the black look on that motherboard. Only change I would make is covering that black "Godlike" text. Maybe some more surface area for the Mosfet heatsinks too. Switch the LAN to an i218V (standard on X99) and the second one to either an i211AT LAN or better yet, a 5 or 10 Gbps Ethernet solution. Otherwise a solid board. I'm thinking about buying one used for my 5960X.

It's just that it is disappointing watching them go down like this, calling a gaming board with silver-white PCB looks and some LEDs gaming. Fun fact: The original red Godlike was the first board with LEDs and the steel PCIe reinforcements.

I'm hoping that the X299 Godlike is good and that we see a premium quality Zen 16 core motherboard from MSI.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> 9:16
> 10:03
> 9:55
> 
> I have no idea what I'm looking for with pi.


This is right.....if its not in this range with new bios......its wrong.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> This is right.....if its not in this range with new bios......its wrong.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


9:07 at 39.2.. old bios. win 10. Timings might be stable but still 9 seconds gained from 14-14-14-34 still feels off.



6.04 is the latest bios for the wee asus. First round of 1.0.0.4a Agesa. Think I'll pass. If memory serves it was at best unimpressive.


----------



## chew*

I don't think they are slacking this board....C6H is another story.

I have faster times......but they are for sandbagging.

Here is a way to gauge what boards/bios are fast.

http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=167245


----------



## SteelBox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> lol "Threadripper"
> 
> The base/boost clocks on some of those SKUs are surprisingly high given the number of cores.
> 
> I think chew* is right...once we see the pricing of that platform nobody is going to be disappointed that they went with X370/B350.
> 
> *I'm more interested in what they will be able to cram into Zen3 on the "7nm" node since it won't require a platform upgrade*...but that is still a few years away. I don't expect Zen2 or Raven Ridge to be much different than what we have now given that it uses the same 14nm LPP.
> 
> Raven Ridge could be an awesome chip for making an inexpensive console killer though with its Vega cores.


Did AMD officialy confirmed that Zen3 will support current am4 motherboards?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteelBox*
> 
> Did AMD officialy confirmed that Zen3 will support current am4 motherboards?


I would not worry about a cpu planned for a processor tech that does not exist yet.
Sure, lets suppose that am4 is still the compatible socket. Other technologies are not standing still.
No reason to believe that they'll be compatible with today's motherboards.
New io standards, new memory standards, new pin-outs for either and it won't matter how compatible your current motherboard is with a cpu.


----------



## SteelBox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I would not worry about a cpu planned for a processor tech that does not exist yet.
> Sure, lets suppose that am4 is still the compatible socket. Other technologies are not standing still.
> No reason to believe that they'll be compatible with today's motherboards.
> New io standards, new memory standards, new pin-outs for either and it won't matter how compatible your current motherboard is with a cpu.


But in this news is stated that Zen2 and Zen3 is 7nm and we know that 100% Zen2 will be compatible with current AM4 boards so there is a big chance that Zen3 is also compatible.

http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-2-zen-3-7nm-cpu-architecture-details/

From comment section:

_"From what I've read, everything up to 2020 will be on AM4. So let's hope. I would love to be able to upgrade my PC without buying a new mobo, ram, etc. It's the smartest way to cell new CPUs, simply make it a viable/logical option to do so."_


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteelBox*
> 
> Did AMD officialy confirmed that Zen3 will support current am4 motherboards?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SteelBox*
> 
> But in this news is stated that Zen2 and Zen3 is 7nm and we know that 100% Zen2 will be compatible with current AM4 boards so there is a big chance that Zen3 is also compatible.
> 
> http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-2-zen-3-7nm-cpu-architecture-details/
> 
> From comment section:
> 
> _"From what I've read, everything up to 2020 will be on AM4. So let's hope. I would love to be able to upgrade my PC without buying a new mobo, ram, etc. It's the smartest way to cell new CPUs, simply make it a viable/logical option to do so."_


Their roadmap calls for it. For what it's worth their roadmap has been wrong before, and will be wrong again. Same as Intels.

Will your current am4 motherboard and ram be good in 2020? Sure. No worries.

Will the mobo be up to date and working with the latest technologies enabled on it? Bet against that.

I certainly hope that in just 3 years there is new tech that makes a compelling case for purchasing a new motherboard regardless of whether or not the socket is am4. Whether that's a new ram technology, new io feature that works better as part of native motherboard feature or what have you.


----------



## bardacuda

Wait...Zen 2 is on 7nm now? This is actually news to me. I thought that one was still going to be on the same process as the current chips.

Anyhow I'll be interested to see what kind of performance/core count they end up being able to get out of a 7nm chip in the current socket.

From what I'm seeing now looks like Zen 2 will indeed be 7nm and some time in 2019 so I guess that's the one I'll be interested in. PCI-E 4 and DDR 5 still seem to be a ways off and it's not like video cards are anywhere near approaching bandwidth limitations with current PCI-E 3 anyway.

I just think it would be cool if you could get like a 24 or 32 core 5GHz chip as a drop in upgrade.


----------



## chew*

The only thing you should really be concerned about is a die shrink or respin of zen with equivalent cores of current zen.....

That should mean clock scaling will get better which is currently there weakness......

Adding more cores will just exploit the weakness further......more cores more heat lower clocks.....

What it needs is same core count less heat higher clocks

x399 is slated for zen 2...totally different socket......because zen 2 is literally zen*2.

quad channel is not a feature its a necessity due to design of chip......1 zen core dual channel 2 zen cores two separate dual channels.....( quad channel )

glue 2 zen cores together 16 cores 32 threads in a "server" type socket.

Unlike intel all AMD chips start out as server chips ( always have )......and then desktop gets the rejects that did not cut the mustard so to speak.

How amd determines what makes a die "server worthy" I have no clue but I am guessing partly based on tdp and asic quality....


----------



## bardacuda

That's what I'm hoping for but I don't really know anything about this new node. I'm in the process of catching up now

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/249075-foundry-futures-tsmc-samsung-globalfoundries-intel-gear-7nm-beyond

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11337/samsung-and-tsmc-roadmaps-12-nm-8-nm-and-6-nm-added


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The only thing you should really be concerned about is a die shrink or respin of zen with equivalent cores of current zen.....
> 
> That should mean clock scaling will get better which is currently there weakness......
> 
> Adding more cores will just exploit the weakness further......more cores more heat lower clocks.....
> 
> What it needs is same core count less heat higher clocks
> 
> x399 is slated for zen 2...totally different socket......because zen 2 is literally zen*2.
> 
> quad channel is not a feature its a necessity due to design of chip......1 zen core dual channel 2 zen cores two separate dual channels.....( quad channel )
> 
> glue 2 zen cores together 16 cores 32 threads in a "server" type socket.
> 
> Unlike intel all AMD chips start out as server chips ( always have )......and then desktop gets the rejects that did not cut the mustard so to speak.
> 
> How amd determines what makes a die "server worthy" I have no clue but I am guessing partly based on tdp and asic quality....


AFAIK X399 CPUs are just the smaller Naples chips and a tweakable platform, not Zen2.


----------



## bardacuda

I think Zen 2 chips will probably come out for both sockets platforms but I could be wrong. Maybe they'll force you to use X499 for Zen 2 HEDT I dunno. Hopefully it won't require a new board for either socket.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> lol "Threadripper"


Corny, although I doubt anything will ever top Intel putting a skull on an SSD.


----------



## SuperZan

Maybe the super-edgy DX79TO? Only tru3 [email protected] need apply.


----------



## bardacuda

Nah I like it...just thought it was funny.


----------



## virpz

@chew*

Which x370 board you feel like having the best LLC ?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Corny, although I doubt anything will ever top Intel putting a skull on an SSD.


Hold on a minute...i have one in my pc....


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> @chew*
> 
> Which x370 board you feel like having the best LLC ?


I can tell you who doesn't...Bios*Tar* because i can not test it at all...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I can tell you who doesn't...Bios*Tar* because i can not test it at all...


chew* wut is Auto llc on the asus b350? "Make a wish"?

Apparently w tf is objectionable.....


----------



## SuperZan

Yeah, the GT7 LLC options are tits up at the moment, even LLC's 1 and 2 throw significantly more vdroop than should be expected. I also wish there were a couple more of the 'advanced' voltages. Those are the only real issues I've had, though I suppose my Chinglish could be above-average.


----------



## chew*

Um...you did not watch video closely...its not droop...its not working...period..it breaks vcore until a bios reset.


----------



## virpz

@chew*

Got the C6H today, LLC seems to be on par with the Taichi. Now the bios...taking out the Taichi's bios bugs I like it better.
4GHz now - gonna play some UT 99 to test stability







:sarcasm


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Um...you did not watch video closely...its not droop...its not working...period..it breaks vcore until a bios reset.


Um... I have the board. The only way I could recreate the issue you had was to use an 'Override' voltage instead of an 'Offset' voltage (which is what I've used from the jump). Not for nothing, but in your video I only saw you using Override. Measured at the socket, my voltage idling in OS is what I've set in Pstate and with Offset. With LLC enabled, my load voltage droops hard even up to LLC's 1 and 2. Again, that's using Offset, not Override, using stock, over, or under VIDs in Pstate settings.


----------



## chew*

Ok but...the fact remains it does not work...fid is pointless with pstate 0 only.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> @chew*
> 
> Got the C6H today, LLC seems to be on par with the Taichi. Now the bios...taking out the Taichi's bios bugs I like it better.
> 4GHz now - gonna play some UT 99 to test stability
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :sarcasm


C6H is very benchable. Im working with K7 now...found some effeciency...its actually not bad at all.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok but...the fact remains it does not work...fid is pointless with pstate 0 only.


On that point there is no argument, LLC definitely needs a fix to be usable in all scenarios.


----------



## cssorkinman

Did a little comparison between buildzoid's vrm temps on his Tiachi on of his video druing cb 11.5 vs my Titanium - same bench.
He's at 4025 , I'm at 4100 , he's at 1.44 volts max vs 1.464 max on mine

My Titanium had cooler VRM temps







( and yes, he has a fan blowing on his socket area too )


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Did a little comparison between buildzoid's vrm temps on his Tiachi on of his video druing cb 11.5 vs my Titanium - same bench.
> He's at 4025 , I'm at 4100 , he's at 1.44 volts max vs 1.464 max on mine
> 
> My Titanium had cooler VRM temps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ( and yes, he has a fan blowing on his socket area too )


Less expensive! Hair...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Did a little comparison between buildzoid's vrm temps on his Tiachi on of his video druing cb 11.5 vs my Titanium - same bench.
> He's at 4025 , I'm at 4100 , he's at 1.44 volts max vs 1.464 max on mine
> 
> My Titanium had cooler VRM temps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ( and yes, he has a fan blowing on his socket area too )
> 
> 
> 
> Less expensive! Hair...
Click to expand...

lol...


----------



## virpz

That guy is trying so hard...

@chew*

Would you run OCCT: Powersupply on the C6H and take note of it's +12V minimum under load ?

Thank you


----------



## cssorkinman

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> lol...


Here is the deal, the Taichi uses next generation fets, such fets are really much more efficient and suitable for motherboards than the Nikos. You can do whatever you want, you can say whatever you want, the MSI Titanium VRMs will not change and at the boards pricepoint it sucks to have nikos there. It is clear to everybody that is not a MSI backend boy .

You can always put those cheap fets under water to try get your temps close to what you would have with the Taichi's at the same load. Still, that would not change the fact that your board comes with fets that are based on old, inefficient and not very reliable tech.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Here is the deal, the Taichi uses next generation fets, such fets are really much more efficient and suitable for motherboards than the Nikos. You can do whatever you want, you can say whatever you want, the MSI Titanium VRMs will not change and at the boards pricepoint it sucks to have nikos there. It is clear to everybody that is not a MSI backend boy .
> 
> You can always put those cheap fets under water to try get your temps close to what you would have with the Taichi's at the same load. Still, that would not change the fact that your board comes with fets that are based on old, inefficient and not very reliable.


Power consumption results in at least two reviews suggest that, less expensive or not, they are part of a board that competes well in that metric and even leads some of its supposedly superior competitors despite matching switching frequency and u sing less efficient fets


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Power consumption results in at least two reviews suggest that, less expensive or not, they are part of a board that competes well in that metric and even leads some of its supposedly superior competitors despite matching switching frequency and u sing less efficient fets


How, when, were it lead ?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> How, when, were it lead ?


Two of the reviews were mentioned pages and pages ago. One used measurements taken at the wall however components were the same. Another review used software, alas we know how accurate power consumption readings are in hwinfo for example. (I think they're mythical or I have a magic board that can manufacture and use more power than it's drawing from the wall)
One other? I forget which had reasonable testing methodology.

Each of them showed comparable clocks and voltages, arguable simply because software is inherently inaccurate, and yet consistant.
Reasons were suggested including the simplest being that msi used a lower switching frequency, something that has since been disproven.

In short it runs away from the k7 which just sucks compared to the competition and hangs favorably with the rest if it doesn't beat them here and there.

And yet those fets are less expensive. I've used harsher words but the power consumption is worth checking out. It's a freaking bumble-bee thing. It appears to just happen.


----------



## yendor

I'd pull out references but it's not my axe. I'm pretty sure they exist. And I think your estimate of 7.80 worth of mosfets is wrong, I bet the greedy buggers pay far less for them


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


We were due for the screenie. I'm watching his earlier vid though for giggles. wee board has been fighting me over timings and I want to frisby it then hunt down the idiot at asus support who sends responses to my email. I'm not sure what he's smoking but I want to make sure I avoid it. Clearly not connecting...


----------



## chew*

So buildzoid runs on a stock cooler which runs far hotter than water...heat increases power draw, power draw increases load on fets and you say apples? Seriously...also not equal chips not equal ambients...not equal comparison..

Btw which way does the heat blow out the stock cooler...oh yah towards vcore pwm...which is my biggest concern for gigabyte users...

An ak47 could shoot less holes in your comparison than i just did..

Furthermore my analysis of the 1700x cpu-z record guy who loves cinebench popping his board was spot on...we know the flaw and what can happen once you reach a certain point...with 600hz switching on that vrm...like i stated previously...when they go..they go out with a bang..

I am not putting that board on cold period....that in itself...should be a warning sign.


----------



## virpz

All you need is to watch chew's videos on the top boards, get the average VRM minus ambient and voilá.
If you have a board with a gigantic heatsink over its VRM and said board is displaying a delta that is higher than all the other know to be good boards then, voilá, you got ur champion - The MSI X370 Xpensive Craptanium, better know as the most expensive X370 board.


----------



## chew*

Pros

Its preety
It works
Good layout

Cons
Fan needed over vrm
No vddp
Lackluster bios options
Price is way out there
No ref clock

And my own little personal complaint....C6H and K7 will stomp it in PI 32m.

Feel free to prove me wrong on pi...but im a jedi master at that so good luck..

You show me at least 8:2x [email protected] or less in win 7...then i will go back and give it another shot....till then...here is your target...this is my slow time...


----------



## PsyM4n

It's quite evident that manufacturers cheaped out on their am4 boards in order to go all out on their high end 16 core capable boards.

Note that this does not justify the high asking prices on some am4 boards though.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> It's quite evident that manufacturers cheaped out on their am4 boards in order to go all out on their high end 16 core capable boards.
> 
> Note that this does not justify the high asking prices on some am4 boards though.


I disagree. The 16 core's will require different sockets, more from vrm (hallo 16 cores) and will produce more heat from the vrm as well as the cpu. Different target market where presumably function trumps bling every day of the week. It's another case of apples to bacon >.>

Cheaped out on early am4? heh. shot in the dark. they knew what they were supposed to deliver, even had es. final silicon was arguably not in their hands and verifiably they didn't have the latest agesa. You can simply watch their release times to see how quickly, or slowly, some of them are pumping out bios updates with latest agesa available to them....


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> I disagree. The 16 core's will require different sockets, more from vrm (hallo 16 cores) and will produce more heat from the vrm as well as the cpu. Different target market where presumably function trumps bling every day of the week. It's another case of apples to bacon >.>
> 
> Cheaped out on early am4? heh. shot in the dark. they knew what they were supposed to deliver, even had es. final silicon was arguably not in their hands and verifiably they didn't have the latest agesa. You can simply watch their release times to see how quickly, or slowly, some of them are pumping out bios updates with latest agesa available to them....


They cheaped out to make room for the high end 16-core platform. The new socket will require more power, more pcb layers, more everything. It makes sense to put the "good stuff" there.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PsyM4n*
> 
> They cheaped out to make room for the high end 16-core platform. The new socket will require more power, more pcb layers, more everything. It makes sense to put the "good stuff" there.


Nah, there is no need to make room. No cross compatibility, therefore no competition. It will appeal to a completely different market segment so again, no competition.
Cheaped out simply because it was what they knew would work, demand was an unknown and top tier products are definitely higher quality.
Second generation of motherboards isn't really out. THEN you'll see if cheaping out is really happening and it might be hard to distinguish between raw competition for what really matters...

RGB quality ftw!


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> So buildzoid runs on a stock cooler which runs far hotter than water...heat increases power draw, power draw increases load on fets and you say apples? Seriously...also not equal chips not equal ambients...not equal comparison..
> 
> Btw which way does the heat blow out the stock cooler...oh yah towards vcore pwm...which is my biggest concern for gigabyte users...
> 
> An ak47 could shoot less holes in your comparison than i just did..
> 
> Furthermore my analysis of the 1700x cpu-z record guy who loves cinebench popping his board was spot on...we know the flaw and what can happen once you reach a certain point...with 600hz switching on that vrm...like i stated previously...when they go..they go out with a bang..
> 
> I am not putting that board on cold period....that in itself...should be a warning sign.


What is the 120 mm aio cooling in his video? superpi"s relevance started to fade rapidly with the advent of the dual core over a decade ago. Extreme cooling? Well there's probably less than a 1000 people in the world that will put a Ryzen under ln2.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> What is the 120 mm aio cooling in his video? superpi"s relevance started to fade rapidly with the advent of the dual core over a decade ago. Extreme cooling? Well there's probably less than a 1000 people in the world that will put a Ryzen under ln2.


Yet it is one of the most benched.

You screenshotted it not me...that is an RGB stock on the cpu...


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> AFAIK you cant actually double with that PWM controller because it drives the FETs directly.
> 
> Im still wondering what in the heck the board designers were doing for all the AM4 boards out. I don't think Ive ever seen this level of single cheek engineering. They are technically sufficient, but look extremely rushed and cheaped down. Perhaps they were building high margin boards for the worst case scenario and simply jacked up prices when they saw that the CPU's performed above expectations.
> 
> I honestly wouldn't pay over $200 for even the CH6. If I were looking for a decent board for the price, Taichi would be it but the UEFI seems to still be pretty bad.


You are so right. Most of these boards including x370 are cheaped down, yet they charge more than their Intel x170 and x270 counterparts. The FACT is that since Ryzen is a SOC the boards Should be cheaper and more care should have been taken with providing extras like a plc chip with extra pciE 3.0 lanes so that 2 m.2 slots would each have 4 pci E 3.0 lanes so that they could be run in raid configfuration. more usb 3.1 ports. etc. These boards have a higher profit margin than the Intel boards and the board manufacturers probably never believed Ryzen would be the success it is. I puke on all of them.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yet it is one of the most benched.
> 
> You screenshotted it not me...that is an RGB stock on the cpu...


https://youtu.be/6HJwBMOr0g4?t=165

In the video from which the screen shot came at the point in the link above ( ~2:45) he moves the rgb fan while screwing around with probes..

rest of video is not funny.. waaaay too long. doubt anyone learned how to use bclk AGAIN. Just 'hey it works now' which sums up all 38 minutes ....


----------



## chew*

I am not a big fan of you tube so do not watch to many vids....do not even like making them but easier for me to show then explain in a forum post.

Anyway cinebench is a spike for 30 seconds at most...load for hours is better indicator....no one games for 30 seconds.

Cool least they sorted it. I had mentioned it to nick shih on skype plus be benched board on ln2 himself. He was aware of issue. I will be retesting it to see if its a pi contender soon.

Anything i find i report. Gigabyte is aware of there issues to....only one not in email or skype is biostar...although namegt knows me and is free to contact me if needed.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Allright....I actually probed the CPU vcore from the chip itself on my PRIME X370 PRO

4Ghz: 40x multiplier - 1.375V vcore setting - LLC4

At idle:

BIOS and HWinfo = 1.375V (steady)

CPUz = mostly 1.352 (and jumps up to 1.373 and is all around the place)

Multimeter = 1.385V (steady)

At load:

HWinfo = 1.362V (steady)

CPUz = mostly 1.428V (and jumps too)

Multimeter = 1.397V (steady)

So LLC4 is indeed giving a small vboost. I know the voltages taken are right because I tested the multimeter with a 12V adapter. I took the measurements while putting the ground probe in different parts of the chassis and the voltmeter showed the same voltages.

The vboost is pretty close to 1.4V which is still safe. All I need to know now if is if LLC4 is peaking too high but for that someone has to test this board with a good scope.

At this point I would assume LLC5 will have a pretty big and potentially dangerous vboost.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Allright....I actually probed CPU vcore from the chip itself on my PRIME X370 PRO
> 
> 4Ghz: 40x multiplier - 1.375V vcore setting - LLC4
> 
> At idle:
> 
> BIOS and HWinfo = 1.375V (steady)
> 
> CPUz = mostly 1.352 (and jumps up to 1.373 and is all around the place)
> 
> Multimeter = 1.385V (steady)
> 
> At load:
> 
> HWinfo = 1.362V (steady)
> 
> CPUz = mostly 1.428V (and jumps too)
> 
> Multimeter = 1.397V (steady)
> 
> So LLC4 is indeed giving a small vboost. I know the voltages taken are right because I tested the multimeter with a 12V adapter. I took the measurements while putting the ground probe in different parts of the chassis and the voltmeter showed the same voltages.
> 
> The vboost is pretty close to 1.4V which is still safe. All I need to know now if is if LLC4 is peaking too high but for that someone has to test this board with a good scope.
> 
> At this point I would assume LLC5 will have a pretty big and potentially dangerous vboost.


Tested 5 yet?


----------



## SaccoSVD

No. I might try but with safer speed and vcore and give you guys some offsets. Let me see.


----------



## SaccoSVD

At stock clock/volt (36x / 1.35V) LLC4 (LLC5 will follow) (Prime X370 Pro)

Idle:

HWInfo: 1.35V (closest but still not the right number)

CPUz: 1.330V (jumps to 1.52V....what?)

Multimeter 1.359V (steady)

Load:

HWinfo: 1.337V (what?)

CPUz: 1.319V (what?)

Multimeter 1.370V (steady)


----------



## SaccoSVD

At stock clock/volt (36x / 1.35V) LLC5 (Prime X370 Pro)

Idle:

HWInfo: 1.231V (steady)

CPUz: 1.199V to 1.450V (close)

Multimeter: 1.250V to 1.48V (unstable, all over the place, never over 1.48 tho but still crazy), you def don't want 1.48V in your chip (although they're at idle) the craziest is that this happens at stock speed/volt....I can't imagine at 1.37V or 1.4V setting.

Load:

HWInfo: 1.031V (steady)

CPUz: 1.199V (steady)

Multimeter: 1.269V (steady)


----------



## SaccoSVD

At stock clock/volt (36x / 1.35V) LLC3 (Prime X370 Pro)

Windows was unstable, took me 3 times to boot. And only could probe idle voltages, as soon as I wanted to launch wprime windows froze.

Idle:

HWInfo: 1.35V (steady)

Multimeter: all over the place, from 1.2V to 1.38V

Couldn't test CPUz

Seems like LLC3 is crap after all.

And seems like this board needs a new BIOS if we hope to have any of this fixed.

That said LLC4 seems to be the best option (for me and my 4Ghz OC), it gives you a small vboost without going too crazy. As I said initially, at 1.375V the vboost was 1.397V so still on the safe side IF peaks aren't an issue.

I'm gonna be probing again after agesa 1.0.0.6 is out and I get it stable here.


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Pros
> 
> Its preety
> It works
> Good layout
> 
> Cons
> Fan needed over vrm
> No vddp
> Lackluster bios options
> Price is way out there
> No ref clock
> 
> And my own little personal complaint....C6H and K7 will stomp it in PI 32m.
> 
> Feel free to prove me wrong on pi...but im a jedi master at that so good luck..
> 
> You show me at least 8:2x [email protected] or less in win 7...then i will go back and give it another shot....till then...here is your target...this is my slow time...


I agree with your assessment of my MSI Titanium. The reason I have one is the Asus issued a whole lot of Crosshair VI boards at launch that were complete bricks. I was an unfortunate victim. The only board the Micro Center tech/sales droid said had no returns was the MSI Titanium. It has been rock solid for me.


----------



## hotbrass

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Pros
> 
> Its preety
> It works
> Good layout
> 
> Cons
> Fan needed over vrm
> No vddp
> Lackluster bios options
> Price is way out there
> No ref clock
> 
> And my own little personal complaint....C6H and K7 will stomp it in PI 32m.
> 
> Feel free to prove me wrong on pi...but im a jedi master at that so good luck..
> 
> You show me at least 8:2x [email protected] or less in win 7...then i will go back and give it another shot....till then...here is your target...this is my slow time...


Why do you use Pi 1.5 instead of the newer versions? I have never used it but I see they are up to version 1.9. Thanks! Enjoy your work!


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Feel free to prove me wrong on pi...but im a jedi master at that so good luck..


Yoda on a good day =p

some days you gotta love software.


and 175 amps.

Neat trick.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Yoda on a good day =p
> 
> some days you gotta love software.
> 
> 
> and 175 amps.
> 
> Neat trick.


I hit that to on b350 video...and hw monitor logged 5.7gig on air...woot..


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotbrass*
> 
> Why do you use Pi 1.5 instead of the newer versions? I have never used it but I see they are up to version 1.9. Thanks! Enjoy your work!


Is the only version allowed for competing purposes. Etc hwbot.


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I hit that to on b350 video...and hw monitor logged 5.7gig on air...woot..


HWinfo 64 is more accurate with temps and voltage than HW Monitor. I have used both and my bios temps and voltage readings more closely resemble HWinfo.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> HWinfo 64 is more accurate with temps and voltage than HW Monitor. I have used both and my bios temps and voltage readings more closely resemble HWinfo.


Yeah but none of them show the actual voltage compared to a multimeter. So they're all useless ATM anyway. Maybe is the Ryzen platform itself reporting the wrong numbers.

I wonder if that's the same on a random Intel rig. Maybe we find a lot of surprises.


----------



## chew*

Well here is a perfect example of why overclockers who actually only overclock and do not actually use a system for intended purpose should not whine.

Asrock taichi now does not reset all your settings...

Broke alot of 24/7 ram compatibility ...broke 32g DR compatibility..

Congrats on the public rant video...job well done but at least your settings that do not work anymore do not get reset.

Lesson to be learned do not rush people to fix what can be worked around.


----------



## chew*

Ok........Apples to Golden Overpriced apples.

Golden Apple with hefty price tag.....and no cosorkin I did not intentionally run it slow......in fact I am pretty sure I smoked you with your own board with way less clocks on win7 as well ( which is slower but hwbot legal )











Just a normal apple on sale at your local food mart.....and I have faster backups not yet posted......


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok........Apples to Golden Overpriced apples.
> 
> Golden Apple with hefty price tag.....and no cosorkin I did not intentionally run it slow......in fact I am pretty sure I smoked you with your own board with way less clocks on win7 as well ( which is slower but hwbot legal )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a normal apple on sale at your local food mart.....and I have faster backups not yet posted......


Nice - I've never been patient enough with the memory tweaking good pi time's require.

hmm except for this one time... on an A -10 6800k



EDIT: http://valid.x86.fr/bjy34u

I haven't gotten around to setting up a benching os drive for the Ryzen , might not bother - hwbot is losing its appeal . Finally bought a bass boat so that's where my time is being spent , maybe this winter I'll get to it.


----------



## delerious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Yeah but none of them show the actual voltage compared to a multimeter. So they're all useless ATM anyway. Maybe is the Ryzen platform itself reporting the wrong numbers.
> 
> I wonder if that's the same on a random Intel rig. Maybe we find a lot of surprises.


On the Crosshair VI, would I use the Vcore probelt? I have to dig my multimeter out because BIOS is showing over 1.5v for the CPU at stock - Haven't changed anything.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *delerious*
> 
> On the Crosshair VI, would I use the Vcore probelt? I have to dig my multimeter out because BIOS is showing over 1.5v for the CPU at stock - Haven't changed anything.


No idea. I have a PRIME X370 PRO.

What is that Probeit?

EDIT: Found out.

Yes! that would be pretty convenient.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Cheaped out on early am4? heh. shot in the dark. they knew what they were supposed to deliver, even had es. final silicon was arguably not in their hands and verifiably they didn't have the latest agesa. You can simply watch their release times to see how quickly, or slowly, some of them are pumping out bios updates with latest agesa available to them....


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Cheaped out simply because it was what they knew would work, demand was an unknown and top tier products are definitely higher quality.
> Second generation of motherboards isn't really out. THEN you'll see if cheaping out is really happening and it might be hard to distinguish between raw competition for what really matters...


Bottom line is that Zen was a huge release - the first upgrade for AMD's enthusiast desktop CPU business since Bulldozer. There are no excuses for not providing products that people want to buy.


----------



## AlphaC

chew* if you get a hold of Gigabyte please tell them that the *$150 MSRP* K3 minus bclk gen should have been the $110 B350 Gaming 3 and that the $170 K5 should have been at best a K3 (Newegg has it at $140).

Newegg seems to agree, the K3 has now dropped to $130.

The pricing is ludicrous







.

For Biostar I don't know why they decided to go with SM4377 + SM4364A for the GT5 and GT3. They could have used the SM4337 instead for high side and had much lower switching losses and comparable low side conduction losses vs Gigabyte/ASUS. The decision just baffles me.

-

I got a X370 Taichi for $59.96 today with additional $10 MIR at Microcenter but I'm waiting for my Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I got a X370 Taichi for $59.96 today with additional $10 MIR at Microcenter but I'm waiting for my Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power


You got a Taichi for $ 59.96 ?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> You got a Taichi for $ 59.96 ?


Yeh the option was open box X370 Taichi or X370 Prime Pro (some B350 garbage , CHVI Hero for $60 more without wifi+BT, and overpriced Gigabytes too), waiting on the Thermalright TrueSpirit 140 Power Am4 cooler from Amazon


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> chew* if you get a hold of Gigabyte please tell them that the *$150 MSRP* K3 minus bclk gen should have been the $110 B350 Gaming 3 and that the $170 K5 should have been at best a K3 (Newegg has it at $140).
> 
> Newegg seems to agree, the K3 has now dropped to $130.
> 
> The pricing is ludicrous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> For Biostar I don't know why they decided to go with SM4377 + SM4364A for the GT5 and GT3. They could have used the SM4337 instead for high side and had much lower switching losses and comparable low side conduction losses vs Gigabyte/ASUS. The decision just baffles me.
> 
> -
> 
> I got a X370 Taichi for $59.96 today with additional $10 MIR at Microcenter but I'm waiting for my Thermalright True Spirit 140 Power


I can say something but tbh the people i tell most likely agree but have hands tied. Marketing and support team has no pull over higher ups. Hicookie i know personally...and i can feel his pain...he is probably getting blocked on many levels.

Nice find on taichi. Open box is the best!

I ordered a replacement set of 3200 b-die tonight....been working with a set of 3600 since i magic smoked one of my 3200 sticks.


----------



## chew*

Fyi if someone likes the msi...but dislikes price...long island NY microcenter has one open box for $209.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Yeh the option was open box X370 Taichi or X370 Prime Pro (some B350 garbage , CHVI Hero for $60 more without wifi+BT, and overpriced Gigabytes too), waiting on the Thermalright TrueSpirit 140 Power Am4 cooler from Amazon


Damn, you got a great deal.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Damn, you got a great deal.





Spoiler: Personal dilemmas and not relevant to thread



Was short lived because when I watched an unboxing video I found it was missing pieces.

The only thing in the box was the motherboard + antennas + SATA cables + IO cover. No M.2 screw , no motherboard screws, none of the connectors.

I exchanged it for a Gigabyte Gaming 5 for the same price because they only had the one Taichi board. That LED garbage is the same price







The board was sitting on the shelf since April unlike the Taichi which was bought in this week.

I might pawn off the Gaming 5 on Ebay for $170 or so (or make a Ryzen 5 system), as it isn't going to be suitable for a workstation and I could really use the extra features of the Taichi. I _may_ get the Taichi anyway off Newegg.

The DIY PC rep was telling me that the only boards with good BIOS updates are Gigabyte and MSI (crock of BS) and that Asus is slow to update CH VI Hero (also BS) / X370 Prime Pro (sort of , not really since they are on AGESA 1.0.0.4).

The only thing useful I got from his spiel is that the open box motherboard stock is rarely up to date on the website.


----------



## chew*

Hell go back and get that taichi...i will mail you a money order for $100.

Keep all stuff except antennas. I just need board and antennas.

Ship it as slow as you see fit lol.


----------



## bloot

I had the k7 now I have the Taichi, the later is a better board imho, vrm temps are MUCH better. I really liked the k7 but the Taichi is a step above.


----------



## virpz

I really liked the Taichi, it is the kind of straightforward, solid board that will last. It reminds me of the Epox 8RDA+ I have had decades ago, only missing the MCP-T soundstorm lol.








Now I have the the C6H and the memory support seems to be slightly better as I can get away with higher ram speeds. On the black side, the C6H Is displaying weirdo vdroops across all voltages ( just like what I had with the Prime X370 ) and I need higher vcore to overclock cpu if compared to the Taichi.
The Taichi with more bios love ( OC feature wise, not asking for "plug and play" **** ) may be the absolute best board for AM4 to those not looking for candy eye stuff.


----------



## IRobot23

need help.
Vrm on
Gigabyte K3, K5 and asus prime pro x370?


----------



## br0da

I'd go for the Prime X370 Pro.


----------



## cssorkinman

Titanium dominating the top Ryzen scores over at Sandra - the Asus score in the top spot is flagged for inconsistencies - none of the MSI's are however.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







EDIT: Tiachi seems to be struggling in this bench , best score ( unless I missed one) was 50th place

Anyone with the Tiachi want to give a go and report back?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## virpz

Taichi dominating at newegg with most reviews and the maximum rating. The MSI Xpensive Craptanium costs $100 more, offers $100 less and with only 26 reviews and a rating of 3 eggs is nowhere to be seem among the most reviewed boards.










Let's flood !


----------



## chew*

Top asus was probably me @ 4.6 on phase lol 9-8-8 2666....yah i would flag it to if i did not think those timings were possible.


----------



## b0oMeR

Did it really take 200 pages to realize that AM4 doesn't support VRMs?

AMD chose not to use any VRM phases on their motherboards, not entirely sure why.

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/new-product/pc-components/amd-ryzen-news-release-date-uk-price-features-specifications-3643552/


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> Did it really take 200 pages to realize that AM4 doesn't support VRMs?
> 
> AMD chose not to use any VRM phases on their motherboards, not entirely sure why.
> 
> http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/new-product/pc-components/amd-ryzen-news-release-date-uk-price-features-specifications-3643552/


AMD not supporting "VRMs"? Where did you get that nugget from? Every motherboard ever made has voltage regulators.


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Taichi dominating at newegg with most reviews and the maximum rating. The MSI Xpensive Craptanium costs $100 more, offers $100 less and with only 26 reviews and a rating of 3 eggs is nowhere to be seem among the most reviewed boards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's flood !


Have you ever actually read Newegg reviews? They are hardly a guide to buying a motherboard. There are plenty of tech sites that have done in depth reviews of most every AM4 motherboard. Common sense will tell you that less people are going to spring for the most expensive boards.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> Did it really take 200 pages to realize that AM4 doesn't support VRMs?
> 
> AMD chose not to use any VRM phases on their motherboards, not entirely sure why.
> 
> http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/new-product/pc-components/amd-ryzen-news-release-date-uk-price-features-specifications-3643552/


This is why we will be replacing all vrms with hammers


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chrisjames61*
> 
> AMD not supporting "VRMs"? Where did you get that nugget from? Every motherboard ever made has voltage regulators.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chrisjames61*
> 
> Have you ever actually read Newegg reviews? They are hardly a guide to buying a motherboard. There are plenty of tech sites that have done in depth reviews of most every AM4 motherboard. Common sense will tell you that less people are going to spring for the most expensive boards.


Oh, really ?
Thanks teacher for







us


----------



## virpz

I think I managed to squeeze the last drop of juice from this micron D9RGG based memory.



Not bad for a memory that is rated XMP 2666MHz.


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> Did it really take 200 pages to realize that AM4 doesn't support VRMs?
> 
> AMD chose not to use any VRM phases on their motherboards, not entirely sure why.
> 
> http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/new-product/pc-components/amd-ryzen-news-release-date-uk-price-features-specifications-3643552/


Maybe because the Ryzen cpu does NOT need the super vrms needed for the Pieldriver heat machines?? MSI made their vrm s on the Titanium more than adequate for the demands of overclocking on Ryzen to a maximum of possibly 4.2 GHZ on water or super air cooling. Yet everybody is decryiing the Titanium which still holds the record for the fastest overclock without LN2.. You guys are barking up the wrong tree. Perhaps some of the B350 motherboards are a little lacking and that is a perhaps.Ryzen is a voltage limited cpu not so much a heat limited cpu. Wake up and smell the coffee. So motherboard comparisons should pay a little less attention to VRM support and more attention to design and features. The MSI Titanium is the most solid design. t does lack the Bclock but that is small potatoes. You can only go so far with B clock before you mess up your pciE 3.o lanes and even USB can become erratic.


----------



## cssorkinman

Titanium's Memory "try it " feature










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium's Memory "try it " feature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Well you have confirmed one thing for me....giga is way faster with only 1640 ram lol.

Probaby why its kicking the titanium into next week with a bus length 10 sec pi difference locked @ 4 gig.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium's Memory "try it " feature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well you have confirmed one thing for me....giga is way faster with only 1640 ram lol.
> 
> Probaby why its kicking the titanium into next week with a bus length 10 sec pi difference locked @ 4 gig.
Click to expand...

pi is for fatty's










Have to see what happens when the new microcode is added and if they plan on bringing back reference clock adjustments.

Basically , the Titanium has features that are helpful for people who aren't very good at memory tuning - ( like me )


----------



## chrisjames61

Double post.


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Oh, really ?
> Thanks teacher for
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> us


Why don't you try refuting what I said. Oh, sorry. You can't.


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> Maybe because the Ryzen cpu does NOT need the super vrms needed for the Pieldriver heat machines?? MSOI made their vrm s on the Titanium more than adequate for the demands of overclocking on Ryzen to a maximum of possibly 4.2 GHZ on water or super air cooling. Yet everybody is decryiing the Titanium which still holds the record for the fastest overclock without LN2.. You guys are barking up the wrong tree. Perhaps some of the B350 motherboards area little lacking and that is a perhaps.Ryzen is a voltage limited cpu not so much a heat limited cpu. Wake up and smell the coffee. So mootherboard comparisons shoudl pay a little less attention to VRM support and more attention to design and features. The MSI Titanium iss the most solid design. t does lack the Bclock but that is small potatoes. You can only go so far with B clock before you mess up your pciE 3.o lanes and even USB can become erratic.


Have you read anything The Stilt said? The Titanium uses sub par power delivery components. That and not having a CLKGEN at that price point seems kind of weak.


----------



## AlphaC

Got my True Spirit 140 Power tonight. Ryzen 7 1700x CPU @ stock 1.225V is pushing 52 degrees C VRM in the hardwareinfo "MIT" in BIOs , I have no idea why it's so high since it is in open air not in a case. Ambient temp is 76F

I updated the Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 BIOs today to F5, it had one from February. Horrible BIOs options regardless except for LED lights (even Pulse and colorshift was working in February BIOs it shipped with LOL).

Nothing for switching frequency , p-states, and the like, only the "normal/turbo" LLC + V_Core + V_SOC + some other voltages + basic memory timings.

Unable to run the EVGA SuperSC DDR4-3200MHz , I get Code 55 (memory issue). Right now it runs at 2133MHz , I'll have to play with it more.









If Gigabyte doesn't revise this board's BIOs in the next week I'm getting the Taichi from Newegg and putting this up for $160+shipping...no use for RGB FUSION in a completely windowless case underneath a desk

edit: got 2933MHz on F5 BIOs with the listed 16-18-18-38 timings

edit 2: got 3200MHz on F5 BIOs with listed 16-18-18-38 , mem voltage 1.35V


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> pi is for fatty's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have to see what happens when the new microcode is added and if they plan on bringing back reference clock adjustments.
> 
> Basically , the Titanium has features that are helpful for people who aren't very good at memory tuning - ( like me )


not really......the best thing for noobies is bin to win.......90% of msi users can not boot at that setting.....90% of users got one chip and is dealing with it.....keep telling you its not you its not your board its your cpu.

Impress me show us how that board clocks that reject cpu you pawned off on family member.

That is what makes a good board a good board............making crap not so crappy.....


----------



## AlphaC

cssorkinman has a Ryzen 7 1800X though.

Price conscious buyers aren't going to drop $120 extra on a CPU and then $300 on a motherboard. At that rate of added costs you might as well get an Intel i7-6900K.

Isn't the point of overclocking to get more performance for the money? Buying the most expensive SKU and most expensive board is really counter-intuitive to that, unless you are going for world records.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chrisjames61*
> 
> Why don't you try refuting what I said. Oh, sorry. You can't.


You jumped inside the thread and quoted my post and you did so by missing any context. If you had actually read the thread then you would easily be able to detect sarcasm.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> pi is for fatty's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have to see what happens when the new microcode is added and if they plan on bringing back reference clock adjustments.
> 
> Basically , the Titanium has features that are helpful for people who aren't very good at memory tuning - ( like me )
> 
> 
> 
> not really......the best thing for noobies is bin to win.......90% of msi users can not boot at that setting.....90% of users got one chip and is dealing with it.....keep telling you its not you its not your board its your cpu.
> 
> Impress me show us how that board clocks that reject cpu you pawned off on family member.
> 
> That is what makes a good board a good board............making crap not so crappy.....
Click to expand...

You are a little confused.

This is the only Ryzen I've owned. My nephew couldn't decide on a board so I lent him my K7 .

The Titanium is a better board for people who aren't as savvy . The only "trick" I used to get 3466 was to step my way up through the dividers rather than going from cl 15 2133 directly to 3466.

EDIT: Figured out how to get a better latency score on aida


----------



## SaccoSVD

More multimeter tests (Prime X370 Pro)

Zenstates at:

40x - 1.4V
32x - 1.3V
32x - 1.3V

LLC Auto.

Multimeter shows:

Idle: between 1.3V and 1.401V

Load: 1.375V steady. I even tried with a pedal I have and could stress the system at will and see the voltages changing.

Passed all tests. Even IBT (but IBT is bull**** IMHO) wPrime passes and my stress test using my audio sequencer bringing the CPU usage to 100% also passed.

So I can confirm LLC auto is good. Better than actually having some LLC on.

It is safe to bring the vcore to 1.42v in the BIOS cause at idle, while high amperage is not passing through the CPU is fine, but at load is gonna be around 1.39v which is still within the safe range.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> You are a little confused.
> 
> This is the only Ryzen I've owned. My nephew couldn't decide on a board so I lent him my K7 .
> 
> The Titanium is a better board for people who aren't as savvy . The only "trick" I used to get 3466 was to step my way up through the dividers rather than going from cl 15 2133 directly to 3466.
> 
> EDIT: Figured out how to get a better latency score on aida


Um yah im aware of babysteps...i after all only say it in god knows how many videos.

Only works on good chips over 3333....

Anyway shoved the gigabyte to top spot in image processing...was in the midst of dethroning msi in multimedia.

Post code 46 poof and this is why i beat boards up on air...some are duds...once i conformal and go cold...warranty void. So now i got 2 gigabytes to rma woot.

46 in manual? Does not exist..lol.

Ehh maybe cpu died...cept i swapped it...still 46.

Giving the clear cmos treatment overnight but doubt with a board that power on still that it will do much good.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> cssorkinman has a Ryzen 7 1800X though.
> 
> Price conscious buyers aren't going to drop $120 extra on a CPU and then $300 on a motherboard. At that rate of added costs you might as well get an Intel i7-6900K.
> 
> Isn't the point of overclocking to get more performance for the money? Buying the most expensive SKU and most expensive board is really counter-intuitive to that, unless you are going for world records.


Or you want the highest daily overclock at the lowest voltage and want to do so on the only board that is Titanium colored







.

I have $1100 in the ram, cpu and board, each of which were the most expensive I've ever bought. I had $600 saved for the cpu and figured on spending no more than $200 on the board - so.... AMD sold the chip cheap enough I could splurge on the board I really wanted. The real bite in the a$$ was the ram .

O.T.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Anyone else tried this test? Wondering how the Titanium compares.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Or you want the highest daily overclock at the lowest voltage and want to do so on the only board that is Titanium colored
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> I have $1100 in the ram, cpu and board, each of which were the most expensive I've ever bought.


Asus C6H $ 254
R7 1700 $ 300
Crucial Ballistx Elite 16Gb $ 129
*Total $ 683*

You have paid $ 417 more to have pretty much the same performance as I do. Why that? Mostly because you choose a board with sub par fets and no clockgen. AKA MSI Xpensive Titanium.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> The Titanium is a better board for people who aren't as savvy . The only "trick" I used to get 3466 was to step my way up through the dividers rather than going from cl 15 2133 directly to 3466.
> EDIT: Figured out how to get a better latency score on aida


Edit: Hole crap, $ 417


----------



## realtomatoes

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Asus C6H $ 254
> R7 1700 $ 300
> Crucial Ballistx Elite 16Gb $ 129
> *Total $ 683*


what specs are those ballistix?


----------



## cssorkinman

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Mighty fine math skills in these forums


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Mighty fine math skills in these forums


Damn, u have paid $ 1100 not $ 1000...that's really bad, that's $ 417 directly to the trash just by getting the wrong mobo.
I can even feel sry for you now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *realtomatoes*
> 
> what specs are those ballistix?


XMP 2666 MHz 16 17 17 36


----------



## virpz

Double, sry


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium dominating the top Ryzen scores over at Sandra - the Asus score in the top spot is flagged for inconsistencies - none of the MSI's are however.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Tiachi seems to be struggling in this bench , best score ( unless I missed one) was 50th place
> 
> Anyone with the Tiachi want to give a go and report back?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


so where did we leave off oh yah you justifying how $300 is worth it and me saying along time ago you pick a benchmark you think justifies MSI's price and grab straws and I will break them......

why is the msi losing at higher clocks to a $79.99 clearance board? I suppose you could report the result........then keep then keep the win......imagine that and its not 32m...

Maybe i will oc it more to make unobtanium for the titanium scores...


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Titanium dominating the top Ryzen scores over at Sandra - the Asus score in the top spot is flagged for inconsistencies - none of the MSI's are however.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Tiachi seems to be struggling in this bench , best score ( unless I missed one) was 50th place
> 
> Anyone with the Tiachi want to give a go and report back?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so where did we leave off oh yah you justifying how $300 is worth it and me saying along time ago you pick a benchmark you think justifies MSI's price and grab straws and I will break them......
> 
> why is the msi losing at higher clocks to a $79.99 clearance board? I suppose you could report the result........then keep then keep the win......imagine that and its not 32m...
> 
> Maybe i will oc it more to make unobtanium for the titanium scores...
Click to expand...

lol obviously it's your cpu









Edit: glad the cpu is ok..... did you blow up the Giga trying to beat the MSI?

EDIT 2:
I gave it a go using MSI's auto memory settings using windows 10 , heavy OS defender, cortana, skype all the normal stuff running in the back ground. For those who might attempt it, it's a pretty tough bench - pushes temps further than most stressing programs.


I have almost no time invested in tuning - from that perspective..... the Titanium is a bargain.


----------



## chew*

No time involved on my end. Loaded my 32m setting ran 1 off @ 4.0 looked good ripped one @ 4.143...done..no bias testing etc etc...sure i can improve it.

Gigabyte i have no clue...not all boards are created equal thats why i pound on them on air....die on air rma...survive i prep then go ln2...

Got tired of eating boards with no warranty long ago...air dead = warranty...my gaming 5 took much worse abuse...i would say this board was just a dud.

Ln2 dead = wallet lighter

Cpu is teh suck...imc is junk but anyway...clearly do not need a cpu advantage vs msi.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No time involved on my end. Loaded my 32m setting ran 1 off @ 4.0 looked good ripped one @ 4.143...done..no bias testing etc etc...sure i can improve it.
> 
> Gigabyte i have no clue...not all boards are created equal thats why i pound on them on air....die on air rma...survive i prep then go ln2...
> 
> Got tired of eating boards with no warranty long ago...air dead = warranty...my gaming 5 took much worse abuse...i would say this board was just a dud.
> 
> Ln2 dead = wallet lighter
> 
> Cpu is teh suck...imc is junk but anyway...clearly do not need a cpu advantage vs msi.


Kinda funny that even with all the background stuff running, my score with msi's auto settings is more efficient than your 32 m tuned score. MSI defeats Chew? lol


----------



## chew*

I was chatting on skype with asus while running bench...its my win 10 install...bone stock...was telling them how i killed K7 and prime plus was my next victim..

You need to learn when and where to grasp straws or ill mega strip a win 7 and show you real benching.

Also seriously? 32m is single threaded...so i took a single threaded tune ran a multithreaded bench...still beat msi...guess the $220 saved was worth it...it bought 3600 ram









How is msi doing in the other non selective cherry picked sandra tests?

No subtimings...no higher ram straps just straight up good old fashioned passionate whooping with less power.


----------



## cssorkinman

Lol chew.... you really are too much.

1.332 volts for 4150...... yeah that's a terrible chip lol







( or on phase)


----------



## chew*

You believing software is to much lol....

I'm crazy but not dumb enough to stick board on phase.

B350 plus vcore has been wrong in cpu-z since day 1.

But you have me tuning now







dropped clocks still higher than msi.

At this rate msi will not even be on page 1 by the time i am done tuning lol.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> You believing software is to much lol....
> 
> I'm crazy but not dumb enough to stick board on phase.
> 
> B350 plus vcore has been wrong in cpu-z since day 1.
> 
> But you have me tuning now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dropped clocks still higher than msi.
> 
> At this rate msi will not even be on page 1 by the time i am done tuning lol.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*


Lol yah justifies $220 hold on im dominating other tests...ill be back to that one soon..without subtimings high ram new agesa etc etc apple vs orange but im fine with that. B350 does not need any of that stuff to curb stomp titanium.

I hope you realise equivalency to a $80 board is just as bad as losing to one


----------



## Artikbot

Christ's sake, this is bugging me now.










Left is 1005, right is 1006. Speeds are obviously described on the screenshot.

It would boot just fine before, for whatever reason it doesn't now after wrestling with it for a couple of hours trying to get it to run at 3733MHz.

Damn it.

If only I knew what does CLDO_VPP mean on my board. Goes from 0 to a lot (over 150?), but there's no units, no nothing. It'd be good to know what's the scale in.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Christ's sake, this is bugging me now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Left is 1005, right is 1006. Speeds are obviously described on the screenshot.
> 
> It would boot just fine before, for whatever reason it doesn't now after wrestling with it for a couple of hours trying to get it to run at 3733MHz.
> 
> Damn it.


Nice scores - did you save the OC profile for the 3600 memory speed?


----------



## Artikbot

Yes. It doesn't boot now, it did before I started dicking about. I have my suspicions, but Gigabyte forgot to label half the fields in the DRAM settings page.

E: Now that 3466 seems to work (so far anyway) I'll try to go back to 3.6. Here's hoping.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Yes. It doesn't boot now, it did before I started dicking about.


That's frustrating - I've got my 3333 mhz/4.1 ghz profile saved to usb and it will now work any time I choose to load it. The 3466 mhz/4100mhz profile i saved seems to be bugged and it won't boot after loading the values - need to figure out what happened.

Train it for 3600 CL 16 then back off to cl 18 at the next post?


----------



## Artikbot

Just got it to windows but it dies within seconds. It's something though. Timings don't seem to change anything.

E: wat. Dropped from 1.4VDDR to 1.35V... and here I am. How's that make any sense.

Getting there. Now it boots at 17-19-19-44. <--- that's a lie, it falls back to even CAS numbers still, so 18-19-19-44.

E2: Ran AIDA64 mem&cache, shows similar results although 15% worse latency (not sure if I trust that reading now...)


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Christ's sake, this is bugging me now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Left is 1005, right is 1006. Speeds are obviously described on the screenshot.
> 
> It would boot just fine before, for whatever reason it doesn't now after wrestling with it for a couple of hours trying to get it to run at 3733MHz.
> 
> Damn it.
> 
> If only I knew what does CLDO_VPP mean on my board. Goes from 0 to a lot (over 150?), but there's no units, no nothing. It'd be good to know what's the scale in.


Gigabyte is .900 default try .100 under soc...i run 1.2 soc +.200 vddp on k7....well until i code 46'd it.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Just got it to windows but it dies within seconds. It's something though. Timings don't seem to change anything.
> 
> E: wat. Dropped from 1.4VDDR to 1.35V... and here I am. How's that make any sense.
> 
> Getting there. Now it boots at 17-19-19-44. <--- that's a lie, it falls back to even CAS numbers still, so 18-19-19-44.
> 
> E2: Ran AIDA64 mem&cache, shows similar results although 15% worse latency (not sure if I trust that reading now...)


I haven't done much memory tuning on ryzen, it's too frustrating to me on "normal" platforms and this one is a doozy for throwing odd behaviors at me.


----------



## chew*

Its frustrating because the msi sux at it...i keep telling you but you do not listen...the gigabyte was a dream to tune subs...

The msi...was anything but and gave me a migraine...

If you come out of that bubble and actually test other boards you will see all are good or bad at something.

Anyway i think i will break out the taichi or biostar next to punk off the msi.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Its frustrating because the msi sux at it...i keep telling you but you do not listen...the gigabyte was a dream to tune subs...
> 
> The msi...was anything but and gave me a migraine...
> 
> If you come out of that bubble and actually test other boards you will see all are good or bad at something.


I don't want/need another board I'm keeping up with a professional with the one I have


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Gigabyte is .900 default try .100 under soc...i run 1.2 soc +.200 vddp on k7....well until i code 46'd it.


I would if I knew what I'm doing









The Asus shows actual volts, the Gigabyte Gaming-5 shows a value that goes from '0' to a lot.

Also, the value I'm referring to isn't CPU VDDP (tried from stock to +0.08V, doesn't do anything at all), it's CLDO_VDDP.

So far it seems the most stable right now - I'm seeing some strange glitches happen (DWM just crashed and Firefox crashed once too, but I was restoring an old session so it could be that), but at least it's kinda sorta working. Need to push further for stability though.

Quite happy though. Not too terrible for the so-called kiddie's RGB toy motherboard eh!

E: Getting somewhere!

VDDR 1.34V

VDDR termination

VSOC 1.2V

VDDR VPP 2.65V

Rest to default, 18-

Seemingly quite stable so far, hasn't crashed in 15 minutes of AIDA CPU, FPU, cache and memory.

Turns out it defaulted to 2133 but AIDA didn't update (?)


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I don't want/need another board I'm keeping up with a professional with the one I have


In one cherry picked benchmark that msi does semi decent in where the pro is digging out the worst possible boards possible to use just to wake you up...

I can whip out a real board and end this....but using boards that i can actually trip ocp on is quite amusing for now..

Btw hows your image processing score...only one that matters imo since amd is competitive at it and is now i dunno #28 in the world...on u guessed it b350.


----------



## Artikbot

What's more amusing is reading this seemingly endless tirade instead of focusing on more meaningful stuff.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I don't want/need another board I'm keeping up with a professional with the one I have
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In one cherry picked benchmark that msi does semi decent in where the pro is digging out the worst possible boards possible to use just to wake you up...
> 
> I can whip out a real board and end this....but using boards that i can actually trip ocp on isquiteamusing for now..
Click to expand...

That's ok... I feel bad that you killed your GIGA trying to keep up with my MSI. Wouldn't want another of your boards on my conscience.


----------



## chew*

I do not feel bad...i would feel bad if i did not test air went straight to ln2 then killed it...then i am $209 lighter in the wallet.

It happens...thats why i hammer boards hard on air. Itclearly had an issue...the b350 should have popped at same settings...it did not...proof flaky board.

Hammering a biostar now...see if it has any unknown skills i am not aware of.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> What's more amusing is reading this seemingly endless tirade instead of focusing on more meaningful stuff.


Technically...i am testing VRMs on multiple boards lol







i am also not peddling products.

Unlike his chip mine is sub par...giga died @ 1.575...previous G5 benched same chip same volts...lived.

B350....lived tripped ocp though...

Biostar...still alive...so far


----------



## SuperZan

Which Biostar board are you pushing now? Still the GT7?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Which Biostar board are you pushing now? Still the GT7?


Yes sir...survived 1.575....thats a big plus...now as long as it can pass @ 4.14 and come within 5 points of msi...its got a thumbs up price vs performance from me.

I will test in one of the tests csorkin is not showing that msi sucks in...see how it does there


----------



## Artikbot

Bleh I can't be arsed with stabilising 3.6GT/s anymore. Let's see if gigabyte answer my questions re. CLDO_VDDP and then I might try.

Dropped back to 3466MT/s and so far so good, XMP profile with manually set multiplier to a notch lower. Almost 8 minutes into AIDA stress test and it's doing alright - far better than the 3 seconds it lasted at 3.6GT/s.

Will dick about with it tomorrow a bit more and see if I can get it to run CL16. It'd be nice.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Which Biostar board are you pushing now? Still the GT7?


openbox gt7 on newegg ~150 us. tempted.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I haven't done much memory tuning on ryzen, it's too frustrating to me on "normal" platforms and this one is a doozy for throwing odd behaviors at me.


w10 makes testing settings headslamming fun. pointless until you lock down idiotic background processes. Then I get crazy outlier results indicating I missed some friggin M$ junk.


----------



## chew*

Upgraded VRM? I dont know if its of interest, bur MSI are launching a new 13 phase X370 motherboard, the Gaming M7, tomorrow at Computex.

Comment from my you tube...why upgrade what is not flawed lol...

Btw. Gt7 met criteria...5 points from msi..on ancient microcode...with 0 tuning options lol.

Think its time to grab the asrock since it supposedly sucks in that one specific task in sandra....


----------



## bloot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Bleh I can't be arsed with stabilising 3.6GT/s anymore. Let's see if gigabyte answer my questions re. CLDO_VDDP and then I might try.
> 
> Dropped back to 3466MT/s and so far so good, XMP profile with manually set multiplier to a notch lower. Almost 8 minutes into AIDA stress test and it's doing alright - far better than the 3 seconds it lasted at 3.6GT/s.
> 
> Will dick about with it tomorrow a bit more and see if I can get it to run CL16. It'd be nice.


I've had no luck either with the same sticks on the 2.34 beta bios for the Taichi. Could hit max 3466 cl18. Reverted back to offical bios, waiting for the final release.


----------



## Artikbot

This BIOS seems good enough to rock as a daily if I'm honest. Quite pleased with the support Gigabyte gives for this board. Certainly better than the Gaming-K7.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Bleh I can't be arsed with stabilising 3.6GT/s anymore. Let's see if gigabyte answer my questions re. CLDO_VDDP and then I might try.
> 
> Dropped back to 3466MT/s and so far so good, XMP profile with manually set multiplier to a notch lower. Almost 8 minutes into AIDA stress test and it's doing alright - far better than the 3 seconds it lasted at 3.6GT/s.
> 
> Will dick about with it tomorrow a bit more and see if I can get it to run CL16. It'd be nice.


CLDO is likely something to do with the LDO (low-dropout DC-DC regulator) power delivery stuff in the power gating logic. Kinda sorta like on die voltage regulation. If you are not p-state overclocking it will likely not offer any improvements as the chip will bypass the on-die voltage regulation.

It could be an acronym for something else, but that is the closest thing that it could be for in my mind.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Upgraded VRM? I dont know if its of interest, bur MSI are launching a new 13 phase X370 motherboard, the Gaming M7, tomorrow at Computex.
> 
> Comment from my you tube...why upgrade what is not flawed lol...
> 
> Btw. Gt7 met criteria...5 points from msi..on ancient microcode...with 0 tuning options lol.
> 
> Think its time to grab the asrock since it supposedly sucks in that one specific task in sandra....


That's honestly pretty awful given its running at a higher clock. ( I'm on 1.0.0.4a btw. )

Only saw one Tiachi in the top 50 for that particular bench, but they are pretty rare - anxious to see how it does.

As for me cherry picking - the only reason I even ran it was to compare ryzen against the forthcoming 7900X intel behemoth for which a web article had quoted it's performance in this particular bench . After running it, I noticed that 8 out of the top 10 scores were produced using an X 370 Titanium. It's quite a long bench and relatively heavy compared to many of the benches out there so I thought it was a good test for VRM performance. Core temps are right up there with IBT AVX maximum and p95 chew's way.

As far as the competitive benches go.... I really haven't payed much attention as the bot doesn't like W 10 and that's all I have for this rig ATM.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> That's honestly pretty awful given its running at a higher clock. ( I'm on 1.0.0.4a btw. )
> 
> Only saw one Tiachi in the top 50 for that particular bench, but they are pretty rare - anxious to see how it does.
> 
> As for me cherry picking - the only reason I even ran it was to compare ryzen against the forthcoming 7900X intel behemoth for which a web article had quoted it's performance in this particular bench . After running it, I noticed that 8 out of the top 10 scores were produced using an X 370 Titanium. It's quite a long bench and relatively heavy compared to many of the benches out there so I thought it was a good test for VRM performance. Core temps are right up there with IBT AVX maximum and p95 chew's way.
> 
> As far as the competitive benches go.... I really haven't payed much attention as the bot doesn't like W 10 and that's all I have for this rig ATM.


How close you can get to the Taichis 19065 CPUmarks? A tipo: this test demands more stability than Sisoftware...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> That's honestly pretty awful given its running at a higher clock. ( I'm on 1.0.0.4a btw. )
> 
> Only saw one Tiachi in the top 50 for that particular bench, but they are pretty rare - anxious to see how it does.
> 
> As for me cherry picking - the only reason I even ran it was to compare ryzen against the forthcoming 7900X intel behemoth for which a web article had quoted it's performance in this particular bench . After running it, I noticed that 8 out of the top 10 scores were produced using an X 370 Titanium. It's quite a long bench and relatively heavy compared to many of the benches out there so I thought it was a good test for VRM performance. Core temps are right up there with IBT AVX maximum and p95 chew's way.
> 
> As far as the competitive benches go.... I really haven't payed much attention as the bot doesn't like W 10 and that's all I have for this rig ATM.


Processor financial analysis is the worst....i gave up testing it...easily require 100 mhz less.

Honestly multimedia is the easiest....


----------



## chew*

Benching taichi @ 3733 14-13-13-26 now...this particular bench just does not scale with "platform" performance...i have no clue what the heck it is measuring lol.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> That's honestly pretty awful given its running at a higher clock. ( I'm on 1.0.0.4a btw. )
> 
> Only saw one Tiachi in the top 50 for that particular bench, but they are pretty rare - anxious to see how it does.
> 
> As for me cherry picking - the only reason I even ran it was to compare ryzen against the forthcoming 7900X intel behemoth for which a web article had quoted it's performance in this particular bench . After running it, I noticed that 8 out of the top 10 scores were produced using an X 370 Titanium. It's quite a long bench and relatively heavy compared to many of the benches out there so I thought it was a good test for VRM performance. Core temps are right up there with IBT AVX maximum and p95 chew's way.
> 
> As far as the competitive benches go.... I really haven't payed much attention as the bot doesn't like W 10 and that's all I have for this rig ATM.
> 
> 
> 
> Processor financial analysis is the worst....i gave up testing it...easily require 100 mhz less.
> 
> Honestly multimedia is the easiest....
Click to expand...

Lots of heat in those sandra benches - appreciate the warning about the FA test.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Benching taichi @ 3733 14-13-13-26 now...this particular bench just does not scale with "platform" performance...i have no clue what the heck it is measuring lol.


Probably have spectacular AIDA 64 scores though.


----------



## chew*

eh without tuning subtimings nah.....



c6h benches probably me to I can not remember tbh....

financial analysis I sad screw it.......and two others meh not getting the hang of it......

Anyway here is the aftermath of Sandra.........everything circled is me today got taichi into top 6 in that bench it sux in as well........

Taichi is a champ clocked this crap cpu the highest.



Damage control is needed for image processing I slaughtered that bench taking all top 5 results with 4 different boards since AMD is like top 27 now


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> CLDO is likely something to do with the LDO (low-dropout DC-DC regulator) power delivery stuff in the power gating logic. Kinda sorta like on die voltage regulation. If you are not p-state overclocking it will likely not offer any improvements as the chip will bypass the on-die voltage regulation.
> 
> It could be an acronym for something else, but that is the closest thing that it could be for in my mind.


I know what the setting is, what I don't know is what the values I am changing are, it is a unit-less scale that goes from 0 to a lot with no base value or anything.

It's supposed to be the DDR4 PHY voltage, but without knowing the values I'm setting and the result after changing the value it feels like I'm taking shots in the dark.

Also, nice one at 3733, chew!


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I know what the setting is, what I don't know is what the values I am changing are, it is a unit-less scale that goes from 0 to a lot with no base value or anything.
> 
> It's supposed to be the DDR4 PHY voltage, but without knowing the values I'm setting and the result after changing the value it feels like I'm taking shots in the dark.
> 
> Also, nice one at 3733, chew!


Ah, yeah. That sounds a lot like the old days of DFI and EPox, tons of values that are just 0-255.









Assuming it does not give you a default value to start from either? Its a possibility that it never actually has a metered value. With the LDO setup as I understand it, input voltage has an impact on output voltage.

Might need to go diving around in the white paper to figure out what acceptable ranges for it are and tweak from there.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I know what the setting is, what I don't know is what the values I am changing are, it is a unit-less scale that goes from 0 to a lot with no base value or anything.
> 
> It's supposed to be the DDR4 PHY voltage, but without knowing the values I'm setting and the result after changing the value it feels like I'm taking shots in the dark.
> 
> Also, nice one at 3733, chew!


I have mine at 820mV for 4GHz @ mem at 3100MHz

Notice that messing with this voltage is more about finding the best value other than anything else. It is like tuning that old radio on a station. Maximum is 1050mV.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Ah, yeah. That sounds a lot like the old days of DFI and EPox, tons of values that are just 0-255.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Assuming it does not give you a default value to start from either? Its a possibility that it never actually has a metered value. With the LDO setup as I understand it, input voltage has an impact on output voltage.
> 
> Might need to go diving around in the white paper to figure out what acceptable ranges for it are and tweak from there.


Stilt on the topic...


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Ah, yeah. That sounds a lot like the old days of DFI and EPox, tons of values that are just 0-255.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Assuming it does not give you a default value to start from either? Its a possibility that it never actually has a metered value. With the LDO setup as I understand it, input voltage has an impact on output voltage.
> 
> Might need to go diving around in the white paper to figure out what acceptable ranges for it are and tweak from there.


Nope, no starting values either









Feels like the volume knob on one of those old amplifiers that went to eleven lol

Imagine that your vcore had no voltage readout, starting voltage or units. You just got a range of values that went from 0 to a lot (say over 200). You can adjust it, but you don't know what you started with, what your end is, or what your current number sets it to because you can't read the value post-adjustment either. That's the situation I'm in!

FWIW... Booted straight up on 1.35V DDR/ 1.1V SOC at 3466 CL16. 1.3V DDR also works just fine, but 1.4V doesn't. Either the IMC or the RAM don't like voltages over 1.35V...

Edit: Gigabyte dude referred me to the AMD community update post...


----------



## gtbtk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> eh without tuning subtimings nah.....
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> c6h benches probably me to I can not remember tbh....
> 
> financial analysis I sad screw it.......and two others meh not getting the hang of it......
> 
> Anyway here is the aftermath of Sandra.........everything circled is me today got taichi into top 6 in that bench it sux in as well........
> 
> Taichi is a champ clocked this crap cpu the highest.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damage control is needed for image processing I slaughtered that bench taking all top 5 results with 4 different boards since AMD is like top 27 now


It seems that chats on youtube are beneficial .









As a matter of interest how do the auto subs at 14-13-13-26 compare to auto subs at 14-14-14-34?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> It seems that chats on youtube are beneficial .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a matter of interest how do the auto subs at 14-13-13-26 compare to auto subs at 14-14-14-34?


Touch faster in some apps.


----------



## gtbtk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> It seems that chats on youtube are beneficial .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a matter of interest how do the auto subs at 14-13-13-26 compare to auto subs at 14-14-14-34?
> 
> 
> 
> Touch faster in some apps.
Click to expand...

Understood thanks.

Could you please tell me what are the differences in the auto loaded secondary/tertiary timings comparing 14-13-13-26 to the 14-14-14-34?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> Understood thanks.
> 
> Could you please tell me what are the differences in the auto loaded secondary/tertiary timings comparing 14-13-13-26 to the 14-14-14-34?


In that run on taichi or in my msi run? Both i just left auto and loose. Im on taichi now very tight full manual for 32m runs. Other benches are just not impacted by it as much save aida which i do not consider a "benchmark" more of a tool...it literally takes days to dial 32m in via subs if you test eac timing and add in the combination of certain timings variable. Some timings impact others and must be tuned together.

That said full manual 3333 12-11-11 msi vs taichi...im not done tuning taichi...still has a 10s lead...gigabyte at this point imo is faster but...i need to finish tuning to be sure...


----------



## cssorkinman

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Whuppin the taichi at a lower clock.... that's the Titanium way


----------



## chew*

Try processpr image processing









The way sandra works is good at a couple...suck in others.

The goal is to tune for balance but rarely happens.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Try processpr image processing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The way sandra works is good at a couple...suck in others.
> 
> The goal is to tune for balance but rarely happens.


For a daily overclock that's the holy grail that's for sure. Settings that perform well no matter what it's asked to do.

4125 mhz cpu 3333 mhz ram 14-14 -14-34-78 584 tRFC 1T 1.424 v-core in bios at LLC 2 is what I ran all the sandra benches at except the Financial liquid magma generator test....lol that one I ran at 4 ghz.


----------



## chew*

that financial is like prime lol......I'm busy tuning pi which is very time consuming so no more Sandra for now....the image processing benefits from total platform performance.

good way to dial in 24/7 settings geared towards performance. most of those tests are heavy board tuning biased except that one.


----------



## Artikbot

alsidjasliduasld getting quite annoyed at this. Struggling badly to fully stabilise the 3466 strap. Now at 1.35V CL16-18-18-36 1T.

For whatever reason going above 1.35V causes a host of issues, and anything over 1.39V won't boot no matter the frequency. I must have the crappiest IMC on earth or the crappiest set of B-dies ever binned.

On top of that, only the ODT value of 48Ohm keeps the memory somewhat stable at higher clocks, which reinforces my thoughts that my IMC is terrible as values lower than 60Ohm indicate IMC weakness.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> alsidjasliduasld getting quite annoyed at this. Struggling badly to fully stabilise the 3466 strap. Now at 1.35V CL16-18-18-36 1T.
> 
> For whatever reason going above 1.35V causes a host of issues, and anything over 1.39V won't boot no matter the frequency. I must have the crappiest IMC on earth or the crappiest set of B-dies ever binned.
> 
> On top of that, only the ODT value of 48Ohm keeps the memory somewhat stable at higher clocks, which reinforces my thoughts that my IMC is terrible as values lower than 60Ohm indicate IMC weakness.


Think you got it backwards lol. Default odt is 43...some chips wont boot 3200 at that. They need 48...that is bad...

Some will boot @ 40 ohm...mine can not.

When i was testing 3400 on dr i noticed just over 3400 was insta fail prime 3399 did not...may be of interest...on taichi i can just run 102 bclk @ 3333 gives me 3399 which i need to retest.


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Think you got it backwards lol. Default odt is 43...some chips wont boot 3200 at that. They need 48...that is bad...
> 
> Some will boot @ 40 ohm...mine can not.


Lol whoopsie. That explains things, good to know









AMD dude said 60-86Ohm is the standard range for high speeds. Well, not for mine 

Also, for whatever it's worth... There seems to be a voltage stability gap in my memory (or IMC, I dunno). 1.3 to 1.35V, it will boot fine. 1.35 to 1.4V, won't even post. 1.41V... Well, running the stability test now and it seems pretty damn solid so far!

No idea what's happening.


----------



## chew*

Lol...so just for some reference im benching pi 32m @ 3333 12-11-11-22 1.54v which is 1.56 on taichi...soc is 1.0 vddp is .900...this chip will not post with 1.25 soc and blue screens in 32m over 1.56 vdimm.

The voltage tolerance is extremely chip dependant. My buddy zen can cram more vdimm into his np...

My 1400 when cold can take 1.8+ vdimm but far less on air and apparently eats b die and somehow does not break imc when it maims a set...what i was doing was leaking voltage through imc to stabilize it cold...this might be what you just noticed over 1.4v









My 1800x cold or not 1.56 max just to give you an idea of chip variance

You can run 1.45 24/7 in bdie but its scaling falls after that. While amd said 1.5 i would just set 1.45 max for 24/7.

1.5 was probably because they know internally some chips hate/like volts up to and around that point.

Voltage tolerance is a very large factor on these chips...some scale with...some hate it.

Im a crack addict...another set of bdie just showed up in the mail...lol


----------



## Artikbot

I've ran out of guns for 3466 at least until Gigabyte bother to properly label some of the new settings.

Setting on 3333 for now, might do some work on the timings later.

Oh, board won't post on 1.42V either. Funny, that. Well, at least I know 1.41V does work.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I've ran out of guns for 3466 at least until Gigabyte bother to properly label some of the new settings.
> 
> Setting on 3333 for now, might do some work on the timings later.


Gigas subs are out of wack and fyi 312 trfc is to tight for 3466. Try setting like umm 150 210 400 then try to pull it down once stable. I would not go below 132/192/312 @ 3466. Hope this helps









May need much higher but i like running as tight as possible if possible


----------



## Artikbot

Interesting. I tried dicking about with tRFC/2/4 (630/380/280 I think I used?) when I was trying to get 3600 on a leash, but not with 3466.

I did see that XMP1 uses generally far looser timings than what SPD tells the board to use (on average 30% looser). Perhaps because there's no tables defined for speeds over 2666 on these sticks.

3333 seems more than stable enough at 16-16-16-32 on 1.35V, so even if I miserably fail to go above that, I am still quite happy.

E: It worked a treat, cheers! Pushed volts to 1.41 and loosened tRFC, now it's properly stable at 3333. Next I'll try with 3466 again, but that's gonna be a job for tomorrow.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> Interesting. I tried dicking about with tRFC/2/4 (630/380/280 I think I used?) when I was trying to get 3600 on a leash, but not with 3466.
> 
> I did see that XMP1 uses generally far looser timings than what SPD tells the board to use (on average 30% looser). Perhaps because there's no tables defined for speeds over 2666 on these sticks.
> 
> 3333 seems more than stable enough at 16-16-16-32 on 1.35V, so even if I miserably fail to go above that, I am still quite happy.
> 
> E: It worked a treat, cheers! Pushed volts to 1.41 and loosened tRFC, now it's properly stable at 3333. Next I'll try with 3466 again, but that's gonna be a job for tomorrow.


?


----------



## Nighthog

With new BIOS F7a I can now boot my Corsair 2666C16 Micron A-die dual rank kit with 3200Mhz on the AB350-Gaming 3.

Testing out stability at the moment.

The Micron A-die aren't the best memory IC's.

16.17.17.17.40.(64) (400,200,auto) 1.400V mem, 1.200 SOC. This just with quick testing to see if it was stable to boot and not giving errors instantly.

I had one freeze on OC clock but none yet with stock cpu. Might need more voltage for cpu with the higher data fabric as seen by various posters on forums when OC:ing.

EDIT:

After more testing and tweaking I notice various boot issues when trying to tighten the timings and voltages.

Soc voltage needs to be around 1.150V or more or you get more frequent boot fails. Boots to backup bios more often or fails outright to boot. (+0.000 offset fails outright, +0.018 might boot once in a while, 0.030 fails every second try it seems. etc)
Memory should be around 1.400V as I had already used. 1.350V is to low and 1.380 might work but wasn't always safe in booting. You get 3 beeps at boot the lower you try more frequently.

So I use SOC offset +0.056 and memory 1.400V for below settings:
16.17.17.17.40.(62.18) (340,192,132) 1T. Standard SPD subtimings for my kit, (XMP sub timings while being more loose, they fail always)
I'm uncertain how safe this is for it always to boot correctly but should be somewhere in the ballpark not to give too many issues.

Did a 32M superPi run for stock cpu clock for now to have something to compare to later. (3200Mhz CL 16.17.17.40.62 1T)


I notice though I did not gain anything running CinebenchR15 for stock clocks compared to my 2666 14.15.13.13.26 1T tightened timings I had used with previous BIOS.

EDIT 2:

https://valid.x86.fr/3dn891



EDIT 3:

stock clock and 3200Mhz CL 14.17.17.40.58 1T

4000Mhz OC 3200Mhz Cl14... (didn't seem to improve.)


----------



## chew*

Cool. I will have to see what my 10-12-12 2400 DR corsair hynix can do.


----------



## gtbtk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> Understood thanks.
> 
> Could you please tell me what are the differences in the auto loaded secondary/tertiary timings comparing 14-13-13-26 to the 14-14-14-34?
> 
> 
> 
> In that run on taichi or in my msi run? Both i just left auto and loose. Im on taichi now very tight full manual for 32m runs. Other benches are just not impacted by it as much save aida which i do not consider a "benchmark" more of a tool...it literally takes days to dial 32m in via subs if you test eac timing and add in the combination of certain timings variable. Some timings impact others and must be tuned together.
> 
> That said full manual 3333 12-11-11 msi vs taichi...im not done tuning taichi...still has a 10s lead...gigabyte at this point imo is faster but...i need to finish tuning to be sure...
Click to expand...

I am asking because Loaded latency numbers are jumping all over the place and I am trying to work out exactly why that is. The two sets of timings I mentioned seem obvious at first glance why the latency numbers are lower, but not everyone is getting similar low loaded latencies with the same reported timings numbers.

The theory I have is the DDR4 training is doing something to one or a couple of the secondary timings on some occasions but not others. When it gets it right, the latency drops by 10ns. I am thinking that it may be because of some other setting like ProcODT or what ever else is running in auto on some peoples machines is forcing the variations. Given that the ODT setting adjusts the signalling noise floor, it is possible that has some connection if it floats around on auto changing what the uefi is trying to manage as it trains the memory and sets the secondaries.

I am thinking that once found, setting X set to a fixed setting, it may create some consistency in the ram tuning.


----------



## chew*

There are still timings we have no access to that are random training @ boot. I actually shut am4 training off on taichi.

Results are consistent now sort of..

I know to low an odt setting = no post. To high no post. I also know one setting before no post is just a tiny bit slower but it is not enemy #1...something else is happening we have no control over.

If i enable am4 training again i will get random sauce results again.


----------



## gtbtk

I am sure the AMD secret sauce has something that is causing some strangeness to happen. I have a suspicion that the AMD AGESA team don't quite have their heads around all the ingredients of the secret sauce as yet.

Have you seen this memory timings utility?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread/18220_20#post_26137022


----------



## br0da

Review of the Biostar X370GTN:
https://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/75458-biostar-x370gtn-itx-am4-motherboard-review.html
VRM hardware:
Quote:


> As mentioned in the introduction, the X370GTN has a seven-phase CPU power design that utilizes an Intersil ISL95712 PWM controller and Nikos PK612DZ MOSFETs. Those seven phases are divided into a 4+ 3 configuration, with four phases dedicated to the CPU cores and three phases for the SOC.


About VRM temperatures:
Quote:


> While the use of Nikos MOSFETs doesn't worry us - despite the fact that they aren't the best when it comes to power efficiency - the tiny little MOSFET heatsink that has been enlisted to cool them is a cause for concern. With our Ryzen 7 1800X at default core clocks and the memory set to DDR4-3200, we ran the AIDA64 System Stability Test for about 90 minutes and the heatsink got extremely hot, peaking at around 75°C / 167°F. That will burn you in about one second. The four power chokes reached about 60°C / 140°F. The three exposed MOSFETs and chokes that handle the SOC portion were all running in the 48-55°C / 119-122°F range, which is hot but not terrible. Our open test bench has no active or passive airflow, so it is a worst case scenario, but then again tiny Mini ITX cases don't have great airflow and they could theoretically trap even more heat. Overall, we recommend some type of additional airflow if you're using a Ryzen 7, while four-core or six-core processors shouldn't cause similar issues.


...and about BCLK OC:
Quote:


> Selecting the CPU Clock setting will open up a BCLK frequency list, which we can't show you because the screen capture feature won't work when there's a dropdown menu open. However, there are 15 options in that list, ranging from AUTO to 107.3MHz. Now you might be thinking that since this motherboard doesn't have a BCLK chip/external clock generator that this feature is useless anyways, but no it actually works fine thanks to the AGESA 1.0.0.4a update that must have unlocked that functionality.


----------



## AlphaC

I'm amazed they think 75°C at stock clocks on a 95W TDP CPU is OK.









edit: there is a section warning against overclocking though.
Quote:


> Assuming you decide to ignore our warnings and overclock on this motherboard, you will want to use Ryzen Master instead of the meager BIOS-based overclocking settings. While Biostar has made custom P-State overclocking - the only overclocking method on this model - as simple as possible by allowing overclockers to use the +/- keys to increase/decrease the CPU core frequency or CPU core voltage, it is still not our preferred method. Furthermore, we discovered that it appears to limit the Vcore to 1.35V, which may just be Biostar's wise attempt at stopping people from blowing up their MOSFETs.


Anyhow if it's a 2-in-1 mosfet it means there is no doubled low side. No schottky diode per NIKOS' site either.

datasheet:
http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015924170242-PK612DZ_REV1.0_20150915.pdf

Key points: Package limitation current :Q1=35A,Q2=35A.
Channel Q2= 3.4 °C/W thermal resistance junction to case
Channel Q1= 5°C/W thermal resistance junction to case

Since Q2 has lower RDS(on) and higher drain current of 95A we can assume the RDS(on) to be 1.9mΩ @V_GS = 10V for low side. (It's 2.5mΩ @V_GS = 4.5V)
Channel Q1 has 5.5mΩ @V_GS = 10V and up to 7.4mΩ @V_GS = 4.5V

Rise time t_r = 17ns for Q2 and 16ns for Q1
Fall time t_f = 17ns for Q2 and 15ns for Q1

The gist of it is that the t_r+t_f would be lower than the high side of the B350 ASUS boards and also the Gigabyte ones, while the low side has roughly half the RDS(on) such that the low side doesn't necessarily need to be doubled. The low side is definitely more efficient than any Asrock B350 board since the SM4336 is around 5-8mΩ RDS(on) and the alternative PK618BA is around 6-7mΩ as well.

All in all it isn't horrible for the $110 price they're asking and they're the first to market with ITX. The board basically destroys any value proposition from their own B350 lineup though. I'd love to see what performance could be achieved with a proper VRM heatsink (i.e. copper Enzotech heatsinks with Fujipoly pads).

The ideal CPU for this sort of board would be a Ryzen 5 1600, though maximum of 1.35V is limiting. I'd be really wary of pushing more than 20A per phase and that means the hexcores are going to be able to lightly OC on this board as opposed to octacores.

I'd expect the high side to blow first given that the power dissipation for Q1 is 1.1W at 70°C (which is about 20A per phase) , while the low side would likely blow around 25A per phase. The limitation of power dissipation per phase is lower than that of the other B350 boards , even if it is slightly more efficient. It's not like a NexFET with 12W power dissipation...

Yeh, OC 8 core not advised:
Quote:


> Throwing caution to the wind, and without adding any additional airflow, we set out to achieve our usual overclock. Much to our surprise, the little Biostar had no immediate problem pushing our 1800X to 4.1GHz at 1.40V. We also had the SOC voltage to 1.20V and the RAM voltage to 1.35V.
> 
> We were able to run our usual array of benchmarks at this frequency, and it even passed an AIDA64 stress test that last almost 90 minutes. We say "almost 90 minutes" because when we measured the VRM temperatures, either the *MOSFET heatsink or one of the power chokes was running at 93°C / 200°F* and we immediately called it quits. All the electrical components can handle over 100°C, but running that hot is obviously not ideal, and it is outside of our personal comfort range for any long-term build. We also inspected the 4-pin CPU power connector for any heat-related issues, and although it was warm, that was likely due to its proximity to the VRM area.


----------



## br0da

Same conclusion here, these FETs aren't a bad choice at all. They aren't as efficient as NexFETs or PowIRstages, but still the FETs in this design are more efficient than any B350 design.
Also one should keep in mind that the VRMs on the B350GTN seem to be the same...


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> I am sure the AMD secret sauce has something that is causing some strangeness to happen. I have a suspicion that the AMD AGESA team don't quite have their heads around all the ingredients of the secret sauce as yet.
> 
> Have you seen this memory timings utility?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread/18220_20#post_26137022


I will give it a spin but on my 32m pi OS i try to run as lightweight as possible. I set am4 training back on last night woot back to random performance...bleh


----------



## chew*

Lol funny now after i have tested they realize vrm temps are a concern and are actually testing them...

Heatsink was 93c...so how hot was back of pcb lol...or the fets themselves.

Maybe i should raise the bar more for review sites...there is much more to test


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I will give it a spin but on my 32m pi OS i try to run as lightweight as possible. I set am4 training back on last night woot back to random performance...bleh


It looks like a static utility. reads once and done.

wee board has always fought to stay at cas 10 , wins most of time. and is reluctant to drop trcd to 8.

I get the finger during post. not even training attempt, with hard reset. needs cmos clear .. think cpu is telling me something.



typical result. can shotgun 10 x with this divider

perhaps using the timing checker will show me better subs and then I can walk it down slower with better results?


----------



## chew*

The lower dividers are key to lower cas yendor...iirc c9 only possible @ 1866 with refclock.

I think i ran it up to 2666+ c9 but fail post @ 2666 divider c9...think 2400 was same outcome.

Really need 300 refclock possible to access a larger timing option at useable speeds.


----------



## gtbtk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> I am sure the AMD secret sauce has something that is causing some strangeness to happen. I have a suspicion that the AMD AGESA team don't quite have their heads around all the ingredients of the secret sauce as yet.
> 
> Have you seen this memory timings utility?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread/18220_20#post_26137022
> 
> 
> 
> I will give it a spin but on my 32m pi OS i try to run as lightweight as possible. I set am4 training back on last night woot back to random performance...bleh
Click to expand...

I just thought that it may be a handy tool, particularly in the light of random performance experience. When the Micron memory pascal 1070 cards first came out, I had the same joys of random performance and unexplainable results so I feel you pain. Unlike beating your head against the wall, it does actually get better over time as you discover the obscure things that are going on behind the scenes

I thought this tool may give a clearer insight into what the training is not being consistent with. It may also shed light on where timings can be pulled in for improved throughput. I have no idea if it runs a service the way the Asus suite software does or not. If it does, a start /stop of the service should not be too difficult to manage if you need to do a bench run.


----------



## Artikbot

I've found it quite useful actually. It's the easiest way to check, in just a double click, what memory speeds and timings you booted at.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artikbot*
> 
> I've found it quite useful actually. It's the easiest way to check, in just a double click, what memory speeds and timings you booted at.


Yup, I can see a use for it when there are timings you can't see elsewhere or which other utilities do not return actual values...


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The lower dividers are key to lower cas yendor...iirc c9 only possible @ 1866 with refclock.
> 
> I think i ran it up to 2666+ c9 but fail post @ 2666 divider c9...think 2400 was same outcome.
> 
> Really need 300 refclock possible to access a larger timing option at useable speeds.


Hi Chew.









I have my 4dimm 64Gb Corsair Vengeance running with DOCP at 2933Mhz.

Do you think is worth to try running it faster or are the gains negligible?

1800x at 4Ghz (1.412v in Zenstates, LLC Auto)
Prime X370 Pro

The system is really stable ATM

Thank you.


----------



## chew*

There are gains in performance from running dual rank alone. A single sided set gets @ 3200 roughly 50k read 49k write 46k copy. @ 3333 it jumps to 52k R 51k W 48k C and 3466 should be coming in around 54k R 52k W 49-50k C.

There are other factors as well. Some programs just benefit from shear speed alone...some require speed + performance ( tighter timings )

The reality is you should run what is reliable however not ragged edge stability for a reliable system.

Ryzen tends to perform better in my experience the more stable you are.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> There are gains in performance from running dual rank alone. A single sided set gets @ 3200 roughly 50k read 49k write 46k copy. @ 3333 it jumps to 52k R 51k W 48k C and 3466 should be coming in around 54k R 52k W 49-50k C.
> 
> There are other factors as well. Some programs just benefit from shear speed alone...some require speed + performance ( tighter timings )
> 
> The reality is you should run what is reliable however not ragged edge stability for a reliable system.
> 
> Ryzen tends to perform better in my experience the more stable you are.


Benchmark at 3066mhz 15-15-15-15-35 (best of 3 runs)


Benchmak at 2933mhz 15-17-17-17-35


Latency at 2933 is around 82ns compared to 77ns at 3066 yet I got a higher score at 2933

I couldn't stay at 3066 either, it failed Aida64 stress test and I booted twice then it didn't boot again.

Could not go to 3200 or higher at all no matter the voltage (1.45v) or timings (tried from 15-15-15-15-35 up to 24-24-24-24-48)

Tried with ProDT at 68.8ohm and 60ohm
Tried setting 2T and Geardown disabled.

No way to go higher than 3066 unstable.

I guess I give up at this point. Those failed POST and reboot times are killing me.


----------



## chew*

There a bank group swap option in bios?


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> There a bank group swap option in bios?


Is it called like that "Bank Group Swap"? I didn't see anything like that.

There is one called memory interleaving and it has many options. Like, Auto, Bank, Die, Socket


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Is it called like that "Bank Group Swap"? I didn't see anything like that.
> 
> There is one called memory interleaving and it has many options. Like, Auto, Bank, Die, Socket


Interleaving is another option. Your on x370 pro with latest bios? If so give me a day or so and i will pop it back on bench. Hopefully bios has matured since the last one which was really bad.

The results could mean subs changed for the worse...or a memory performance hole @ 3066...i have not tested that strap.


----------



## SaccoSVD

I guess I'm in your hands. I find the amount of parameters daunting for me ATM. Thank you









Yes my Prime X370 Pro board has the latest 0803 beta BIOS (AGESA 1.0.0.6)

What are the chances of running this kit at 3600mhz on this board?


----------



## chew*

On any board 64 gig? Slim to none....but i like to say nothing is impossible...only highly improbable. Impossible means do not bother trying...if you never try you will never know.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Interleaving is another option. Your on x370 pro with latest bios? If so give me a day or so and i will pop it back on bench. Hopefully bios has matured since the last one which was really bad.
> 
> The results could mean subs changed for the worse...or a memory performance hole @ 3066...i have not tested that strap.


0612 for the pro didn't seem to have anything different from 604... except locking you out of earlier versions. No release note , and email support can't find it's own azz when asked. 801 never hit the dl page but 803 went up shortly after.. presumably minor fix. No one docs these things?

Glanced at prime x370-A. Looks like b350-plus vrm. Filling the product stack....


----------



## SaccoSVD

Would it improve the infinity fabric performance in any way to have 3600 and some real big timings even if the timings match the ram throughput of 2933?


----------



## chew*

I am not sure tbh. I have not tried yet with ugly timings. I do know some things can benefit from pure speed but many like performance minded tuning.

I do not get how the b350 is in better shape than x370...boggles the mind..or maybe not...quality of chipset core is really something i have started pondering.


----------



## SaccoSVD

I initially tried 3600 with somewhat loose timings such as:

24-24-24-24-48

And other parameters like:

Dram voltage 1.45v (tried 1.5v too)and termination voltage at half of it (set automatically by BIOS)

ProDT at 68.8ohm
Command at 2T and Gearbox disabled.

Also all the helpful parameters described by the community update, I've increase them by 2 or 4 mostly. Not much.

I'm just not sure what is the right procedure. It just didn't POST and setting lower clocks didn't either. Not that I'm expecting a miracle, but i wonder if I did something wrong.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I am not sure tbh. I have not tried yet with ugly timings. I do know some things can benefit from pure speed but many like performance minded tuning.
> 
> I do not get how the b350 is in better shape than x370...boggles the mind..or maybe not...quality of chipset core is really something i have started pondering.


plus was better. Someone was bugging them about the lousy bios with that first 6xx version. I wonder who....

2933 for 4x16 is outstanding. 3200 divider was crappy before. not sure if more subs has made it better for the pro.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Just tried 3600 with the max allowed timings 34-27-27-27-55 and 1.45v

No POST...well


----------



## chew*

Do not get discouraged with timings set like that..ryzen is still quirky and each board has to be fooled with differently.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> plus was better. Someone was bugging them about the lousy bios with that first 6xx version. I wonder who....
> 
> 2933 for 4x16 is outstanding. 3200 divider was crappy before. not sure if more subs has made it better for the pro.


I dunno i have been bugging them on all lol...stupid farking cpu is gonna drive me to drink..its going to pass prime @ 3466...or die...brb reboot.


----------



## iNeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Benchmark at 3066mhz 15-15-15-15-35 (best of 3 runs)
> 
> 
> Benchmak at 2933mhz 15-17-17-17-35
> 
> 
> Latency at 2933 is around 82ns compared to 77ns at 3066 yet I got a higher score at 2933
> 
> I couldn't stay at 3066 either, it failed Aida64 stress test and I booted twice then it didn't boot again.
> 
> Could not go to 3200 or higher at all no matter the voltage (1.45v) or timings (tried from 15-15-15-15-35 up to 24-24-24-24-48)
> 
> Tried with ProDT at 68.8ohm and 60ohm
> Tried setting 2T and Geardown disabled.
> 
> No way to go higher than 3066 unstable.
> 
> I guess I give up at this point. Those failed POST and reboot times are killing me.


Same mobo and bios but dual channel only:


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iNeri*
> 
> Same mobo and bios but dual channel only:


Any other BIOS settings you can share that might help me get it stable?


----------



## the w3rd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Would it improve the infinity fabric performance in any way to have 3600 and some real big timings even if the timings match the ram throughput of 2933?


3200Mhz seems to be the sweet spot. Many timing seems to mathematically work out.
Pushing 3600Mhz timing, will require some hands on and 3800~4000Mhz timings, will just requires $$.

This thread is so long now. Anyone have the chart for populated ram @ 3200Mhz for both dual & single sided (ranked) Memory...?

I would like to see that for 3600 and 3800mhz timings. _(Or 3688Mhz or whatever..)
_


----------



## TheBloodEagle

Mem latency seems to be a bit high on Ryzen, no? Anyone getting higher bandwidth AND lower latency? Sub 50ns?


----------



## iNeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Any other BIOS settings you can share that might help me get it stable?


yeah, put

PRO_ODT to 60 ohm
VDDP .975 this one really help me to cold boot at 3200 mhz
Geardown Disabled
CR 2t
Soc 1.1 mV

CR is a little ticky, for this one you have to boot firts on auto settings (2133 etc) once you booted this way the bios correctly puts CR at 2t :/

Re enter to bios an set your stable timings (recomend you 16-16-16-36-75 ) and 3200 frecuency .

I notice that hynix chips dont like volts. If i set more than 1.38 mV the board never boots.

The problem is that you have 4 slots, its seems thats why you have your lattency so high.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iNeri*
> 
> yeah, put
> 
> PRO_ODT to 60 ohm
> VDDP .975 this one really help me to cold boot at 3200 mhz
> Geardown Disabled
> CR 2t
> Soc 1.1 mV
> 
> CR is a little ticky, for this one you have to boot firts on auto settings (2133 etc) once you booted this way the bios correctly puts CR at 2t :/
> 
> Re enter to bios an set your stable timings (recomend you 16-16-16-36-75 ) and 3200 frecuency .
> 
> I notice that hynix chips dont like volts. If i set more than 1.38 mV the board never boots.
> 
> The problem is that you have 4 slots, its seems thats why you have your lattency so high.


Oh! those are pretty useful tips. I didn't know about CR acting up. I'll try ASAP!! thank you!


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> CR is a little ticky, for this one you have to boot firts on auto settings (2133 etc) once you booted this way the bios correctly puts CR at 2t :/


What is the exact procedure for this? Do you mean Boot into windows or just boot into BIOS?

This is what I did and didn't work so far:

Loaded optimized defaults and rebooted into BIOS

Set ram to 3200
Timings: 16-16-16-16-36 (where do I put that 75?)
PrODT: 60ohm
CR2t
Geardown disabled
SOC 1.1
VDDP 0.975
RAM volt: 1.38v

No POST.

Tried 18-18-18-18-36

and

20-20-20-20-40

No POST

I think is because CR is not sticking, but how can I tell?


----------



## chew*

Odt 60 for this...no
CR 2..no
Geardown disabled...no

Just saying..there are alot of myths...and most of them are exactly that...myths.

Boards vary...chips vary..memory varies.

The old habit of copy paste rarely if ever works..

Voltages...highly chip dependant..


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Odt 60 for this...no
> CR 2..no
> Geardown disabled...no
> 
> Just saying..there are alot of myths...and most of them are exactly that...myths. Boards vary...chips vary..memory varies.
> 
> Voltages...highly chip dependant..


Can't see the image in a new tab (too tiny here), photobucket gives me an error.


----------



## chew*

Its a 24 hour prime 95 run with 32gb @ 3200 14-14-14-34 with extremely tight subtimings...


----------



## SaccoSVD

So I could go 2T at 2933 by putting all the settings manually.

Does anyone have a full set of timings/subtimings for 3200?


----------



## SaccoSVD

Got some 3200 related numbers from some of the Thaiphoon's "XMP enhancer tool" existing profiles, made pictures and tried those values. No POST.

Hmm...


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iNeri*
> 
> Same mobo and bios but dual channel only:


Can I please have a full screenshot set of your entire memory timings tab? and other settings too if is not too much trouble. It'll probably help me greatly. At least as a starting point.

Oh, nevermind. that is for 3066mhz. I wanna focus on 3200 now.


----------



## SaccoSVD

So, I've tried many things, including installing a XMP profile number 2 (was missing) in the EEPROMs based on some JEDEC bins at 3200 from Thaiphoon burner. (set as 2 Dimms/CH)

The numbers all make sense, in which they are all higher than those at 2933 and in the range I would think timings and sub timings should be.

It just doesn't POST. Tried all sort of things such as different voltages in the sensitive parameters. CR2 etc....

Although I think the BIOS is still bugged, I don't see the sub timings applying when I chose the profile number 2. (specially those big numbers in the sub timings)

So....I don't know. I guess I cannot use 3200 with 64gb RAM....no wonder there is no corsair 64gb kit that comes at 3200 that I know of.

BTW: Having CR at 1T or 2T didn't make any benchmark difference at 2933mhz.


----------



## olliiee

Sorry to interject off topic, I am pretty much at the base level in terms of overclocking knowledge (only ever OC sandy bridge CPU's) but I am keen to learn more on my new Ryzen 1700 build. I just can't decide on a motherboard. I originally thought based on reviews and buildzoids video that the MSI B350/X370 pro carbon would be acceptable for a 3.8-4Ghz 24/7 OC on the 1700 but after reading the past few weeks worth of posts in this thread I am less sure of the VRM performance..

Which boards are the top picks in the mid-range category?


----------



## SaccoSVD

I guess each Mobo has it's issues. All I can say is my X370Pro is good. I can run my 64Gb 4 Dimm vengeance LED kit at rated 2933mhz. I could OC to 3066mhz but wasn't stable and have no more patience with timings.

I've heard the asus B350 is also good. I ran with a similar board VRM wise with a 3770k at 4.6Ghz LLC3 for 5y non stop.

Not that you need any LLC on these boards, LLC auto and 1.37v should serve you well on a 1700 at 3.8

At 4Ghz you can use 1.418v provided you have adequate cooling. You can leave LLC auto or use LLC1 or 2, LLC3 is unstable (here) LLC4 and 5 give you vboost which is dangerous.

I don't know exactly how it performs RAM wise and there might be a problem (or not), you should look around in their forums and ask.

No software is reporting vcore properly, you need to use a multimeter and probe on the socket. At least on the X370Pro vcore set in BIOS at LLC auto and LLC1 is reflected in the multimeter so that's good. Except for LLC3 and LLC5 which make the vcore to jump badly.

Check Bullzoid's video about LLC in youtube to understand more about LLC in general. In general no LLC or light LLC is good on these boards.

Vdroop vcore values are basically bonkers on all software, each software gives you it's version, which are very off sometimes, specially CPUz and HWInfo HWmonitor.

Here at 4Ghz 1.4125v at idle becomes 1.375v at load in the multimeter. That doesn't mean is gonna be the same in a B350 board as the VRM is different I assume.


----------



## olliiee

Thanks for your reply mate








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Not that you need any LLC on these boards, LLC auto and 1.37v should serve you well on a 1700 at 3.8


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Check Bullzoid's video about LLC in youtube to understand more about LLC in general. In general no LLC or light LLC is good on these boards.


I just checked out the video, I remember when I first started OCing I understood it to be compensating for Vdroop on load but resulted in higher voltages existing during idle, while voltages at load are as specified in the BIOS? Is that the general gist of it? Does LLC auto = off or does it select between like off and Level 2.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> I don't know exactly how it performs RAM wise and there might be a problem (or not), you should look around in their forums and ask.


I actually already own all the parts I plan to use (not my signature rig, its outdated) minus the R1700 and motherboard. I plan to use a 280mm AIO + case fans blowing down onto the VRM. Also have some Corsair 3200Mhz LPX DDR4, as long as I can get 2933Mhz I'd be content with that.

My primary concern is just a motherboard I can safely overclock below 1.4v without it spiking and killing components.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Thanks for your reply mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just checked out the video, I remember when I first started OCing I understood it to be compensating for Vdroop on load but resulted in higher voltages existing during idle, while voltages at load are as specified in the BIOS? Is that the general gist of it? Does LLC auto = off or does it select between like off and Level 2.
> I actually already own all the parts I plan to use (not my signature rig, its outdated) minus the R1700 and motherboard. I plan to use a 280mm AIO + case fans blowing down onto the VRM. Also have some Corsair 3200Mhz LPX DDR4, as long as I can get 2933Mhz I'd be content with that.
> 
> My primary concern is just a motherboard I can safely overclock below 1.4v without it spiking and killing components.


LLCs on these boards are as I said LLC3 to 5 something to avoid cause LLC3 tends to vboost and be unstable LLC4 and 5 are vboosts, not really an option. LLC auto can be jumpy at stock clock, but it stabilizes at 4Ghz OC, LLC1 I found really stable, it has a vdroop and that is good for me.

With the parts you have I don't think it will be a problem to OC. You could put as low as 1.37v for 3.8Ghz and try 1.412v for a 4ghz on LLC1, you can go a bit higher as long as your load vdroop doesn't exceed 1.421v

My 1800x needs 1.375 at load for a 4Ghz OC, your's if you're lucky the same, or less, or more. If your actual vcore at load is 1.4v you're in the safe area despite a 1.44v vcore set in BIOS or Zenstates.

Check out that too, Zenstates. Did you?


----------



## olliiee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> My 1800x needs 1.375 at load for a 4Ghz OC, your's if you're lucky the same, or less, or more. If your actual vcore at load is 1.4v you're in the safe area despite a 1.44v vcore set in BIOS or Zenstates.
> 
> Check out that too, Zenstates.


Is that an asus only feature though? its like offset overclocking right? and it can downclock when not at load?


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Is that an asus only feature though? its like offset overclocking right? and it can downclock when not at load?


I think so. I'm not sure if someone ever tried Zenstates on other boards. All I know is that it was supposed to be for the C6H and works for the X370Pro too.

Reported to work on ASUS B350 Pro too.


----------



## olliiee

Are there any benefits for it aside from lower power consumption?


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Are there any benefits for it aside from lower power consumption?


Not really. But no performance disadvantage either.


----------



## olliiee

Yeah would be a useful option to have. Are none of the power saving features native to Ryzen available when overclocking with a fixed voltage?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Yeah would be a useful option to have. Are none of the power saving features native to Ryzen available when overclocking with a fixed voltage?


Not really. You get dynamic clock, but that is it.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Yeah would be a useful option to have. Are none of the power saving features native to Ryzen available when overclocking with a fixed voltage?


As soon as you put your own clock speed instead of Auto the option is disabled in the BIOS and you cannot downclock anymore.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> As soon as you put your own clock speed instead of Auto the option is disabled in the BIOS and you cannot downclock anymore.


Not true. C&Q still works for dynamic frequency. Dynamic voltage OTOH does not function.

You have to set up a power profile in Windows where the minimum clock is not 90%+.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Not true. C&Q still works for dynamic frequency. Dynamic voltage OTOH does not function.
> 
> You have to set up a power profile in Windows where the minimum clock is not 90%+.


Thanks. I wasn't sure about that...so is the vcore then.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Are there any benefits for it aside from lower power consumption?


Also lower idle temperature which in turn helps keeping your AIO coolant colder for when you push it.

To me as I said another advantage is being able to boot at stock freqs, then lower the clock if I want before going into windows update both for stability purposes.

I had windows broken once on my old system because it locked up during windows update installation.

I can also have it at 40x most of the time, and if I wanna let's say render something REALLY long that is gonna rise the temperature and stress for too long then I can go down to 3.9Ghz within windows without having to go to the BIOS.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Sorry to interject off topic, I am pretty much at the base level in terms of overclocking knowledge (only ever OC sandy bridge CPU's) but I am keen to learn more on my new Ryzen 1700 build. I just can't decide on a motherboard. I originally thought based on reviews and buildzoids video that the MSI B350/X370 pro carbon would be acceptable for a 3.8-4Ghz 24/7 OC on the 1700 but after reading the past few weeks worth of posts in this thread I am less sure of the VRM performance..
> 
> Which boards are the top picks in the mid-range category?


If by midrange you mean $140-160: ASUS X370 Prime Pro

If by midrange you mean $120ish (more entry level X370): MSI B350 Pro Carbon

As I posted in the Gigabyte K7 thread:


Spoiler: http://www.overclock.net/t/1625822/gigabyte-ga-ax370-gaming-k7-discussion/1810#post_26154893



_IMO_
slightly overpriced x370 that is B350 + SLI capability essentially:

ASUS X370 Prime A ... B350 VRM + ALC887 (unacceptable for X370) on a X370 board + Realtek LAN and the price isn't great
Gigabyte X370 Gaming .... basically B350 Gaming with a x370 chipset (no USB 3.1 type C), ALC892, etc , IIRC this one has poorly implemented DualBIOS
Gigabyte X370 K3... no USB type C connector , Killer ethernet (worse support than Realtek LAN in Linux), B350 level VRM you are mainly paying for LEDs everywhere + Dual BIOS / BCLK
Gigabyte X370 K5 ... B350 level VRM you are mainly paying for LEDs everywhere + Dual BIOS / BCLK
Biostar X370 boards except GT7

X370s without USB 3.1 gen 2:

Asrock X370 Killer SLI if you don't need SLI but if you want to have USB 3.1 gen 2 + ALC1220 , you're essentially paying for 4 high side mosfets worth maybe $3-4
Asrock X370 Fatal1ty X , it's worth the $10ish to get a K4 for USB 3.1 gen 2 (does have ALC 1220 + Intel LAN)

~$130-140 entry X370 / B350 with X370 board features such as ALC1220 + Intel LAN:

Asrock Fatal1ty K4 ... ALC 1220 + Intel LAN + USB 3.1 gen 2, debug code LED but VRM is not top tier , *beta AGESA 1.0.0.6 just recently this week*
ASUS B350-F STRIX (VRM may be iffy) ... ALC1220 + Intel LAN + USB 3.1 gen 2 _although no type C_ , *beta AGESA 1.0.0.6 just recently this week*
Bunch of MSI boards cut down from X370 Pro Carbon that have USB 3.1 Gen 2 but not ALC1220 , x370 SLI for example has un-shielded ALC892 ; x370 Krait & Gaming Pro have shielded ALC892 but Realtek LAN & one M.2
MSI x370 Pro Carbon (~$150 market price now), unless you use 2nd M.2 slot every other board is better priced so B350 Pro carbon goes here really

midrange x370 ~$160-180:

Asus x370 Prime Pro , 6x NexFET VRM (40A each) but no BCLK ... also no debug code LED , *beta AGESA 1.0.0.6*
Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 , 6x IR3553 (40A each) but no BCLK *AGESA 1.0.0.6*
Biostar X370 GT7 , 8x IR3555 (60A each) top tier VRM , power/reset/clear CMOS + Debug LED, but due to the audio (no DAC/AMP/extra shielding) + Realtek LAN + lack of BCLK it's more midrange and that is reflected in the price too
In between midrange & high end:

ASUS X370 STRIX if it has the X370 Prime Pro VRM while adding a BCLK and improved audio shielding
Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 , it has unlabeled "coupon" v-check points + BCLK but no wifi slot if you wanted to add wifi , *AGESA 1.0.0.6 after Gaming 5*
MSI X370 Xpower would go here if the VRM wasn't 6 phase low Rds(on) mosfets with an overkill heatsink, it lacks BCLK, V-check points, etc but the price is _ludicrous_ unless it's 30-40% off (~$180-210). *AGESA 1.0.0.6 supposedly out but some claim it's just improved version of 1.0.0.4a*

High end x370 $220+ with the features to support the price difference:

Asrock X370 Taichi (+ Fatal1ty Pro if you use 5Gbps LAN) , 12x NexFET (40A) and 2 memory phases using NexFETs , 2nd M.2 and wifi+BT ... has faults of its own such as lack of v-check points + Taichi doesn't have power/reset switch , board is thinner than a GB x370 Gaming 5 when I held it , *AGESA 1.0.0.6 official beta on site , OCUK had beta AGESA 1.0.0.6 before Gigabyte had any*
ASUS CH VI Hero (the first board with monoblock watercooling) , 8x NexFET (40A), v-check points, LN2 mode, etc ... has minor faults such as cheapo NIKOs used for the 2 memory phases + initial batch of bricking boards + lack of PS/2 input for legacy keyboards , *one of first with beta AGESA 1.0.0.6*




Since this is the VRM thread:

Both ASUS X370 boards are good VRM , presumably so is the X370-F STRIX
Only Asrock's Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro are worth considering for Ryzen 7 if VRM is a driving factor in your purchase ; Fatal1ty K4 is a gamble due to multiple variants with different mosfets
Gigabyte Gaming x370 5 / K7 are the only Gigabyte boards worth buying for Ryzen 7 but the VRM heatsink is mediocre
All 8 phase MSI boards are not wonderful but as far as VRM they're better than B350 (i.e. fake 8 phases with 4 phases using double the components: X370 Pro Carbon, X370 Krait Gaming , X370 Gaming Pro , X370 Gaming Plus, X370 SLI PLUS, B350 Pro Carbon, B350 Krait, etc); MSI X370 Xpower is a waste of money VRM-wise unless you get it ~ 30-40% off

Boards with BCLK generators:

ASUS X370 CH VI Hero , X370-F STRIX
Asrock Taichi & Fatal1ty Pro
Gigabyte X370 K7 (& K3 , K5 that aren't worth it for Ryzen 7)
Boards with software/firmware-based BCLK adjustment (may not be all of them):
Biostar X370 GTN --- not worth buying for Ryzen 7
MSI B350 Tomahawk , X370 Xpower


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Interleaving is another option. Your on x370 pro with latest bios? If so give me a day or so and i will pop it back on bench. Hopefully bios has matured since the last one which was really bad.
> 
> The results could mean subs changed for the worse...or a memory performance hole @ 3066...i have not tested that strap.


I've used one of Thaiphoon XMP profiles (3200W) and installed it as profile #2 in my kit. (do you have any idea which one would be the best for my ram? I've added the part number into Thaiphoon's database too)

Part number CMU64GX4M4C3000C15

I could get 3200 to train on my board. But windows is unstable and shows CRC errors on files, also hardware errors in memory test.

SOC at 1.25v, this alone is the major factor to get it at least to train.

Now, probably all the timings have to be massaged but have no freaking idea where to start. This XMP profile has 20-20-20-20-52 as primary timings. Probably not worth against 3000 at 15-17-17-17-35 anyway.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> I've used one of Thaiphoon XMP profiles (3200W) and installed it as profile #2 in my kit. (do you have any idea which one would be the best for my ram? I've added the part number into Thaiphoon's database too)
> 
> Part number CMU64GX4M4C3000C15
> 
> I could get 3200 to train on my board. But windows is unstable and shows CRC errors on files, also hardware errors in memory test.
> 
> SOC at 1.25v, this alone is the major factor to get it at least to train.
> 
> Now, probably all the timings have to be massaged but have no freaking idea where to start. This XMP profile has 20-20-20-20-52 as primary timings. Probably not worth against 3000 at 15-17-17-17-35 anyway.


Not sure. The Hynix 2133 kit I have running a 2933 is using the JEDEC 2133p downbin I think.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Not sure. The Hynix 2133 kit I have running a 2933 is using the JEDEC 2133p downbin I think.


So how did you do. Flashed that 2133 profile then what did you do to get it at 2933?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> So how did you do. Flashed that 2133 profile then what did you do to get it at 2933?


I didn't change the SPD at all, that's what it came with (no thaiphoon license). To get 2933 I just set the strap to 2933, timings to 16-16-16-38, SoC voltage to 1.05v, and memory voltage 1.35v.

Here is the Thaiphoon screen cap if anyone thinks it will help them.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> I didn't change the SPD at all, that's what it came with (no thaiphoon license). To get 2933 I just set the strap to 2933, timings to 16-16-16-38, SoC voltage to 1.05v, and memory voltage 1.35v.
> 
> Here is the Thaiphoon screen cap if anyone thinks it will help them.


The Hynix-based kit I have that is sold as DDR4 3200MHz CL16 runs with 16-18-18-38 @ 1.35V so your result is spot on timings-wise.

I have SOC at 1.1V though.


----------



## olliiee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> If by midrange you mean $140-160: ASUS X370 Prime Pro
> 
> If by midrange you mean $120ish (more entry level X370): MSI B350 Pro Carbon
> 
> In between midrange & high end:
> 
> ASUS X370 STRIX if it has the X370 Prime Pro VRM while adding a BCLK and improved audio shielding
> Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 , it has unlabeled "coupon" v-check points + BCLK but no wifi slot if you wanted to add wifi , *AGESA 1.0.0.6 after Gaming 5*
> MSI X370 Xpower would go here if the VRM wasn't 6 phase low Rds(on) mosfets with an overkill heatsink, it lacks BCLK, V-check points, etc but the price is _ludicrous_ unless it's 30-40% off (~$180-210). *AGESA 1.0.0.6 supposedly out but some claim it's just improved version of 1.0.0.4a*


I think these are the two areas I would place myself, either a top end B350 like the MSI Pro-Carbon or skip a few brackets to the almost high end X370 Strix.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Since this is the VRM thread:
> 
> Both ASUS X370 boards are good VRM , presumably so is the X370-F STRIX
> Only Asrock's Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro are worth considering for Ryzen 7 if VRM is a driving factor in your purchase ; Fatal1ty K4 is a gamble due to multiple variants with different mosfets
> Gigabyte Gaming x370 5 / K7 are the only Gigabyte boards worth buying for Ryzen 7 but the VRM heatsink is mediocre
> All 8 phase MSI boards are not wonderful but as far as VRM they're better than B350 (i.e. fake 8 phases with 4 phases using double the components: X370 Pro Carbon, X370 Krait Gaming , X370 Gaming Pro , X370 Gaming Plus, X370 SLI PLUS, B350 Pro Carbon, B350 Krait, etc); MSI X370 Xpower is a waste of money VRM-wise unless you get it ~ 30-40% off


I actually just watched a review of the X370 Strix by OC3D, he says the VRM is an 8+2 (I assume with doubling?) so would that likely be the same as the Asus C6H VRM? https://youtu.be/m0n_cWNhJ8A?t=227[/URL]

Thanks for your answer by the way mate, very helpful


----------



## AlphaC

I don't think he took the heatsinks off.

If you look at the chokes then you can assume it is 8+2 , but in actuality it is likely the same as X370 Prime Pro which is 6 + 4.

The PWM used is on 6+2 mode with a doubler for the SOC phases , much like Gigabyte's X370 K7 / G5.


----------



## olliiee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I don't think he took the heatsinks off.
> 
> If you look at the chokes then you can assume it is 8+2 , but in actuality it is likely the same as X370 Prime Pro which is 6 + 4.
> 
> The PWM used is on 6+2 mode with a doubler for the SOC phases , much like Gigabyte's X370 K7 / G5.


Yep I assumed it wouldn't have actually have been a true 8+2, thanks for the clarification. I wish more popular reviewers went to some of the detail you find in threads like this.. At least its as good as the Prime Pro. I guess I just need to decide between the B350 MSI Pro Carbon and B350 Asus Strix which appear to be relatively equal or the X370 Asus Prime Pro or Strix which also appear equivalent in terms of overclocking potential, with the Strix seeming to have a better range of RAM on the QVL. Its a shame so few of the boards have debug LED's, its come in handy so many random times I wish it was more standard on AM4 boards.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> Yep I assumed it wouldn't have actually have been a true 8+2, thanks for the clarification.


Truth from board makers?

Good luck with that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *olliiee*
> 
> I wish more popular reviewers went to some of the detail you find in threads like this..


Payola, perhaps.

Welcome to the wonderful world of _caveat emptor_ Wild East (not just West) capitalism - where a person is expected to scour forums, hoping to find basic information.


----------



## chew*

I will buy a board to review if its worthy....if it looks like a copy paste or lipstick on a pig however I am uninterested in testing them.

Pcb revision confirmed then i am all in...


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Since this is the VRM thread:
> 
> Both ASUS X370 boards are good VRM , presumably so is the X370-F STRIX


AlphaC, would the upcoming X370-F STRIX have the same AM3+ holes for fitting of any type of cooler, much like the ROG Crosshair VI ?


----------



## gupsterg

Looking closely at the board image, where the clips are for cooler it has the holes for AM3.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Looking closely at the board image, where the clips are for cooler it has the holes for AM3.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Thank you gupsterg, it looks like ONLY Asus has gone this way because no other manufacturer has included AM3 slots/holes for everyone's old coolers.

Have some Thermalright's that would go brilliantly with the latest Ryzen cpu's. No wonder they still attract the most customers compared to all the others, by providing little extra slots for everyone to use.

Maybe in the end I will fork out extra for an AM4 Noctua (here in Convict Town) but I still want to use some previous coolers, that worked well with the P4 heaters long ago.


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chrisjames61*
> 
> Have you read anything The Stilt said? The Titanium uses sub par power delivery components. That and not having a CLKGEN at that price point seems kind of weak.


So why are our stable cpu overclocks every bit as good as any other x370 motherboard???? The problem you dogmatists refuse to accept is True 8x2 or 8x4 power phase on vrms is complete overkill for the Ryzen platform. You all dance around this point because there is zero evidence to indicate the Titanium has inadequate vrm support for any conceivable situation with Ryzen. Time to put up or shut up. Stilt is not a god. This is NOT Bulldozer and Bulldozer vrms are a wasted effort on this platform.The physical engineering of the Titaniium board is far superior to any X370 board on the marker. It certainly is more durable.


----------



## chew*

I would not go that far wiz...but it should suffice just fine on air/water.

A unprepared or inexperienced first time ln2 overclocker could pop it rather easy if they tried to run it up in cinebench @ its defaults switching frequency...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> So why are our stable cpu overclocks every bit as good as any other x370 motherboard???? The problem you dogmatists refuse to accept is True 8x2 or 8x4 power phase on vrms is complete overkill for the Ryzen platform. You all dance around this point because there is zero evidence to indicate the Titanium has inadequate vrm support for any conceivable situation with Ryzen. Time to put up or shut up. Stilt is not a god. This is NOT Bulldozer and Bulldozer vrms are a wasted effort on this platform.The physical engineering of the Titaniium board is far superior to any X370 board on the marker. It certainly is more durable.


I want better vrm, I'm willing to pay for better vrm. That is not better vrm. If idiots can get rgb headers and lousy effiiciency in the name of speed or white freaking motherboards I should be able to get better vrm...

As long as people say "this is good enough" I'm not likely to see better vrm farther down the product stack.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> As long as people say "this is good enough" I'm not likely to see better vrm farther down the product stack.


That has ALWAYS been the case when it comes to AMD. The Intel side gets loads of VRMs devised in a number of packages featuring everything bundled within some models from various manufacturers yet WE here in the AMD side get nada.

If anyone decides to focus upon the AMD side it's the bare minimum, hence we accept it because there are NO other manufacturers offering anything better. WE will always be the sad, forgotten, limp sided fourth cousin that everyone ignores, whilst Intel is the "First Son", always venerated and worshiped.

Despite this reality we all still support the AMD side due to either our own ignorance or blatant hatred of the "First Son".


----------



## AlphaC

To be fair, since Haswell things have gone downhill on the Intel side as well.

Z97 Asrock boards were using NexFETs even on $120ish Extreme4/ Extreme6. Z170 / Z270 use Sinopower generally except the Z170 OC Formula

Gigabyte Z87 boards were using IR3553 PowIRStages , they've been using Vishay SiRA18 + SiRA12 and On Semi 4C10N + 4C06N since then

ASUS has actually stayed the same for the ROG line more or less, it's a consistent 8 phases of NexFETs. 4C09N + 4C06N aren't amazing but they've been used for Intel Z170 / Z270 although in 8 phases (without doubled low side)

MSI has been using mostly NIKOs PK616+PK632BA on mainstream boards but generally Xpower has used International rectifier parts such as IR3550 or IR3555.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> The problem you dogmatists refuse to accept is True 8x2 or 8x4 power phase on vrms is complete overkill for the Ryzen platform.


There are none of those boards on the market, right? That makes it difficult to use the results of overclocking with such boards as comparative evidence.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> Stilt is not a god. This is NOT Bulldozer and Bulldozer vrms are a wasted effort on this platform.


He said the VRM spec is much tighter for AM4 than for AM3+ (and even tighter than Intel). That would make the VRM quality more important, not less, in terms of voltage stability, right?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> So why are our stable cpu overclocks every bit as good as any other x370 motherboard???? The problem you dogmatists refuse to accept is True 8x2 or 8x4 power phase on vrms is complete overkill for the Ryzen platform.


Another possibility is that Ryzen will improve its overclocking headroom over time, making differences between the boards more pronounced. AMD may even release a higher TDP (high leakage) variant. I'm sure it won't be 220 watt but one never knows what the future will hold.

My personal beef with board makers is that they won't offer basic feature parity with Intel, like the hybrid water-air coolers that came out on Intel way back in 2013. As long as normal overclocks for Ryzen require fans on the VRM then there is a need to offer that parity.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> To be fair, since Haswell things have gone downhill on the Intel side as well.
> 
> Z97 Asrock boards were using NexFETs even on $120ish Extreme4/ Extreme6. Z170 / Z270 use Sinopower generally except the Z170 OC Formula
> 
> Gigabyte Z87 boards were using IR3553 PowIRStages , they've been using Vishay SiRA18 + SiRA12 and On Semi 4C10N + 4C06N since then
> 
> ASUS has actually stayed the same for the ROG line more or less, it's a consistent 8 phases of NexFETs. 4C09N + 4C06N aren't amazing but they've been used for Intel Z170 / Z270 although in 8 phases (without doubled low side)
> 
> MSI has been using mostly NIKOs PK616+PK632BA on mainstream boards but generally Xpower has used International rectifier parts such as IR3550 or IR3555.


Intel still has hybrid water-air VRM solutions from board makers - a feature continued to be offered since 2013.


----------



## chew*

I do not think there is any true 8x2 or 8x4 because there is no true 8 phase period...its 6+2 or 4 phase doubled.

Maybe i have been mia to long but last i heard 6 was the biggest true phase.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> When a platform requires a change for functional reasons then it will be done.


Explain why the first iPad didn't come with a camera.

I can. It's called planned obsolescence. The existence of planned obsolescence contradicts your claim. That's just one piece of evidence against your claim, which is an example of large overstatement.

Another is the fact that businesses sometimes cut corners, as Ford did with the Pinto gas tank. The Pinto should have been designed differently but was designed improperly anyway - and they knew better.

Sometimes businesses cut corners and lie to consumers about it, like VW did with my Passat diesel.

No, we can't just blindly state that products in the market are the best they can be - that they are what they need to be because the people selling them are omniscient and benevolent.


----------



## chew*

They do require a functional change.

Functional and larger vrm sinks on many boards would be a big help...not needing to actively cool vrms...priceless.

AMD has publically stated traces in pcb could use improvement...as to what end...routing for cleaner signal path or more copper...no clue.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I do not think there is any true 8x2 or 8x4 because there is no true 8 phase period...its 6+2 or 4 phase doubled.
> 
> Maybe i have been mia to long but last i heard 6 was the biggest true phase.


8+0 is if they don't use the PWM for SOC.

6+2 is if they use the same PWM for CPU + SOC , because it is unlikely 7+1 would be used

At least this is the case for the IR35201 used on the Asrock X370 K4 / Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro , ASUS Crosshair VI hero, Gigabyte X370 G5 / K7, Biostar GT7, and MSI X370 Xpower

http://irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/pb-ir35201.pdf
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> They do require a functional change.
> 
> Functional and larger vrm sinks would be a big help.
> 
> AMD has publically stated traces in pcb could use improvement...as to what end...routing for cleaner signal path or more copper...no clue.


Definitely better VRM sinks are needed.

While they're at it , they (manufacturers) should ditch the I/O covers' intrusion into the heatsink area. This is something that the Asrock X370 Taichi gets right: the I/O cover does not intrude over the VRM heatsink, unlike the Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming.


----------



## chew*

Has anyone every actually made a true 8 phase on a motherboard to date?

I am just curious if it has actually been done while i hibernated.


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> They do require a functional change.
> 
> Functional and larger vrm sinks on many boards would be a big help...not needing to actively cool vrms...priceless.
> 
> AMD has publically stated traces in pcb could use improvement...as to what end...routing for cleaner signal path or more copper...no clue.


But my vrm's do NOT run hot.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Has anyone every actually made a true 8 phase on a motherboard to date?
> 
> I am just curious if it has actually been done while i hibernated.


GIGABYTE Shows Off Z77X-UP7 Motherboard with 32-Phase CPU VRM

8 true phases quadrupled?


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Has anyone every actually made a true 8 phase on a motherboard to date?
> 
> I am just curious if it has actually been done while i hibernated.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gamersnexus*
> ASUS Z170 Pro
> 
> The photo above shows a 16-phase VRM for the CPU.
> 
> Gaming G1 Z170
> 
> Gigabyte has a whopping 22 VRM phases visible for the CPU,


link

Fancy math, typical of board makers and review sites?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kitguru*
> The Asus Z170 Pro also (presumably) features a 16-phase digital VRM for microprocessors


link
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ASUS*
> P6X58D Premium
> 
> The groundbreaking 16+2 phase VRM design is brrought to the ASUS motherboards.
> 
> P5Q Premium
> 
> The breakthrough technology of 16-phase VRM design is bringing to the ASUS motherboards.
> 
> P5Q Deluxe
> 
> The breakthrough technology of 16-phase VRM design is bringing to the ASUS motherboards.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *legitreviews*
> The ASUS P8P67 Deluxe Intel Sandy Bridge Motherboard has an industry leading 16+2 digital power phase


link


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 8+0 is if they don't use the PWM for SOC.
> 
> 6+2 is if they use the same PWM for CPU + SOC , because it is unlikely 7+1 would be used
> 
> At least this is the case for the IR35201 used on the Asrock X370 K4 / Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro , ASUS Crosshair VI hero, Gigabyte X370 G5 / K7, Biostar GT7, and MSI X370 Xpower
> 
> http://irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/pb-ir35201.pdf
> Definitely better VRM sinks are needed.
> 
> While they're at it , they (manufacturers) should ditch the I/O covers' intrusion into the heatsink area. This is something that the Asrock X370 Taichi gets right: the I/O cover does not intrude over the VRM heatsink, unlike the Fatal1ty X370 Professional Gaming.


Is not the Titanium vrm sink larger than on its competition?? I assume that is at least part of the reason my vrms do not overheat.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> But my vrm's do NOT run hot.


You can do a 4 GHz overclock with no active cooling on the VRMs? If so, what kind of case fans are you running? Deltas?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> Is not the Titanium vrm sink larger than on its competition?? I assume that is at least part of the reason my vrms do not overheat.


Isn't it a bit much to expect people to pay that kind of a premium for a bit more aluminum?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> But my vrm's do NOT run hot.
> 
> 
> 
> You can do a 4 GHz overclock with no active cooling on the VRMs? If so, what kind of case fans are you running? Deltas?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> Is not the Titanium vrm sink larger than on its competition?? I assume that is at least part of the reason my vrms do not overheat.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Isn't it a bit much to expect people to pay that kind of a premium for a bit more aluminum?
Click to expand...

I dunno, show me any other board getting an honest 4ghz with the VRMs barely touching 40 C.


2 crappy 120 mm fans pointed at vrm heatsinks. 70 F room


----------



## chew*

Thx for that superstition...holy hell at that 32 ÷ 4 gigabyte.

Honestly the only board i would run no active cooling on is taichi...i find myself tossing a fan on them out of habit with 90f ambients however.

Of course what little joy i get from cool vrm temps on it is shattered by one choke sounding like i am cooking bacon when i stress test...


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Thx for that superstition...holy hell at that 32 ÷ 4 gigabyte.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tweaktown*
> You can see some of the main features like 32+3+2 Phase CPU Power Design, true all Digital PWM design, OC Touch, Thin Fin Cooling along with a run down on the I/O side of things.
> 
> Moving to the other end of the board you can see we've got two 8-pin CPU power connectors for people who need an extreme amount of clean power.
> 
> Looking at the price side of things the $399.99 price tag that is associated with the GIGABYTE Z77X-UP7 brings it in as the second most expensive Z77 motherboard on offer over at Newegg with the ASUS P8Z77-V Premium being $50 more expensive. Justifying the price isn't too hard, though. You only have to look at the package that's on offer.


GIGABYTE Z77X-UP7 (Intel Z77) Motherboard Review

I'll pass on 32 phases and take a VRM sink that will let me make use of the water loop I paid for.

BTW, the 16+2 ASUS P8P67 Deluxe sold for $235 in 2011.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I dunno, show me any other board getting an honest 4ghz with the VRMs barely touching 40 C.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 crappy 120 mm fans pointed at vrm heatsinks. 70 F room


Less expensive!

How goes the latest bios ? I kid. I lurk the titanium forum.
annoyed I can't point to os as someone running 32gig at 3200+ for now.

max memclock 1612.9? odd.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I dunno, show me any other board getting an honest 4ghz with the VRMs barely touching 40 C.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2 crappy 120 mm fans pointed at vrm heatsinks. 70 F room
> 
> 
> 
> Less expensive!
> 
> How goes the latest bios ? I kid. I lurk the titanium forum.
> annoyed I can't point to os as someone running 32gig at 3200+ for now.
> 
> max memclock 1612.9? odd.
Click to expand...

I've managed 3466 1.12 v soc 1.4v dram 2x8 but it wasn't fully stable, 1.72 beta allows for faster frequency at the expense of performance using auto settings and I'm too lazy to mess with tweaking it myself.

3333 cl 14 ran fine for about a week , then I updated to the latest w 10 and it's having some random blue screens now.

@ 14 second advantage in spi 32m 1.1 bios vs the newest one I've used both left to auto settings. ( Xamp )


----------



## chew*

Yah i dissappeared around that time.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yah i dissappeared around that time.


I think my Z87 Mpower board has 16 +4 from one of the reviews I read. I was a bit surprised at how much juice that machine would actually use at 5 ghz


----------



## chew*

Yah but thats doubled as well or tripled or quadrupled...


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Has anyone every actually made a true 8 phase on a motherboard to date?
> 
> I am just curious if it has actually been done while i hibernated.


On AMD, not sure. Most X99 and coming X299-boards should be 8-phase without doubling.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yah but thats doubled as well or tripled or quadrupled...




20 " real" phases fwiw from the reviewers point of view.


----------



## chew*

Cool. See dissappear and 6 phase gets surpassed.

Yah but some reviewers read the box...so it must be true lol.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> 20 " real" phases fwiw from the reviewers point of view.


Best case is 8 PWM outputs from the controller directly to the driver (or power stages with integrated drivers). Second best is using a phase multiplier/doubler/quadrupler which divides the controller PWM signal into a number of lower frequency PWM signals that are forwarded to the drivers. The downsides of this approach are added costs and worse transient response because of the added delay of the signal going through the multiplier IC. Least desirable is adding multiple MOSFETs and inductors on the same phase, driven by the same driver. It will allow for increased current output, but at the cost of lower efficiency due to higher switching losses. The most common usage is to add a second low-side MOSFET to help dissipate the rectification losses, and since on-time for the low-side MOSFET is usually a lot longer than for high-side, meaning switching losses are a small portion of the total power loss.



(From IR3599 datasheet)


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> 
> 
> 20 " real" phases fwiw from the reviewers point of view.
> 
> 
> 
> Best case is 8 PWM outputs from the controller directly to the driver (or power stages with integrated drivers). Second best is using a phase multiplier/doubler/quadrupler which divides the controller PWM signal into a number of lower frequency PWM signals that are forwarded to the drivers. The downsides of this approach are added costs and worse transient response because of the added delay of the signal going through the multiplier IC. Least desirable is adding multiple MOSFETs and inductors on the same phase, driven by the same driver. It will allow for increased current output, but at the cost of lower efficiency due to higher switching losses. The most common usage is to add a second low-side MOSFET to help dissipate the rectification losses, and since on-time for the low-side MOSFET is usually a lot longer than for high-side, meaning switching losses are a small portion of the total power loss.
> 
> 
> 
> (From IR3599 datasheet)
Click to expand...

I appreciate your input.

The reviewer's opinion was 20 phases - what would you consider this to be?


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> Thank you gupsterg, it looks like ONLY Asus has gone this way because no other manufacturer has included AM3 slots/holes for everyone's old coolers.
> 
> Have some Thermalright's that would go brilliantly with the latest Ryzen cpu's. No wonder they still attract the most customers compared to all the others, by providing little extra slots for everyone to use.
> 
> Maybe in the end I will fork out extra for an AM4 Noctua (here in Convict Town) but I still want to use some previous coolers, that worked well with the P4 heaters long ago.


Yeah that was one reason that swayed my purchase to C6H at launch. I use a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 and ample for general 24/7 OC. I also spent a day or so at 1.55V and upto 4.075GHz on a R7 1700 using that HS for some HWBot subs.

As the CPU socket is at a differing location than the M7R I used to have the SB-E on I had to go for IB-E, info posted here. I have noted from a few other members shares of say using NH-D14/similar cooler again due to the socket location on C6H, the cooler may end up close to the 1st GPU slot.

Functionality wise the Strix X370-F Gaming ticks some boxes of mine for purchase now if I had not gone for Ryzen build at launch. The BCLK tweak ability is nice plus over say Prime X370 Pro.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> Stilt is not a god.


Has given more insight on AMD products than any other person I know. Has 1st hand experience, which shared many use. I also am aware of instances where he has helped authors of SW we may use, like HWiNFO, etc for support of an AMD product or feature. There are mobo/GPU bios he has modified and shared, besides other applications for us tweakers.

*What contribution can you lay claim to in this context?* So I'd say show some damn respect to the guy. You don't like his viewpoint fine, don't roll with it, but to insult him (which I take from your manner towards him) for what he shares is uncalled for.

So yeah







*The Stilt*







is a GOD.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> Thank you gupsterg, it looks like ONLY Asus has gone this way because no other manufacturer has included AM3 slots/holes for everyone's old coolers.
> 
> Have some Thermalright's that would go brilliantly with the latest Ryzen cpu's. No wonder they still attract the most customers compared to all the others, by providing little extra slots for everyone to use.
> 
> Maybe in the end I will fork out extra for an AM4 Noctua (here in Convict Town) but I still want to use some previous coolers, that worked well with the P4 heaters long ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah that was one reason that swayed my purchase to C6H at launch. I use a ThermalRight Archon IB-E X2 and ample for general 24/7 OC. I also spent a day or so at 1.55V and upto 4.075GHz on a R7 1700 using that HS for some HWBot subs.
> 
> As the CPU socket is at a differing location than the M7R I used to have the SB-E on I had to go for IB-E, info posted here. I have noted from a few other members shares of say using NH-D14/similar cooler again due to the socket location on C6H, the cooler may end up close to the 1st GPU slot.
> 
> Functionality wise the Strix X370-F Gaming ticks some boxes of mine for purchase now if I had not gone for Ryzen build at launch. The BCLK tweak ability is nice plus of say Prime X370 Pro.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> Stilt is not a god.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Has given more insight on AMD products than any other person I know. Has 1st hand experience, which shared many use. I also am aware of instances where he has helped authors of SW we may use, like HWiNFO, etc for support of an AMD product or feature. There are mobo/GPU bios he has modified and shared, besides other applications for us tweakers.
> 
> *What contribution can you lay claim to in this context?*
> 
> So yeah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Stilt*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> is a GOD.
Click to expand...

Stilt is a great resource for this hobby , as are Elmor, Chew, yourself and a few others, but not even Stilt is above being mistaken. It's best to check one's ego and not let experience lead to presumptive infallibility.


----------



## gupsterg

I have always liked your results shares on your kit







and commented as such







.

I will be honest though, the MSI Titanium doesn't float my boat as mobo to buy and I say this without taking VRM into context. Here in the UK it was vastly over priced vs C6H when I got mine, it was ~£300 vs ~£230. It had no BCLK tweak, the UEFI shots I have seen I feel the C6H has better layout and options plus with better label names. Then there were other differences which swayed my purchase to C6H.

There are lesser boards which The Stilt has than say high end ones. I have also seen him point out get x if x is what you plan on doing, so again I take that as he is not giving advice biased towards going high end purchase.

Again anyone not liking his opinion crack on and disagree or ignore his viewpoint, but the manner that os2wiz has posted I find it offensive. Especially as a person who has had great help and time given to from The Stilt, not only in my Ryzen exploits but AMD GPU.

As I would stand with you when someone I felt has cause offense I will stand with him.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> I have always like your results shares on your kit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and commented as such
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> I will be honest though, the MSI Titanium doesn't float my boat as mobo to buy and I say this without taking VRM into context. Here in the UK it was vastly over priced vs C6H when I got mine, it was ~£300 vs ~£230. It had no BCLK tweak, the UEFI shots I have seen I feel the C6H has better layout and options plus with better label names. Then there were other differences which swayed my purchase to C6H.
> 
> There are lesser boards which The Stilt has than say high end ones. I have also seen him point out get x if x is what you plan on doing, so again I take that as he is not giving advice biased towards going high end purchase.
> 
> Again anyone not liking his opinion crack on and disagree or ignore his viewpoint, but the manner that os2wiz has posted I find it offensive. Especially as a person who has had great help and time given to from The Stilt, not only in my Ryzen exploits but AMD GPU.
> 
> As I would stand with you when someone I felt has cause offense I will stand with him.


Perspectives have to be considered that's for sure and should be respected.

I doubt too many people have spent more time than you at finding efficient clocks , chew on superpi, elmor on vrm identification or stilt's time and energy on this esoteric pursuit .

Best to appreciate those efforts for what they are.

Given that the Titanium has won a few efficiency battles in the reviews, it would be interesting to see what you could do with one using the same chip.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I appreciate your input.
> 
> The reviewer's opinion was 20 phases - what would you consider this to be?


The Z87 Mpower Max has been on sin's hardware VRM List for 3-4 years.

It uses the IR3563B PWM controller. That means at most a 8 phases PWM. http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/pb-ir3563b.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a40153567ffa2e28dd

Sin's hardware has it as 5 "true phases" at this PWM with IR3599 quadruplers routed to IR3535 drivers.

Keep in mind the Z87 Mpower Max and Mpower used NXP LFPAKs instead of the PowIRStages used on the Xpower.

High side: PH7030AL http://www.datasheetlib.com/datasheet/481905/ph7030al-115_nxp-semiconductors.html#datasheet OR https://www.digchip.com/datasheets/parts/datasheet/1019/PH7030AL_115-pdf.php OR http://datasheet.octopart.com/PH7030AL%2C115-Philips-datasheet-13717710.pdf
Pricing (https://octopart.com/ph7030al%2C115-nexperia-78754878) ~ $0.30

Anyhow the doubling scheme is not bad but the Z87 XPower is far stronger due to the use of IR3550.

His site seems to be down at the moment but I still have an old saved image. You can also check it yourself on the web archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20160914210453/http://sinhardware.com/images/vrmlist.png
(via https://web.archive.org/web/20161214134731/http://sinhardware.com:80/index.php/vrm-list)


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I appreciate your input.
> 
> The reviewer's opinion was 20 phases - what would you consider this to be?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Z87 Mpower Max has been on sin's hardware VRM List for 3-4 years.
> 
> It uses the IR3563B PWM controller. That means at most a 8 phases PWM. http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/pb-ir3563b.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a40153567ffa2e28dd
> 
> Sin's hardware has it as 5 "true phases" at this PWM with IR3599 quadruplers routed to IR3535 drivers.
> 
> Keep in mind the Z87 Mpower Max and Mpower used NXP LFPAKs instead of the PowIRStages used on the Xpower.
> 
> Anyhow the doubling scheme is not bad but the Z87 XPower is far stronger due to the use of IR3550.
> 
> His site seems to be down at the moment but I still have an old saved image. You can also check it yourself on the web archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20160914210453/http://sinhardware.com/images/vrmlist.png
> (via https://web.archive.org/web/20161214134731/http://sinhardware.com:80/index.php/vrm-list)
Click to expand...

I had seen sin's guide a while ago, but couldn't find it - thank you.

Mine is the model below the max ac - fwiw most reviews at the time had it as a 16 phase. Under normal cooling methods the cpu would go thermonuclear well before the vrms temps went out of their comfort zone.
I was surprised that at 4.9 ghz , there really wasn't that big a difference between it's power demand and my most efficient FX 8 core at the same clock ( as measured by ups).


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I had seen sin's guide a while ago, but couldn't find it - thank you.
> 
> Mine is the model below the max ac - fwiw most reviews at the time had it as a 16 phase. Under normal cooling methods the cpu would go thermonuclear well before the vrms temps went out of their comfort zone.
> I was surprised that at 4.9 ghz , there really wasn't that big a difference between it's power demand and my most efficient FX 8 core at the same clock ( as measured by ups).


Haswell is really power hungry once you crank up volts.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/msi-woos-overclockers-with-their-z87-m-power-and-x-power-motherboards/36056.html


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Perspectives have to be considered that's for sure and should be respected.
> 
> I doubt too many people have spent more time than you at finding efficient clocks , chew on superpi, elmor on vrm identification or stilt's time and energy on this esoteric pursuit .
> 
> Best to appreciate those efforts for what they are.
> 
> Given that the Titanium has won a few efficiency battles in the reviews, it would be interesting to see what you could do with one using the same chip.


Me I'm just a little fish in the big pond







. I appreciate your post







and echo your thoughts on others you name for their value to us







and respecting each other on aspects we discuss







.

Another mobo I'll be honest isn't on my purchase radar







. Happy with C6H and progression on UEFI







. I may try another CPU at some point







. I've had 3x R7 1700, as we all know OC ability isn't as great as an Intel chip but the flip side is I could never gain what I have on AMD platform for same price point on Intel. The performance level is where I expected it to be and happy with it.

Latest "rumour" is B2 stepping maybe out soon, link. Again I'd take with pinch of salt but we never know, more good things to come could be at hand







.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Me I'm just a little fish in the big pond
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I appreciate your post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and echo your thoughts on others you name for their value to us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and respecting each other on aspects we discuss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Another mobo I'll be honest isn't on my purchase radar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Happy with C6H and progression on UEFI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I may try another CPU at some point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I've had 3x R7 1700, as we all know OC ability isn't as great as an Intel chip but the flip side is I could never gain what I have on AMD platform for same price point on Intel. The performance level is where I expected it to be and happy with it.
> 
> Latest "rumour" is B2 stepping maybe out soon, link. Again I'd take with pinch of salt but we never know, more good things to come could be at hand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


from the brief glance it's rumored uncore/soc . Might not seem exciting until you think about it. Then... I'll be in my bunk.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> from the brief glance it's rumored uncore/soc . Might not seem exciting until you think about it. Then... I'll be in my bunk.


Watch it be something yawn worthy such as fixing boards without BCLK modifier going to 99.8MHz or jumping around in BCLK.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Functionality wise the Strix X370-F Gaming ticks some boxes of mine for purchase now if I had not gone for Ryzen build at launch. The BCLK tweak ability is nice plus over say Prime X370 Pro.


Was going to get a C6H BUT the Strix X370 is coming down the line, then I'll wait for that model to arrive.

Looking forward to seating my 1700X into something worthwhile and yet again, buying another Asus product for 2017







.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> Was going to get a C6H BUT the Strix X370 is coming down the line, then I'll wait for that model to arrive.
> 
> Looking forward to seating my 1700X into something worthwhile and yet again, buying another Asus product for 2017
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


If I remember right the Strix VRM is the same as with the Prime X370.


----------



## chew*

Looks like same pcb with different heatsinks with clock gen chip...i sure hope it does not clock memory like prime pro...one of the better boatds but falls from grace due to horrible memory support.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Watch it be something yawn worthy such as fixing boards without BCLK modifier going to 99.8MHz or jumping around in BCLK.


probably.
memory controllers live here, data fabric links to pcie live here. could get straps. something other than current df ratio.

uncore based rgb controller. FIRST! marketing would go mad.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Looks like same pcb with different heatsinks with clock gen chip...i sure hope it does not clock memory like prime pro...one of the better boatds but falls from grace due to horrible memory support.


X370 - A b350 plus vrm, x370 chipset.

chew* have you looked at either with the 1.0.0.6 agesa bios yet?


----------



## chew*

No lol. I was guessing from your comments nothing was exciting.

Having to much fun stomping asus 32m pi bench stable times with my prime 95 stable 24/7 runs on taichi.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> If I remember right the Strix VRM is the same as with the Prime X370.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No lol. I was guessing from your comments nothing was exciting.
> 
> Having to much fun stomping asus 32m pi bench stable times with my prime 95 stable 24/7 runs on taichi.


pro had more room for improvement. early 4a bios just didn't suck enough to warrant a new version til 6. two beta's though. that's just crazy.


----------



## chew*

Yah the prime pro could be one of the best boards...and consumer wise in theory should sell more.

I will get back to it eventually...that and the msi...got a few guys that could use some pointers in tuning it...

Seems the c6h is getting all the end user attention and support.. To bad its slow despite all the efforts.

Maybe elmor can convince the powers that be to make a 32m pi beta for it...currently i have 0 interest in using it. I gave up asking gary to make it fast on skype.

I still need to convince gigabyte to remove the 3dm01 tweak from bios on there boards to if they will not give me ide mode/ahci...it is rather pointless without win xp installable/bootable..

You should grab an open box taichi. You have 3600 c15 sticks right? You can probably port my profile right over. Its nasty fast..no need for high ram speeds when subs are omg tight.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I appreciate your input.
> 
> The reviewer's opinion was 20 phases - what would you consider this to be?


Stupid overkill for Z87 and in general bad engineering practice is what that is. That's what happens when marketing/sales is telling engineering what to do.

VRM controller IR3563B up to 8 PWM outputs
5x doubler ICs IR3599
10x drivers, either IR3535 or combined driver/doubler IR3598
20x inductors
40x FETs, each "phase" or at least each choke has 1x high-side+1x low-side

Best case if IR3598: 5x original PWM outputs from IR3563B, doubled to 10x PWM signals using IR3599. Which again are doubled up to 20x PWM signals using IR3598 and you get 20x phases each with one driver, one high-side FET, one low-side FET and one inductor. 20 separate phases, 5 original ones.

Worst case if IR3535: 5x original PWM outputs from IR3563B, doubled to 10x PWM signals using IR3599. Which drives 10x IR3535 drivers, and each has two high-side FETs, two low-side FETs and two inductors. 10 separate phases, 5 original ones.

Second case will have lower total output capability due to lower efficiency when driving double the amount of components on one driver.


----------



## SaccoSVD

That looks so much like this:


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yah the prime pro could be one of the best boards...and consumer wise in theory should sell more.
> 
> I will get back to it eventually...that and the msi...got a few guys that could use some pointers in tuning it...
> 
> Seems the c6h is getting all the end user attention and support.. To bad its slow despite all the efforts.
> 
> Maybe elmor can convince the powers that be to make a 32m pi beta for it...currently i have 0 interest in using it. I gave up asking gary to make it fast on skype.
> 
> I still need to convince gigabyte to remove the 3dm01 tweak from bios on there boards to if they will not give me ide mode/ahci...it is rather pointless without win xp installable/bootable..
> 
> You should grab an open box taichi. You have 3600 c15 sticks right? You can probably port my profile right over. Its nasty fast..no need for high ram speeds when subs are omg tight.


c16 bin. microcenter is too far away. newegg had one last month but someone snatched it up . It'll come sooner than later.. Wish I knew someone in detroit. taichi open box at MC.


----------



## chew*

I know someone in michigan but....i think detroit is a serious ride..


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I know someone in michigan but....i think detroit is a serious ride..


yeah. my best bet is Tustin Ca. blackmail relatives for the win.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> yeah. my best bet is Tustin Ca. blackmail relatives for the win.


or pony up . been down at 190 a couple of times new. relatives can hit the clearance rack and open box for other boards. Course they don't know what they're doing but since I built the machines they're using.... time to upgrade. get this. HERE IS PICTURE...


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Long-time lurker and been working through this great thread for the past few days. Would like some specific advice from you all as to which of the following boards is a better bet for a 24/7 overclock based on VRM and other usage factors:


Open box Asus Prime X370-Pro for ~$120 from Microcenter
New Asrock x370 Taichi for ~$180 from Newegg

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cletus-cassidy*
> 
> 
> Open box Asus Prime X370-Pro for ~$120 from Microcenter
> New Asrock x370 Taichi for ~$180 from Newegg
> 
> Thanks in advance.


ALWAYS get the NEW Asrock x370 Taichi over anything else currently selling at Newegg.

Best board by Chew*s standard and he's the one that knows







.


----------



## ManofGod1000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cletus-cassidy*
> 
> Long-time lurker and been working through this great thread for the past few days. Would like some specific advice from you all as to which of the following boards is a better bet for a 24/7 overclock based on VRM and other usage factors:
> 
> 
> Open box Asus Prime X370-Pro for ~$120 from Microcenter
> New Asrock x370 Taichi for ~$180 from Newegg
> 
> Thanks in advance.


Spend just a liitle more and buy the Taichi from Microcenter? I know I did.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> ALWAYS get the NEW Asrock x370 Taichi over anything else currently selling at Newegg.
> 
> Best board by Chew*s standard and he's the one that knows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Many thanks. That was my sense, but after 1000+ posts the signal got a bit lost in the noise. Much appreciated to you both.


----------



## AlphaC

elmor , why does the X370-F STRIX have BCLK but no Debug Code LED?









Is there any way to have a code readout on errors? ROG_EXT or something?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cletus-cassidy*
> 
> Long-time lurker and been working through this great thread for the past few days. Would like some specific advice from you all as to which of the following boards is a better bet for a 24/7 overclock based on VRM and other usage factors:
> 
> 
> Open box Asus Prime X370-Pro for ~$120 from Microcenter
> New Asrock x370 Taichi for ~$180 from Newegg
> 
> Thanks in advance.


The Asrock X370 Taichi is hands down the better board by a long shot. You're comparing a mid-range X370 Prime Pro with an attractively-priced high end board. In Europe and some other places the X370 Taichi costs about as much as the ASUS Crosshair VI Hero.

ASUS X70 Prime Pro is basically half the power delivery components as the X370 Taichi , even for memory phases. The X370 Taichi also uses better 12K hour rated capacitors and a heatsink with a heatpipe.

The X370 Taichi has overbuilt VRM and even the memory VRM is overbuilt (it uses TWO NexFETs capable of 40A a piece for memory when everyone else is using 1 or two phases of run-of-the-mill PowerPaks or LFPAKs).

If you have to rationalize the purchase you have other non-VRM features:
* wifi+BT
* a Debug LED so you don't have to guess what is wrong if you get an error
* Clear CMOS button
* 2nd M.2 slot
* p-state overclocking via BIOs
* audio shielding + amp


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> elmor , why does the X370-F STRIX have BCLK but no Debug Code LED?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any way to have a code readout on errors? ROG_EXT or something?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> The Asrock X370 Taichi is hands down the better board by a long shot. You're comparing a mid-range X370 Prime Pro with an attractively-priced high end board. In Europe and some other places the X370 Taichi costs about as much as the ASUS Crosshair VI Hero.
> 
> ASUS X70 Prime Pro is basically half the power delivery components as the X370 Taichi , even for memory phases. The X370 Taichi also uses better 12K hour rated capacitors and a heatsink with a heatpipe.
> 
> The X370 Taichi has overbuilt VRM and even the memory VRM is overbuilt (it uses TWO NexFETs capable of 40A a piece for memory when everyone else is using 1 or two phases of run-of-the-mill PowerPaks or LFPAKs).
> 
> If you have to rationalize the purchase you have other non-VRM features:
> * wifi+BT
> * a Debug LED so you don't have to guess what is wrong if you get an error
> * Clear CMOS button
> * 2nd M.2 slot
> * p-state overclocking via BIOs
> * audio shielding + amp


Looks like you can get this from ami still.



https://ami.com/en/products/bios-uefi-tools-and-utilities/amidebug-rx/

would be nice to know if it did. Or a port 80....


----------



## AlphaC

It probably costs ASUS at most $10-20 to implement a Code LED since a $180 Biostar GT7 and a $130 Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 have it. On a board without BCLK it doesn't bother me as much. However, it's a ROG STRIX with BCLK modifier on a platform without straps for PCIE and other things.

I'm not going out to buy a AMI Debugger just to use a motherboard and I doubt anyone else will either.

ROG_EXT is a more reasonable expectation since most people that aren't of the ASUS-only mindset have a Asrock X370 Taichi (+Fatal1ty Pro), Gigabyte x370 K7 , or ASUS Crosshair VI Hero to choose from for BCLK overclocks and all three have Debug Code LEDs.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It probably costs ASUS at most $10-20 to implement a Code LED since a $180 Biostar GT7 and a $130 Asrock X370 Fatal1ty K4 have it. On a board without BCLK it doesn't bother me as much. However, it's a ROG STRIX with BCLK modifier on a platform without straps for PCIE and other things.
> 
> I'm not going out to buy a AMI Debugger just to use a motherboard and I doubt anyone else will either.
> 
> ROG_EXT is a more reasonable expectation since most people that aren't of the ASUS-only mindset have a Asrock X370 Taichi (+Fatal1ty Pro), Gigabyte x370 K7 , or ASUS Crosshair VI Hero to choose from for BCLK overclocks and all three have Debug Code LEDs.


Oh I agree that people in general won't want to buy the ami debugger. I'd just find it useful on more motherboards and if lucky ALL the am4 motherboards. As for ROG_EXT ... isn't that also a usb 2.0 header? or you just want more utlitity ala the whole rog front base thing which I have to agree is nifty.


----------



## gupsterg

ROG Front Base is utter crap IMO. Search the ROG forum and you'll see most struggle getting right combo of panel FW/mobo FW/Driver working with OS used. I recall one poster had his running AOK on W7, goes to W10 and then it's borked. Solves it then when new mobo FW is used it goes borked again.

Then the OC profile button didn't pick up full custom profiles or something of that elk. I was in thread where me and few others were trying to suss it.

For me the panel was worth what I paid for it...... Nothing







.

It came bundled with a M7R (great board IMO), which again I paid best promo price at time. I opt'd to sell Asus Front Base panel, netted me back ~£35 IIRC.


----------



## Zhany

So I just noticed something odd on the Gigabyte Gaming 3 mATX board, when in BIOS my VRM temp goes up to 71C at first I thought this might be a temperature reading fluke in the BIOS such as the offset being applied to the VRM MOS instead of the CPU but it turns out the temperature is accurate as I did a reboot after using HWinfo and VRM temp was at 47C when I got into bios it was at 48C and I watched it climb up, so for some reason when in the BIOS the CPU is under some type of load which seems odd to me.

Has anyone else noticed similar behavior on the Gigabyte Boards?


----------



## chew*

Yep...all boards are doing this i think..bandaid for coldboot issues.

Just a wild guess...


----------



## gupsterg

Not had this on C6H,


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Not had this on C6H,


boot settings for it there. would guess that it's a less tuneable version of the same approach. cuz end users are dumb so if we can avoid them as much as possible with crappy stuff.. we'll do it.


----------



## chew*

Asus most certainly climbs temps in bios to...my phase change does not lie.

Windows idling temps get colder...bios idling temps get warmer...


----------



## gupsterg

My rig was off doing a flashback via USB of UEFI 9943 AGESA 1.0.0.6. I then boot and grabbed screenies. So as the board had been off VRM temp starts at ~36C, 10min later it's ~40C, nothing usual in my books







. All the time I was in UEFI pressing F12 to grab screenie at non specific time intervals.

C6H_VRM.zip 1575k .zip file


As this was UEFI defaults testing Core Performance Boost was on (ie PB/XFR active), so CPU can boost to 3.75GHz, discussed in C6H thread







.


----------



## chew*

All i can tell you is idling doing nothing in bios...= hotter than desktop idling...no powersaving pstate crap...

Beyond that an educated guess...= solve cb issues.

I noticed it got more aggressive in 1006 agesa. I also noticed cb black screens were gone..


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> All i can tell you is idling doing nothing in bios...= hotter than desktop idling...no powersaving pstate crap...
> 
> Beyond that an educated guess...= solve cb issues.
> 
> I noticed it got more aggressive in 1006 agesa. I also noticed cb black screens were gone..


Zhany posted that his VRM temp was running upwards, seemingly dramatically from his post.

You stated all boards are doing that.

I said my C6H isn't.

You said yours is.

I did the screenies and mine isn't







.

I agree in UEFI no power saving is on







. I also said that in the post where I posted the zip







, so Zhany could explain his setup







. I agree OS will be lower







.



And here is screenie from earlier today so similar ambient temps, but OC setup.


----------



## chew*

ok let me explain this simply.......vrm temps up are contributed to something is pulling power so cpu temps would be up....

there is no reason why bios would be higher if no power saving is on.......windows is doing something bios is not.......

if windows is cooler.......ask yourself a simple question..........why.

the c6h is not the second coming of Christ and is not immune to any of the agesa related issues of any other boards because it has nothing to do with the board and everything to do with agesa.......

If I am wrong go to 1004 agesa show me cas 15 with 3200 ram divider on any board.......


----------



## gupsterg

My windows is cooler on VRM as CPU will down clock to 1.55GHz.

As stated before when in UEFI CPU can go to max clock, it will not idle. If you are say at UEFI defaults like in the zip screenies I posted, CPU can go to XFR frequency 3.75GHz in my case as it's R7 1700. When on my OC setup it can go to 3.8GHz, even in UEFI.

We can see CPU does not idle in UEFI as VCORE is not the idle VCORE. I have measured using DMM.

Shall I link the post by [email protected] and Elmor concerning that when we in UEFI CPU is loaded?

And I never said C6H was second coming of Christ


----------



## chew*

a fixed clock of 4.0 with 1.4v high performance........= hotter bios temps vs idle idle/windows.....in fact 1006 runs hotter period......

the MSI actually makes this easy to see because port 80 once in windows displays cpu temps


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> a fixed clock of 4.0 with 1.4v high performance........= hotter bios temps vs idle idle/windows.....in fact 1006 runs hotter period......
> 
> the MSI actually makes this easy to see because port 80 once in windows displays cpu temps


And did I not say power saving is not active in UEFI?

And yes I am aware when in OS even with fixed frequency temps are lower as some elements of power saving features say like gating down inactive parts is going on.


----------



## chew*

I look at things far more simply.

Bios little to no cpu use.

Windows cpu use. 7 or 10...makes no difference.

One runs hotter...one does not.

Takes quite a bit to pull my phase change temps down by nearly 10c...btw..thats on the magical c6h...none of my other boards have been on phase.

-33c bios -43c windows...10c difference measured by k probe mounted directly in head of evap over cpu die wired into a temp controller/monitor that costs more than the c6h by itself.......not software not bios.

Cpu temps up...no brainer...vrm temps must be up to..

Why or how...i do not care...i only care about knowing and being aware of it.

What is not going to happen here is...convincing me that i am seeing things...


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> What is not going to happen here is...convincing me that i am seeing things...


No worries Chew* I'm not here to convince you







. I am only placing information as an explanation to Zhany and other members







.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I look at things far more simply.
> 
> Bios little to no cpu use.


The UEFI does place load on the CPU, it is not "Bios little to no cpu use"

Here is a post from 22/03/17 so when earlier UEFIs were about.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> UEFI does place a load on the CPU, so I'd wouldn't expect the voltage to be at idle.


Now like I said before I have verified via DMM I do not seen ~500mV in UEFI as I do at idle in OS. As stated before CPU can go XFR/OC clocks so I see appropriate voltage.

This same reason was why as work around to overvolting that was happening on C6H on a failed memory post (ie Q-Code: F9) I sussed disabling Core Performance Boost was best to do.

We initially started discussing it here link, then there is a video here showing when CPB is off as R7 1700 Pstate 0 is 3GHz with ceiling VID of 1.1875V, which the SMU based on leakageid and other characteristics of silicon will set below it you can see I get ~1V, link.

*Case 1*

UEFI Defaults.

When Core Performance Boost is [Auto] or [Enabled] CPU can go to "Precision Boost / XFR", so VCORE will reflect this in the monitoring within UEFI. Taking a measurement by DMM will also show this. No section in UEFI shows actual CPU frequency for monitoring at that "instance in time".

*Case 2*

UEFI Defaults with CPB [Disabled].

PB/XFR will be disabled. Monitoring will show "base clock" VCORE set by SMU, measuring with DMM will also show this.

Base clock for R7 1700 is 3GHz, this is PState 0. When "we" change PState 0 to custom "we" see ceiling VID, in the case of my R7 1700 1.1875V. When I measure with DMM I see ~1.000V.

*Case 3*

PState 0 OC of 3.8GHz, with CPB [Disabled], with offset of +162mV.

Now as PState 0 is "base clock" and "we" have modified that, SMU snap VCORE upto ceiling VID due to increased CPU clock, add the offset and I reach ~1.35V. IF memory training fail and AMD CBS page reset, Extreme Tweaker does not, then due to CPB [Disabled] CPU go only to default "Base clock" and SMU set VCORE as it wish (in my case ~1.000V), add the offset of +162mV = ~1.162V. IF CPB had been on CPU would have gone to PB/XFR VCORE plus offset = ~1.5V.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> -33c bios -43c windows...10c difference measured by k probe mounted directly in head of evap over cpu die wired into a temp controller/monitor that costs more than the c6h by itself.......not software not bios.


And is my data not showing that VRM temp is lower in OS than UEFI?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Why or how...i do not care...i only care about knowing and being aware of it.


If you do not care about the why and how then it is futile me taking any more time to explain.


----------



## chew*

You are listing case scenarios that have little to do with me...

A 1700 @ 1.40 with 39x

cpb irrelevant/amd cpb voltage irrelevant..

No pstate oc...irrelevant.

All that stuff does not apply in my example or testing and yes i have wired into the socket and left dmm on while on phase...

Once again all irrelevant.

Bios idle kills my temps...

Nothing has changed....vcore/speeds still same bios/windows.

I offered a logical explanation as to the why. I see far less cases of CB issues since 1006. Hmmm...

Its a fact that some were related and a fact that amd imc is impacted by temps.

Sometimes the simplest thing is over analyzed...


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> You are listing case scenarios that have little to do with me...
> 
> A 1700 @ 1.40 with 39x
> 
> cpb irrelevant/amd cpb voltage irrelevant..
> 
> No pstate oc...irrelevant.
> 
> All that stuff does not apply in my example or testing and yes i have wired into the socket and left dmm on while on phase...
> 
> Once again all irrelevant.
> 
> Bios idle kills my temps...
> 
> Nothing has changed....vcore/speeds still same bios/windows.
> 
> I offered a logical explanation as to the why. I see far less cases of CB issues since 1006. Hmmm...
> 
> Its a fact that some were related and a fact that amd imc is impacted by temps.
> 
> Sometimes the simplest thing is over analyzed...


Bios idle kills your temps as CPU is not at idle







, same goes with VRM temps being higher in bios than OS at idle







.

And as stated by me and you before, power management/gating of inactive parts is not active when CPU in bios.

That is as simply as I can put it







.

Regardless of my case situation, yours or another's







.

I hope @The Stilt or @[email protected] or @elmor will chime in to clarify to you as you don't seem to be understanding what I have posted now several times







.


----------



## chew*

Or you do not...load cb windows -33c also...

Be far more interested in explanation of pi= slow.

The its an old antiquated bench excuse...does not fly...if it was intel...record possible...it would get fixed with the quickness.

Good enough does not fly with me.


----------



## Zhany

That would make sense if the CPU is boosting in the UEFI,/Under load as I noticed with the VRM temps climbing the CPU temp went up as well , I topped out at around 53c when in windows I'm at about 33c at idle. VCORE on auto is typical of what I see at full load in Windows as well at around 1.23v if I recall correctly.

The highest temp I got my VRM to on the Gigabyte gaming 3 Matx was 83c at stock clocks under prime 95 with furmark going on the GPU as well before I had a blower style GPU now I top out at around 77C. This is with no direct active cooling over the VRM area.

It was just one of those huh thats funny moments. I'm running the F5C bios as well.


----------



## chew*

Yep its more like acknowledge...question is it a big deal? No. Can or should it be changed nah not really. Conclusion. Oh well. Move onto what can be and should be fixxed.


----------



## gupsterg

@Zhany

NP







.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Yep its more like acknowledge...question is it a big deal? No. Can or should it be changed nah not really. Conclusion. Oh well. Move onto what can be and should be fixxed.


So acknowledge now, wow that was hard work mate







.


----------



## yendor

eh, we get oem code before microcode loads . could be vendor injected code here. then microcode loading begins. oem's get another shot at memory related code. then imc side of the fun begins for real. I'm assuming one or both are being leveraged to make annoying cold bug go away. crosshair with it's settings only one that allows users affect things that take place during these two parts of post. Figure there's no OFF. Probably a default applied no matter what.

eh, I should get the tools. Curious.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> @Zhany
> 
> NP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> So acknowledge now, wow that was hard work mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Tbh...first thing that went through mind...wow lol...well that is one way to solve cold boot issues...

Its not a fact...just a funny thought i had...and certainly would work...

If it was intentional...would AMD or ASUS tell you? No...dream on..

Have about as much chance of seeing intel admit...our new cpus are not cost effective/run hotter.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> eh, we get oem code before microcode loads . could be vendor injected code here. then microcode loading begins. oem's get another shot at memory related code. then imc side of the fun begins for real. I'm assuming one or both are being leveraged to make annoying cold bug go away. crosshair with it's settings only one that allows users affect things that take place during these two parts of post. Figure there's no OFF. Probably a default applied no matter what.
> 
> eh, I should get the tools. Curious.


All I know is.

AMD code launches first and Asus can not do anything to that. This was the info from Elmor.

The only example that has been given where Asus is doing a work around is DRAM voltage. The Asus EC can be set through bios option VBOOT, to set higher DRAM voltage than AMD code, then AMD code isn't aware what EC is doing and mobo use that voltage.

We were told the AMD code is 1.2V. I have observed that on DMM, for a few seconds at post VDIMM will be ~1.2V then go to 1.35V (if set in VDIMM option), with VBOOT option the ~1.2V is changed, I match to whatever VDIMM I use.

There has also been a recent post about how Asus/vendors build bios and limitations they may encounter by The Stilt.


----------



## superstition222

Good ole UD3P 2.0 board for my FX won't boot with a multiplier higher than 20 or something, unless one boots from BIOS. Then, it will happily boot at higher multis. The Stilt said he thinks it's a boot bug related to inadequate voltage.

Sound familiar? Since only this Gigabyte board suffers from this problem - of all the FX boards, as far as I know, that one wasn't on AMD.

Several BIOS revisions were released, none of which addressed the bug. Contacting support didn't do anything either.


----------



## chew*

Maybe we complain to much....

I see what looks like 6 phase cpu... 2 phase SOC...

Interestingly either a 2+2 or true 4 phase per memory bank.

Of course this thing is designed to run @ stock with a ton of airflow and most likely controlled ambient temps..


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Maybe we complain to much....
> 
> I see what looks like 6 phase cpu... 2 phase SOC...
> 
> Interestingly either a 2+2 or true 4 phase per memory bank.
> 
> Of course this thing is designed to run @ stock with a ton of airflow and most likely controlled ambient temps..


Up to 35c non condensing humidity.

edit - I should get eyes checked.. 10c to -35c small difference.


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Maybe we complain to much....
> 
> I see what looks like 6 phase cpu... 2 phase SOC...
> 
> Interestingly either a 2+2 or true 4 phase per memory bank.
> 
> Of course this thing is designed to run @ stock with a ton of airflow and most likely controlled ambient temps..


Granted that is most likely a server motherboard, it will have a lot more airflow than any workstation or PC but we really overcomplicate how much VRM we need and modern VRMs have made a lot of strides in improving efficiency and given the intention of the board they probably can't overclock. After all, older Xeon boards (C602 legacy) have like 6+2 with some piping hot Xeons yet are fine.
And I'm talking about the Z9PA-D8 powering 135W TDP (according to ASUS) processors on even desktops with appalling airflow compared to servers (ASUS says it supports E5 2687W & V2 though)


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> Granted that is most likely a server motherboard, it will have a lot more airflow than any workstation or PC but we really overcomplicate how much VRM we need and modern VRMs have made a lot of strides in improving efficiency and given the intention of the board they probably can't overclock. After all, older Xeon boards (C602 legacy) have like 6+2 with some piping hot Xeons yet are fine.
> And I'm talking about the Z9PA-D8 powering 135W TDP (according to ASUS) processors on even desktops with appalling airflow compared to servers (ASUS says it supports E5 2687W & V2 though)


The Stilt said it's not so much the number of phases as the quality of them. However, I also recall him saying it's not cost-effective to use a small number of phases and have the board be able to deliver a lot of power. Apparently, it's more cost-effective to at least use a doubler - or to offer 6 or more real phases, than it is to offer a board with 4 very strong phases.

I wonder if this is a case where the dreaded car analogy is actually useful. 4 cylinder engines can be made to be powerful but have a history of being considered the weaker option in consumer vehicles (not race cars), in comparison with V6/V8/V10+. Yet, 4 cylinders can be made to be powerful, although vibration is an issue with few cylinders. 3, 4, and 5 cylinder engines tend to have need more vibration control than 6 and 8 as far as I know. This seems similar to what The Stilt was saying about VRM phases. The power delivery can be smoother with more phases, even if there are efficiency losses if one goes too high. So, there seems to be a sweet spot for VRM phases just as there is for engine cylinders. Where the sweet spot lies depends on the goal for the product. It seems clear enough that very powerful 4 phase boards aren't being made. However, that Xeon board may have been pretty robust despite just having 6 phases.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> For a 8C/16T Zeppelin I wouldn't even consider a motherboard with a 4+2 phase config. While a making a board with sufficient 4+2 phase VRM is entirely possible (as previously said), none of the manufacturers will use high enough quality components in their boards to make a 4+2 phase configuration good enough. A native 6+2 phase configuration will be used on the high quality mainstream / high-end boards. There will most definitely be doubled (4+1 to 8+2, etc) solutions too, especially in the cheaper "enthusiast" / "high-end" boards.
> 
> The VRM requirements on Zeppelin & Raven are not demanding due the high power draw, but due the high current draw.


As for the purpose of 350 boards. That's a question mark since there is a non-overclocking class and the quality overclocking class. The 350 boards languish in a sort of conceptual Bermuda Triangle, unless one wants to specifically say they're not for 8 core use.


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> The Stilt said it's not so much the number of phases as the quality of them. However, I also recall him saying it's not cost-effective to use a small number of phases and have the board be able to deliver a lot of power. Apparently, it's more cost-effective to at least use a doubler - or to offer 6 or more real phases, than it is to offer a board with 4 very strong phases.
> 
> I wonder if this is a case where the dreaded car analogy is actually useful. 4 cylinder engines can be made to be powerful but have a history of being considered the weaker option in consumer vehicles (not race cars), in comparison with V6/V8/V10+. Yet, 4 cylinders can be made to be powerful, although vibration is an issue with few cylinders. 3, 4, and 5 cylinder engines tend to have need more vibration control than 6 and 8 as far as I know. This seems similar to what The Stilt was saying about VRM phases. The power delivery can be smoother with more phases, even if there are efficiency losses if one goes too high. So, there seems to be a sweet spot for VRM phases just as there is for engine cylinders. Where the sweet spot lies depends on the goal for the product. It seems clear enough that very powerful 4 phase boards aren't being made. However, that Xeon board may have been pretty robust despite just having 6 phases.
> As for the purpose of 350 boards. That's a question mark since there is a non-overclocking class and the quality overclocking class. The 350 boards languish in a sort of conceptual Bermuda Triangle, unless one wants to specifically say they're not for 8 core use.


I was trying to explain in layman terms but yes, higher phase count VRMs are also more likely power hungrier although modern doublers have also improved therefore doubled up VRMs doesn't really matter anymore.

If I'm honest, the 8 cores don't use a awful lot of power so you could get away with OC'ing not absolutely balls to the walls but close enough at 3.8ghz a say B350M Pro4

Imo, the msi boards are far too overpriced. Damn, the B350 tomahawk costs almost as much as my X370 Sli Killer does!


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> Granted that is most likely a server motherboard, it will have a lot more airflow than any workstation or PC but we really overcomplicate how much VRM we need and modern VRMs have made a lot of strides in improving efficiency and given the intention of the board they probably can't overclock. After all, older Xeon boards (C602 legacy) have like 6+2 with some piping hot Xeons yet are fine.
> And I'm talking about the Z9PA-D8 powering 135W TDP (according to ASUS) processors on even desktops with appalling airflow compared to servers (ASUS says it supports E5 2687W & V2 though)


it's one of tyan's two single socket epyc mainboards. intended to run in no more than 10c ambient.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> If I'm honest, the 8 cores don't use a awful lot of power so you could get away with OC'ing not absolutely balls to the walls but close enough at 3.8ghz a say B350M Pro4


Still amazed at the R1700 which is specified to use 65W.......unbelievable







.

Stuck between using either an R5 1600 or an R7 1700.


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> Still amazed at the R1700 which is specified to use 65W.......unbelievable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Stuck between using either an R5 1600 or an R7 1700.


And my 6700k genuinely uses more power even with the IGP disabled








If you don't need maximum performance even while streaming, you can go for the R5 1600. Or even maximum performance in everything (except gaming, which is stupid because intel ruled the days with quads and we are stuck with quads since... 2006 ... TWO THOUSAND AND SIX!)

I find that anything above a quad is smoother for everything, when I was on a 4670k everything felt slower and generally not as snappy as my X5650 I was using at that period too. I now have a 6700k and using a 1700 is so much smoother. Granted I was using a E5 1660 V3 at one point... but that was locked and it was hot as all hell. Still can hardly believe the 1700 has better performance than that and is 1/3 the power consumption (not exactly but would you like me to say 2.3 times less?)

There was a test on youtube showing A12-9800 vs the 1700 in gaming and the 1700 achieved 3x better framerates and where it's critical you're dealing with a 8 core that's 1/2 the power consumption of piledriver and 3x the performance.

Quite a remarkable feat.




And the test was run on a 1700 with one ccx disabled.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> There was a test on youtube showing A12-9800 vs the 1700 in gaming and the 1700 achieved 3x better framerates and where it's critical you're dealing with a 8 core that's 1/2 the power consumption of piledriver and 3x the performance.


Yeah, saw that but don't forget an A12-9800 is old tech, using Bristol Ridge so it isn't a Ryzen upgrade just yet. Really looking forward to the new models with APUs attached.

If they are anything like the current Ryzen hardware then AMD will slaughter all of Intel sales simply due to them having a CPU that offers everything to run the latest games at full rez for little money. Nothing better than hitting a home run with the next few releases for this year.

Really glad AMD has finally found their way back onto everyone's desktop







.


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> Yeah, saw that but don't forget an A12-9800 is old tech, using Bristol Ridge so it isn't a Ryzen upgrade just yet. Really looking forward to the new models with APUs attached.
> 
> If they are anything like the current Ryzen hardware then AMD will slaughter all of Intel sales simply due to them having a CPU that offers everything to run the latest games at full rez for little money. Nothing better than hitting a home run with the next few releases for this year.
> 
> Really glad AMD has finally found their way back onto everyone's desktop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Yeah absolutely Bristol ridge is of course not an upgrade i'm saying that Ryzen completely slaughters it. Can't wait for raven ridge.

A12 might be old tech but AMD decided to release it anyway


----------



## Artikbot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> The Stilt said it's not so much the number of phases as the quality of them. However, I also recall him saying it's not cost-effective to use a small number of phases and have the board be able to deliver a lot of power. Apparently, it's more cost-effective to at least use a doubler - or to offer 6 or more real phases, than it is to offer a board with 4 very strong phases.


It's pretty much the gist of it, yeah.

Either you have a relatively small amount of well-designed, low resistance, low loss converters (think 4 or 6, for example), or you go cheaper and trade PCB surface and engineering time (routing a lot more components) in exchange for being able to use much cheaper components, but more of them.

In effect, having two 20A FETs with 0.08mOhm on-state resistance is equivalent to having a single 40A one with 0.04mOhm, difference being the latter is likely to cost four or five times as more.

You incur extra switching losses, extra driver logic losses, a more complicated buck controller (which is potentially more expensive, too) and require more engineering time and board space, but if you can save enough money on the transistors and inductors (the latter are quite hard to find in certain current handling capabilities with adequate footprints), it could be well worth it.

Plus the average enthusiast that doesn't really know much nor care much will see an absolure assload of inductors and capacitors and go WOW 24 PHASE THIS MUST BE THE BEST ON THE MARKET!!


----------



## chew*

Finally found someone dumb enough to sell sharp pointy objects to me...

Should make my life far simpler testing @ socket now.


----------



## chew*

I guess when these run stock they do not run that hot vrm wise. Workstation so i can not imagine low ambients are required for this.

Looks like probably IR 6 phase. Also another 2 phase SOC.

Interestingly enough for memory...another 4 phase per channel?

Maybe its 2+2...or 2 per channel?


----------



## virpz

@chew

How do you like the C6H hiccup/stability wise ?


----------



## chew*

No clue yet. On 1001 bios its fine for me lol.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I guess when these run stock they do not run that hot vrm wise. Workstation so i can not imagine low ambients are required for this.
> 
> Looks like probably IR 6 phase. Also another 2 phase SOC.
> 
> Interestingly enough for memory...another 4 phase per channel?
> 
> Maybe its 2+2...or 2 per channel?


single socket epyc topping out at 3 ghz. still 16 cores doing workstation load. financial analysis section of sandra comes to mind....


----------



## chew*

True...i think it claimed my k7..


----------



## os2wiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> You can do a 4 GHz overclock with no active cooling on the VRMs? If so, what kind of case fans are you running? Deltas?
> Isn't it a bit much to expect people to pay that kind of a premium for a bit more aluminum?


First I now have 2 fans pointing at vrms. One a 120mm and a second 80mm. Second while I do not see a $50 premum justified over Crosshair VI. The physical construction of the board sis superior to CHG VI. Steel reinforcement of memory slots as well as pciE slots. No other board has steel reinforcement of memory slots. I have had memory slots get damaged on one of my previous motherboards and so I appreciate that attention to detail in engineering the board. Once again my vrm's do not run hot and never have, no matter what overclock. My problem with running at 4.0GHZ for 24/7 use has nothing to do with vrms.The amounbt of voltage I have to apply puts it up at 1.51 volts and I am not subjecting a $500 cpu to that voltage. I am working class not parasite class.


----------



## br0da

IR3555M parts on the X370 Strix: http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/review/489382?p=4


----------



## josephimports

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> IR3555M parts on the X370 Strix: http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/review/489382?p=4


Nice.


----------



## IRobot23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> IR3555M parts on the X370 Strix: http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/review/489382?p=4


How much A ?


----------



## br0da

Theoretical maximum is 360A for the CPU VCC (60A each), for calculation of losses with realistic current there aren't enough infos in the public datasheet.


----------



## IRobot23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Theoretical maximum is 360A for the CPU VCC (60A each), for calculation of losses with realistic current there aren't enough infos in the public datasheet.


How does that compare to GaMING 5?


----------



## br0da

The VRM hardware of the Strix X370 is better.


----------



## IRobot23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> The VRM hardware of the Strix X370 is better.


by how much?
120A?


----------



## br0da

Yeah you can say so.


----------



## IRobot23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Yeah you can say so.


this is as powerfull as C6H then...


----------



## br0da

One could also say it's even more powerful.
But the Strix might lack in a UEFI support and a heatsink as good as the for / from the C6H.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> IR3555M parts on the X370 Strix: http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/review/489382?p=4


Nice!

The only issue is no Debug LED & cmos button

This is basically Biostar GT7 with BCLK it seems
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *IRobot23*
> 
> How does that compare to GaMING 5?


Better by far.

IR3553M = 40A rating , Gaming 5 uses 6 x for CPU

IR3555 = 60A rating , X370-F STRIX uses 6x for CPU

It'll give the Asrock Taichi a run for its money if the BIOs is ok


----------



## br0da

It's a 6+4 instead of a 8+4 design. It's identical to the Prime X370-Pro except for the FETs and of course the drivers.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> It's a 6+4 instead of a 8+4 design. It's identical to the Prime X370-Pro except for the FETs and of course the drivers.


Makes no sense to run four 60A drivers for SOC but I don't see any pictures of the back of the board so I'll trust you on that


----------



## br0da

You're right, that doesn't make sense at all.
But you can see it in the review: On two of the VRM pictures you can see the two IR doublers for the SoC phases and not a single IC like that around the CPU VCC parts. If you scroll down there is a picture of the backside where you can't see anything like that too.


----------



## AlphaC

I was a bit skeptical since the CH VI Hero uses the ASP1405I as well

I see the iR3599 at the top of the board that you mentioned


----------



## br0da

Here you go:


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> First I now have 2 fans pointing at vrms. One a 120mm and a second 80mm.
> 
> My problem with running at 4.0GHZ for 24/7 use has nothing to do with vrms.


Can't be both.

If you're using fans on the VRMs can you say the VRMs don't need active cooling? If Ryzen needs active cooling on the VRMs then why is there no board on the market that offers feature parity with a 2013 Intel board (hybrid air/water VRM sink)? And, if your board requires active cooling for the VRM what's the difference between it and a less expensive board, in terms of VRM cooling?

Being able to run without active cooling at stock is irrelevant unless it's a 350 board.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> First I now have 2 fans pointing at vrms. One a 120mm and a second 80mm. Second while I do not see a $50 premum justified over Crosshair VI. The physical construction of the board sis superior to CHG VI. Steel reinforcement of memory slots as well as pciE slots. No other board has steel reinforcement of memory slots. I have had memory slots get damaged on one of my previous motherboards and so I appreciate that attention to detail in engineering the board. Once again my vrm's do not run hot and never have, no matter what overclock. My problem with running at 4.0GHZ for 24/7 use has nothing to do with vrms.The amounbt of voltage I have to apply puts it up at 1.51 volts and I am not subjecting a $500 cpu to that voltage. I am working class not parasite class.


less expensive!

where are teh titanium screenies?

Os, been following your adventures with the titanium memory. ~close


----------



## chew*

Ok ill bite on strix x370...but pass on the 350.

Will keep checking microcenter for stock. Still on a mission to find open box taichi to sacrifice on ln2.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ok ill bite on strix x370...but pass on the 350.
> 
> Will keep checking microcenter for stock.


skip the x370 A while you'er passing on boards. nothing to see here.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> skip the x370 A while you'er passing on boards. nothing to see here.


More interested in trace changes/vrm.

Ln2 just needs a vrm that will not go boom. Cheaper = better.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *os2wiz*
> 
> First I now have 2 fans pointing at vrms. One a 120mm and a second 80mm. Second while I do not see a $50 premum justified over Crosshair VI. The physical construction of the board sis superior to CHG VI. Steel reinforcement of memory slots as well as pciE slots. No other board has steel reinforcement of memory slots. I have had memory slots get damaged on one of my previous motherboards and so I appreciate that attention to detail in engineering the board. Once again my vrm's do not run hot and never have, no matter what overclock. My problem with running at 4.0GHZ for 24/7 use has nothing to do with vrms.The amounbt of voltage I have to apply puts it up at 1.51 volts and I am not subjecting a $500 cpu to that voltage. I am working class not parasite class.
> 
> 
> 
> less expensive!
> 
> where are teh titanium screenies?
> 
> Os, been following your adventures with the titanium memory. ~close
Click to expand...











Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






Aim to please


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Can't be both.
> 
> If you're using fans on the VRMs can you say the VRMs don't need active cooling? If Ryzen needs active cooling on the VRMs then why is there no board on the market that offers feature parity with a 2013 Intel board (hybrid air/water VRM sink)? And, if your board requires active cooling for the VRM what's the difference between it and a less expensive board, in terms of VRM cooling?
> 
> Being able to run without active cooling at stock is irrelevant unless it's a 350 board.


I don't need active cooling on my VRMs to do 4GHz and it never goes over 50c at full load so that's good.


----------



## TheBloodEagle

Although not AM4 boards, rather X299, I think der8auer is onto something here with boardmakers not doing their best.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBloodEagle*
> 
> Although not AM4 boards, rather X299, I think der8auer is onto something here with boardmakers not doing their best.


Hmm, X 299 the new am3+/bulldozer????


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> I don't need active cooling on my VRMs to do 4GHz and it never goes over 50c at full load so that's good.


What case fans are you using? Deltas?


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> I don't need active cooling on my VRMs to do 4GHz and it never goes over 50c at full load so that's good.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> What case fans are you using? Deltas?


and what's a full load...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Hmm, X 299 the new am3+/bulldozer????


he should just stop *****ing because it's clearly GOOD ENOUGH


----------



## SuperZan

X299 is VRM blocks mandatory. This further reinforces the value play Ryzen (and presumably TR) offer.


----------



## chew*

So to sum up video points out what i have complained about since ryzen launch. Terrible heatsink designs.

I think dimaggio should go lecture derdauer to.


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> What case fans are you using? Deltas?


Please see my rig. There are deltas but they aren't the scary fast ones.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> and what's a full load...


P95 stress test and I'm talking about VRM temps NOT CPU temps.


----------



## SliceTbone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheBloodEagle*
> 
> Although not AM4 boards, rather X299, I think der8auer is onto something here with boardmakers not doing their best.


Shame they didn't test the OC Formula in that test...


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SliceTbone*
> 
> Shame they didn't test the OC Formula in that test...


Didn't? I hadn't read the full list of what he actually tested. A long overdue complaint about the sacrifice of function for form reaching it's ultimate conclusioin.
Should be in vendor's minds for 5 seconds......


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SliceTbone*
> 
> Shame they didn't test the OC Formula in that test...


When you sell a motherboard for the crowd that definitely needs overclocking, you shouldn't need to buy a high end motherboard to do moderate OCs when pretty much all X99 boards could easily OC up to 4.5ghz on HW-E


----------



## bardacuda

Guess they figured it wasn't necessary since the crappy TIM can't move heat from the die to the heat spreader anyway


----------



## br0da

ASUS B350 Strix VRM confirmed: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-26.html#post25659124


----------



## chew*

Lipstick on a pig.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Lipstick on a pig.


10 bucks for better audio, more rgb headers
ok more fan headers is a nice touch
and a different heat retainer for vrms.


----------



## chew*

you forgot plastic? could have swore it had a plastic cover to.....maybe that was the x370 though.

I am getting bored.

Be on a bigger heat source soon should be fun.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Lipstick on a pig.
> 
> 
> 
> 10 bucks for better audio, more rgb headers
> ok more fan headers is a nice touch
> and a different heat retainer for vrms.
Click to expand...

As long as she can run 24/7 all year round, than this qualifies as a server for my intended use







.

Also she does drink a little less from the wall socket hence it helps on running costs, when more are hooked online.


----------



## chew*

Good vid. He covers many of the basics i never discuss about prime.

But i am an idiot...i know nothing.

https://youtu.be/89Tgazt8v5Y


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Good vid. He covers many of the basics i never discuss about prime.
> 
> But i am an idiot...i know nothing.
> 
> https://youtu.be/89Tgazt8v5Y


So der8aur gets "good enough" pushback from idiots too.


----------



## chew*

What the heck? 2 versions of hero 6 now?

1 has wifi.

Edit. Bluetooth as well. Wonder if RC connect works with it now?


----------



## gupsterg

The 2 versions been out month+ IIRC. Same board though. Now in UK C6H ~£200 and WiFi version taking the ~£250 spot of non Wi-Fi.


----------



## DaveLT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Guess they figured it wasn't necessary since the crappy TIM can't move heat from the die to the heat spreader anyway


----------



## CrazyElf

Chew, are you doing to be doing similar test for X399?

Judging from what I am seeing here, I think that 4 months after the Ryzen launch, most of us here seem to agree that the X370 Asrock Taichi and X370 Fata1ty Gaming Professional are the boards to get. The X370 Strix with the 6 + 4 IR3555 and the Biostar GT7 are also pretty strong.

If the situation is like what it is on X370, then one of these may be the best choice (or Asrock's flagship):

 

Unless Gigabyte releases a really crazy good motherboard. Alternatively if MSI steps it up on the hardware front for X399 or ASUS has a better BIOS than with X370, they might be an option too. I also want them all to step up their BIOS times. MSI was a bit slower with the AGESA updates than I would have liked.

No idea what is under those X399 Asrock heatsinks. The Gigabyte though is woefully inadequate the prototype having 6 phases and reportedly the final with 8x IR3553 (40A) = 320A. Hopefully they update to IR3555. Asus might have the best option so far with its X399 Zenith Extreme (they say that it is the same as their other options, so likely 8x IR3555M @ 480A)., but Asus BIOS has been lacking so far on X370 so that's not a very encouraging sign. We're still very early so it's hard to say if the final product will be the same. I hope though the X299 saga will make them upgrade their VRMs.

I would want more than 8 phases though, considering this is 16 TR cores we are talking about. I'd like to see 12 phases in the space and 12 Mosfets under the board (this is what the X99 OC Formula did). We're looking at a bit more than double the power draw of X370 on a per clock basis. The sheer size of the socket means that there is far less room for quality VRMs ... and we have 2x the current clock for clock considering we are now working with 16 rather than 8 cores. I'm surprised we aren't seeing XL ATX boards.

 

Just wondering, who has been the fastest and best in terms of BIOS stability? Asrock?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaveLT*
> 
> And my 6700k genuinely uses more power even with the IGP disabled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't need maximum performance even while streaming, you can go for the R5 1600. Or even maximum performance in everything (except gaming, which is stupid because intel ruled the days with quads and we are stuck with quads since... 2006 ... TWO THOUSAND AND SIX!)
> 
> I find that anything above a quad is smoother for everything, when I was on a 4670k everything felt slower and generally not as snappy as my X5650 I was using at that period too. I now have a 6700k and using a 1700 is so much smoother. Granted I was using a E5 1660 V3 at one point... but that was locked and it was hot as all hell. Still can hardly believe the 1700 has better performance than that and is 1/3 the power consumption (not exactly but would you like me to say 2.3 times less?)
> 
> There was a test on youtube showing A12-9800 vs the 1700 in gaming and the 1700 achieved 3x better framerates and where it's critical you're dealing with a 8 core that's 1/2 the power consumption of piledriver and 3x the performance.
> 
> Quite a remarkable feat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the test was run on a 1700 with one ccx disabled.


DaveLT, you may not be feeling things more smooth with Ryzen.

Quote from myself: http://www.overclock.net/t/1631473/bits-chips-what-about-the-entry-level-16c-32t-threadripper-849/300_100#post_26206974
Quote:


> If the RAM is overclock to DDR4 3600, then a Ryzen 1700 actually holds its own pretty well. Let me show you:
> 
> *Test with a GTX 1070*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the 0.1 frame percentile claims. From a 0.1 percentile frame time point of view, Ryzen with DDR4 3600 is actually doing very well - better even in most titles than a [email protected] The people claiming that with overclocked RAM, Ryzen is as good as a 7700k @ 5GHz may not be exaggerating.
> 
> *Test repeated with a 1080Ti.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Again, it holds its own pretty well, especially at 1440p. You'll have to pause at each game, but even with a 1080Ti, the Ryzen holds its own.
> 
> These are some of the only frame time reviews I could find, but to this reviewer's credit, they are frame time and not frame rate reviews.


Here's also my thoughts on TR:
Quote:


> Keep in mind a few factors:
> 
> There is an inter-die penalty on top of the inter-CCX penalty for TR, but the 7900X is lagging in gaming as well
> There is the possibility of both die controllers going to 3600 with TR because you are really overclocking 2 separate dual channel controllers rather than 1 controller
> If DDR4 3600 is achieved, then the Infinity Fabric link will also be faster, lessening the inter-CCX and inter-die penalty
> Does this mean Ryzen will win? No, but if (and this is a big if), Threadripper's RAM overclocks well, it will be a lot closer than you might think. Intel will have the "money no object" solution, but Ryzen is going to have something like an 80-90% solution for half the price.
> 
> I mean Ryzen is still 8% slower clock for clock than Skylake and it's a big gap still at AVX, but Ryzen's still a lot closer than we've been in a long time to Intel.
> 
> Another possibility is that AMD might release Threadripper patches in games. We've already seen this happen on many titles for Ryzen. What we really need is games to be cache aware and to assume that Ryzen has 7 MB (each CCX has 8 MB) and to adjust the resistance since it is on the same die, while making off die 8 other cores a bit higher in resistance. I could see an increase as much as 30% possible with NUMA awareness in some benchmarks.
> 
> I'd love to see a 32 socket Epyc released at $2000 to truly knock out the Intel 18 core.
> 
> They really need to make their Infinity Fabric run a lot faster though for future revisions of Zen.


I'm hoping that we can get:

Up to 4 GHz overclocks
DDR4 3600, which more importantly will overclock the fabric
Good quality motherboards with excellent VRMs and BIOS
We will see though. I'm also hoping Zen+ will overclock a bit more later next year.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the heck? 2 versions of hero 6 now?
> 
> 1 has wifi.
> 
> Edit. Bluetooth as well. Wonder if RC connect works with it now?


Yep. If you check the Asus website, there's 2 versions:

NO Wifi:
https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/

With Wifi:
https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO-WI-FI-AC/

 

The bluetooth module comes from the wifi card. It is probably an Intel 8265 or the newer Intel wireless 9000 series.

Probably better that way, as people don't have to pay for a wi-fi feature they don't need.


----------



## chew*

I am going to be on an Asrock x399 but obviously under NDA till launch.

Not by choice just the way it happened.

Not particularly sure that i want to go spend a ton of money on x399 but will test what i can.

Hypothetically speaking i would not expect miracles gaming. More workstation benefits than anything.


----------



## notron811

excuse me, but finally which is the cause of vrm very heat? the limited number of it? And therefore it works bad and they warm up?
i have a msi b350 tomahaws and with 1.35vcore on my ryzen 1600 at 4 ghz vrm touched 100°C


----------



## chew*

Impossible temps. B350 is "good enough".

On a serious note.

Lesser quality fets with less effeciency combined with a rather poor quality heatsink = high temps.

Poor quality as in design and mass.


----------



## notron811

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Impossible temps. B350 is "good enough".
> 
> On a serious note.
> 
> Lesser quality fets with less effeciency combined with a rather poor quality heatsink = high temps.
> 
> Poor quality as in design and mass.


so, this problem is almost for all, i thinked of apply a little heatsink above vrm, anyone of you have do it?


----------



## chew*

No but better heatsinks...maybe individuals glue on with that arctic silver stuff and a fan on them would do wonders.


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *notron811*
> 
> excuse me, but finally which is the cause of vrm very heat? the limited number of it? And therefore it works bad and they warm up?
> i have a msi b350 tomahaws and with 1.35vcore on my ryzen 1600 at 4 ghz vrm touched 100°C


Your problem is called MSI...
They are using bad and low quality components on their products so you need to avoid that brand on all costs, bcoz they sell expensive and put bad components just to get more money on the back of the consumer and that is not nice...
And i remember the time back on AthlonXP/P4 when MSI was doing great quality boards, but that was so long, more then 10 years, today they suck and bad...


----------



## notron811

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Your problem is called MSI...
> They are using bad and low quality components on their products so you need to avoid that brand on all costs, bcoz they sell expensive and put bad components just to get more money on the back of the consumer and that is not nice...
> And i remember the time back on AthlonXP/P4 when MSI was doing great quality boards, but that was so long, more then 10 years, today they suck and bad...


if you speak so, you very angry with msi







, yes it may be this, i'm not an expert and i may not say if what you said is right or not... anyway thanks for your reply to my question


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *notron811*
> 
> excuse me, but finally which is the cause of vrm very heat? the limited number of it? And therefore it works bad and they warm up?
> i have a msi b350 tomahaws and with 1.35vcore on my ryzen 1600 at 4 ghz vrm touched 100°C
> 
> 
> 
> Your problem is called MSI...
> They are using bad and low quality components on their products so you need to avoid that brand on all costs, bcoz they sell expensive and put bad components just to get more money on the back of the consumer and that is not nice...
> And i remember the time back on AthlonXP/P4 when MSI was doing great quality boards, but that was so long, more then 10 years, today they suck and bad...
Click to expand...

Daily clocks on my MSI








https://youtu.be/HBZF66HzN4Q


----------



## Radical Vision

What is happening here:
Good 1800X silicon that is capable of going above 4GHz
And the biggest crap from all AM4 boards, after all this is OC forum, all people that know what to do, know the MSI is the worst choice for mobo..
+ on all that above you are MSI fanboy....


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> What is happening here:
> Good 1800X silicon that is capable of going above 4GHz
> And the biggest crap from all AM4 boards, after all this is OC forum, all people that know what to do, know the MSI is the worst choice for mobo..
> + on all that above you are MSI fanboy....


Less than 3% failure rate over a 13 year period will do that to a guy


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Less than 3% failure rate over a 13 year period will do that to a guy


More like a fanboy will say that, no matter what...

MSI did have great quality back on AthlonXp/P4 era, and that was long ago...
+ I did have before MSi TF R9 280X it was nice card no problems, but still bad components quality...
And one of the best based video cards is Aorus GTX 1080TI not MSI 1080TI strange why...
What will happend if i get your CPU and you mine, will your precious Titanium be able to OC above 4GHz, i can say from now no, and will your best binned 1800X on 4.15GHz run on same speed on my Aorus K7 guess what it will...........
I don`t have problems with MSI, but selling inferior products with high price that and marketing they are premium it make me mad.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t6LP9glKmc&t=1146s

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/most-reliable-brand-of-motherboards.2499756/

MSI Titanium

Pros:
style
steel slots
PS2
8+4 pin +12v
great VRM heatsink
x2 M2 slots

cons:
price
inferior components
no BLKC chip
lower RGB
no dual bios
no dual lan,
no dual audio
no dual usb
worst price to performance/futures ratio and more bad things to come...
no WI-FI

price 300$

___________________________________________________________

Gigabyte Aorus K7

Pros:
price
great ultra durable high quality components
steel slots
dual bios
dual lan
dual audio
dual usb
tons of RGB + light show design
PS2
x8 fan headers + great fan controlled software
metal gold plated audio jacks
x9 thermal sensors
USB dac UP
x4 U.2 connector
Creative sound slaster X-Fi MB5
great price to performance/futures ratio

cons:
no WI-FI
inferior heatsink/ no heatpipe
bad M2 spot +no cooling

Price 210$


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> More like a fanboy will say that, no matter what...
> 
> MSI did have great quality back on AthlonXp/P4 era, and that was long ago...
> + I did have before MSi TF R9 280X it was nice card no problems, but still bad components quality...
> And one of the best based video cards is Aorus GTX 1080TI not MSI 1080TI strange why...
> What will happend if i get your CPU and you mine, will your precious Titanium be able to OC above 4GHz, i can say from now no, and will your best binned 1800X on 4.15GHz run on same speed on my Aorus K7 guess what it will...........
> I don`t have problems with MSI, but selling inferior products with high price that and marketing they are premium it make me mad.......
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t6LP9glKmc&t=1146s
> 
> https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/most-reliable-brand-of-motherboards.2499756/
> 
> MSI Titanium
> 
> Pros:
> style
> steel slots
> PS2
> 8+4 pin +12v
> great VRM heatsink
> x2 M2 slots
> 
> cons:
> price
> inferior components
> no BLKC chip
> lower RGB
> no dual bios
> no dual lan,
> no dual audio
> no dual usb
> worst price to performance/futures ratio and more bad things to come...
> no WI-FI
> 
> price 300$
> 
> ___________________________________________________________
> 
> Gigabyte Aorus K7
> 
> Pros:
> price
> great ultra durable high quality components
> steel slots
> dual bios
> dual lan
> dual audio
> dual usb
> tons of RGB + light show design
> PS2
> x8 fan headers + great fan controlled software
> metal gold plated audio jacks
> x9 thermal sensors
> USB dac UP
> x4 U.2 connector
> Creative sound slaster X-Fi MB5
> great price to performance/futures ratio
> 
> cons:
> no WI-FI
> inferior heatsink/ no heatpipe
> bad M2 spot +no cooling
> 
> Price 210$


Yes the x370 Titanium is expensive and wish we get more for the price. However it works great. Keep seeing the theme of assuming bad temps etc etc, but the only people saying so are those that havent tested the board in actual usage. Most Titanium owners have high overclocks and good temps. ~Peace.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> Yes the x370 Titanium is expensive and wish we get more for the price.


It's not necessary to _wish_ if one:

1) Refuses to pay that price for that level of product.
2) Tells the company to do better.
3) Lobbies via forums, articles, and comments.

Companies are in business to sell us the products we want to buy.

They are not in business to sell us the products they want to sell to us.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Companies are in business to sell us the products we want to buy.
> 
> They are not in business to sell us the products they want to sell to us.


Well said.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> you forgot plastic? could have swore it had a plastic cover to.....maybe that was the x370 though.
> 
> I am getting bored.
> 
> Be on a bigger heat source soon should be fun.


Plastic is what makes for better heat retainer. dissipating heat? what's that?

I'm digging into bios for wee board . going to wind up trashing it before spi programmer arrives at this rate. absence of the full agesa 1.0.0.6 set of options is just dumb.
plus. it's where I'm going to wind up with the biostar.
hm, might just as well swap over today. dual bios will let me really screw things up and get away with it









x399 heat source? Oh yeah. Twice the cores/threads and the workstation boards in the wild look ok .. for servers I'm sure. Enthusiasts? Hell no.
Others have pointed out the lack of real estate. Huge freaking socket, and just like the x299 dimms problematic to air flow.
But we see active cooling on a few of the boards shown at computex. for dimm's. m2. and vrm? pricing gonna be nuts.


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> It's not necessary to _wish_ if one:
> 
> 1) Refuses to pay that price for that level of product.
> 2) Tells the company to do better.
> 3) Lobbies via forums, articles, and comments.
> 
> Companies are in business to sell us the products we want to buy.
> 
> They are not in business to sell us the products they want to sell to us.


I can't disagree in general. But in my case:

1) Early adopter, bought before reviews. I even posted the first naked VRM photo here in OCN. I think even before other photos hit online. The critical discussions were initiated by us early adopters who posted the early VRM photos and findings.

2) Sent MSI a rant support request asking for explanation of VRMs. Response was they would forward to research dept.

3) Lobbied here and there but *sigh* I have to be factual and report on how the board is actually doing. Which is it is working great.

4) Just to add, definitely consumers should buy value products. I am only countering assumptions that are not true.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Less than 3% failure rate over a 13 year period will do that to a guy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More like a fanboy will say that, no matter what...
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that if it weren't true nor would I continue to buy from them.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> absence of the full agesa 1.0.0.6 set of options is just dumb.


I built an ITX box for VR for a colleague with an ASRock "Fatality" board. Intel released a microcode patch in April to fix a processor bug in SL and KL that can lead to instability and data loss. Do you think ASRock has bothered to patch this "enthusiast-grade" board in all these months?

Nope.

The level of customer service and quality standards in the motherboard business is astounding.


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> It's not necessary to _wish_ if one:
> 
> 1) Refuses to pay that price for that level of product.
> 2) Tells the company to do better.
> 3) Lobbies via forums, articles, and comments.
> 
> Companies are in business to sell us the products we want to buy.
> 
> They are not in business to sell us the products they want to sell to us.


Very very well said....


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> It's not necessary to _wish_ if one:
> 
> 1) Refuses to pay that price for that level of product.
> 2) Tells the company to do better.
> 3) Lobbies via forums, articles, and comments.
> 
> Companies are in business to sell us the products we want to buy.
> 
> They are not in business to sell us the products they want to sell to us.


+Rep.

Basically they should have copied the Z270 XPower:



10 + 4 design of IR3555M @ 60A (really 5 + 2 doubled), controlled by an IR35201. They both are in the $300 USD range, although sometimes the Z270 XPower is about $30 more.


The Z70 XPower has better VRMs
X370 has no onboard clock generator, which the X370 Taichi / Gaming Professional, X370 Gaming K7 and Asus Z370 Crosshair Hero all have - and I might add all of those boards at launch were cheaper than the X370 XPower
Z270 XPower has voltage checkpoints and features you'd expect from an OC board
IO ports in the rear and SATA ports are lacking for a flagship
Not a biggie, but the Z270 Xpower has 8 layers versus 7 on the X370 XPower, but it shows a less complex board
Had the X370 XPower been as good as the Z270 XPower and shipped with a solid BIOS, I would have said that it was the best X370 board, deserving its premium. That is not the case. There have been no true flagships with insane features at this point.

There have been plenty of articles, posts on this forum, movies on Youtube, etc, urging for change.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> I can't disagree in general. But in my case:
> 
> 1) Early adopter, bought before reviews. I even posted the first naked VRM photo here in OCN. I think even before other photos hit online. The critical discussions were initiated by us early adopters who posted the early VRM photos and findings.
> 
> 2) Sent MSI a rant support request asking for explanation of VRMs. Response was they would forward to research dept.
> 
> 3) Lobbied here and there but *sigh* I have to be factual and report on how the board is actually doing. Which is it is working great.
> 
> 4) Just to add, definitely consumers should buy value products. I am only countering assumptions that are not true.


+Rep too.

Yeah I sent a email to MSI employees on this one too.

Agree that the board is physically working ok, although MSI could be faster with the AGESA updates. The problem is that even though the board works, the value proposition isn't there. Price to performance isn't good. THat's the issue, not that the board is catching fire (it isn't, at least not right now).

If this were a $200 USD board, the reception would have been a bit more positive.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> X299 is VRM blocks mandatory. This further reinforces the value play Ryzen (and presumably TR) offer.


We don't know if TR will or won't need blocks.

Assume 4x the power density per phase though.


At least double per clock the current draw, possibly more
Half as much board space for VRMs
Motherboard prototypes look like the heatsinks are as bad as on X299
I would not be surprised if the motherboard makers manage to fail us this time around.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Guess they figured it wasn't necessary since the crappy TIM can't move heat from the die to the heat spreader anyway


This is not correct. THe problem is not the TIM (Intel's TIM is actually one of the best in industry). THe problem is the Z-Height between the IHS and the die.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/delidded-my-i7-3770k-loaded-temperatures-drop-by-20%C2%B0c-at-4-7ghz.2261855/page-23#post-34053183

Quote:


> Notice that the Intel stock CPU TIM outperforms the NT-H1 replacement TIM once the CPU-to-IHS gap is identical
> ...
> Conclusion: The Intel stock CPU TIM is not the reason Ivy Bridge's run hot, and replacing the Intel stock CPU TIM is not the reason a delidded Ivy Bridge runs so much cooler - the benefits of delidding are entirely due to the resultant reduction in gap height between the CPU silicon die and the underside of the IHS.


The poster idontcare seems to be having image hosting issues, but basically the point is that the height of the IHS, not the TIM is the problem. OF course this is a non-issue with AMD (they are using a very good solder with gold).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Stupid overkill for Z87 and in general bad engineering practice is what that is. That's what happens when marketing/sales is telling engineering what to do.
> 
> VRM controller IR3563B up to 8 PWM outputs
> 5x doubler ICs IR3599
> 10x drivers, either IR3535 or combined driver/doubler IR3598
> 20x inductors
> 40x FETs, each "phase" or at least each choke has 1x high-side+1x low-side
> 
> Best case if IR3598: 5x original PWM outputs from IR3563B, doubled to 10x PWM signals using IR3599. Which again are doubled up to 20x PWM signals using IR3598 and you get 20x phases each with one driver, one high-side FET, one low-side FET and one inductor. 20 separate phases, 5 original ones.
> 
> Worst case if IR3535: 5x original PWM outputs from IR3563B, doubled to 10x PWM signals using IR3599. Which drives 10x IR3535 drivers, and each has two high-side FETs, two low-side FETs and two inductors. 10 separate phases, 5 original ones.
> 
> Second case will have lower total output capability due to lower efficiency when driving double the amount of components on one driver.


If you think that is overkill, see the Z87 XPower:

 

That is 32 phases (I think 8 phases quadrupled) of IR3550M. Overkill is better than overheating IMO.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> More like a fanboy will say that, no matter what...
> 
> MSI did have great quality back on AthlonXp/P4 era, and that was long ago...
> + I did have before MSi TF R9 280X it was nice card no problems, but still bad components quality...
> And one of the best based video cards is Aorus GTX 1080TI not MSI 1080TI strange why...
> What will happend if i get your CPU and you mine, will your precious Titanium be able to OC above 4GHz, i can say from now no, and will your best binned 1800X on 4.15GHz run on same speed on my Aorus K7 guess what it will...........
> I don`t have problems with MSI, but selling inferior products with high price that and marketing they are premium it make me mad.......
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t6LP9glKmc&t=1146s
> 
> https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/most-reliable-brand-of-motherboards.2499756/
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Titanium
> 
> Pros:
> style
> steel slots
> PS2
> 8+4 pin +12v
> great VRM heatsink
> x2 M2 slots
> 
> cons:
> price
> inferior components
> no BLKC chip
> lower RGB
> no dual bios
> no dual lan,
> no dual audio
> no dual usb
> worst price to performance/futures ratio and more bad things to come...
> no WI-FI
> 
> price 300$
> 
> ___________________________________________________________
> 
> Gigabyte Aorus K7
> 
> Pros:
> price
> great ultra durable high quality components
> steel slots
> dual bios
> dual lan
> dual audio
> dual usb
> tons of RGB + light show design
> PS2
> x8 fan headers + great fan controlled software
> metal gold plated audio jacks
> x9 thermal sensors
> USB dac UP
> x4 U.2 connector
> Creative sound slaster X-Fi MB5
> great price to performance/futures ratio
> 
> cons:
> no WI-FI
> inferior heatsink/ no heatpipe
> bad M2 spot +no cooling
> 
> Price 210$


Agree with this, although to be fair, you can't compare reliability of one platform to another (Ryzen is a very immature platform still) and MSI's other products are solid. If I were buying Z270, I would not hesitate to get the Z270 XPower in a heartbeat. The 1080Ti Lightning is one of the best custom PCBs, rivalled only by the EVGA 1080TI kIngpin and Galax 1080Ti HOF.

MSI does have good quality products still at the high end ... I would not be using them in my sig rig if they were not.


----------



## CriticalOne

I much, much, much rather have a comically overkill VRM than one that barely cuts the mustard or just isn't good enough.


----------



## chew*

In reality we only need a quality true 8 phase or properly doubled quality 4+4 with good heatsinks design/dissipation wise. True 4 or doubled 2+2 should be ok for soc....but....we have not seen apu yet.

A taichi vrm with the msi titanium sinks for example would run @ like 50c on a daily basis full load in hot summer days passive.

More is not always better. It induces complications. The above suggestion would be "cleaner power" which according to some above my pay rate claim ryzen benefits from.


----------



## Radical Vision

Still even with this heatsink on the Aorus 5/K7 i manage to have cool VRM even without using the fans i will add at some point, maybe when i get thermal grizzly, bcoz now there is Arctic MX-2 is not a bad paste, but im sure the grizzly will lower -5c at least. Playing today WoW 7.1.5 i did check many times the VRM temps never did see above 45c (chipset at 43c) all fans on 50% but the volume of the game is high so i can`t hear them. My guess is when i add the VRM fans, it will lower the temperatures a lot and at high stress test will not go above 50-55c...

When you look at Aorus GTX 1080TI Extreme you see insane card, insane quality, heatsink, fans, even the damn front and back plates are metal, and when you look the Aorus K7 heatsink you start to wonder why the hell they did put so much worse heatsink on the board compared to the card...
Maybe the answer is that, the Aorus K7 have lots of futures on the board, so i think this is why they did not have the time to put better heatsinks on the board, and when i compare Aorus GTX 1080TI heatsink to the K7 ones is ******ed...
Shame on Gigabyte they did put this on the board to cool the VRMs (even no heatpipe




























), but as we all know there are no perfect things on the world, if the K7 did have great heastink, ROG lv of bios and WI-FI was going to be king AM4 MB, still is one of the best even like that.....


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Shame on Gigabyte they did put this on the board to cool the VRMs (even no heatpipe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ), but as we all know there are no perfect things on the world


There is a vast difference between perfection and adequate. Inadequate isn't acceptable.

As for heatpipes, though... Has anyone proven that they're more than decoration or just added metal mass - when it comes to VRM sinks? Are they actually necessary or would just having a highly-finned larger metal sink accomplish the same thing?


----------



## Radical Vision

This is why i say if the K7, did have the bios level of ROG and the heatsink of Titanium or CHVI, it was going to be the absolute King of AM4 boards, but nothing is perfect. There are not perfect humans, cars, computer parts, even the things that the mass of people claim to be perfect are not, may say Apple is the very best, but they are not... So we as humans are not perfect, so I like K7 because it shows the humans are imperfect...

Well i did not research for the VRM heatpipes, to see if there is any difference, and i think no one even did test this thing even guys like jay 2 cents, adored, gamers nexus, linus or others. Still if they put them maybe it make some difference.


----------



## chew*

They can balance the heat.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> This is why i say if the K7, did have the bios level of ROG and the heatsink of Titanium or CHVI, it was going to be the absolute King of AM4 boards, but nothing is perfect. There are not perfect humans, cars, computer parts, even the things that the mass of people claim to be perfect are not, may say Apple is the very best, but they are not... So we as humans are not perfect, so I like K7 because it shows the humans are imperfect...
> 
> Well i did not research for the VRM heatpipes, to see if there is any difference, and i think no one even did test this thing even guys like jay 2 cents, adored, gamers nexus, linus or others. Still if they put them maybe it make some difference.


ah, had a hard time taking this seriously. heat pipes move heat.. that's why they're an integral part of tower coolers for cpu's. cooling solutions for graphics cards, practically every lap top or serious sff build.
for 'generic' (if there's really such a thing) we're moving it away faster from hotter components, moving it to areas where it dissipates better because the surface area available isn't saturated or simply has better airflow to again, dissipate heat. It's possible to have a design that's not improved by heat pipe, sure. But that's probably a bad cooling solution or one that's already exceptional.


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> They can balance the heat.


That is exactly what i did think after i did write my comment. Now the VRM on all AM4 boards are x2 types CPU and VSOC. The CPU part is hot, but the VSOC is cool as corpse, the heatpipe will transfer the heat from the hot CPU part, to the VSOC bcoz is cooler....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> ah, had a hard time taking this seriously. heat pipes move heat.. that's why they're an integral part of tower coolers for cpu's. cooling solutions for graphics cards, practically every lap top or serious sff build.
> for 'generic' (if there's really such a thing) we're moving it away faster from hotter components, moving it to areas where it dissipates better because the surface area available isn't saturated or simply has better airflow to again, dissipate heat. It's possible to have a design that's not improved by heat pipe, sure. But that's probably a bad cooling solution or one that's already exceptional.


superstition222

Did say he think the heatipes on the VRMs are possibly and decoration, not me. I just did say, im not absolute sure what the pipes do, but if board makers put them, there is reason for that..


----------



## chew*

A board that could benefit for example is GT7.

They stuck 4 of the vcore phases under same sink as the SOC.

Meanwhile the lone other half of the vcore phase runs cool.

Could balance the heat out with a heatpipe...or just make the heatsink bigger for the combo vrm sink.

They chose to do neither obviously.


----------



## Radical Vision

Yep the K7 VSOC side is dead cool all the time, while the CPU side is warm or hot depend on the case, air flow, loads. Bcuz of the design seems impossible to add heatpipe to this heatsink without need to changing it all, there is the +12 8 pi connector and x2 big caps there...
Changing the whole heatsink on the CPU VRM side will improve the whole situation and make the board close to perfect, but will end removing the plastic cover. Still in my case the VRM cant get too hot, die to the perfect air flow, as you state before without case and some fan on that heatsink there is problem...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> A board that could benefit for example is GT7.
> 
> They stuck 4 of the vcore phases under same sink as the SOC.
> 
> Meanwhile the lone other half of the vcore phase runs cool.
> 
> Could balance the heat out with a heatpipe...or just make the heatsink bigger for the combo vrm sink.
> 
> They chose to do neither obviously.


Yeah, the layout wouldn't even rate a mention with a proper heatpipe solution. As it is, it's still an easy enough board to cool, but an oversight nonetheless. Could always be worse though. Could have been weaker components AND the weaker sink. That would have been 'fun'.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> There are not perfect humans, cars, computer parts, even the things that the mass of people claim to be perfect are not, may say Apple is the very best, but they are not... So we as humans are not perfect, so I like K7 because it shows the humans are imperfect...


Good grief.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Yep the K7 VSOC side is dead cool all the time, while the CPU side is warm or hot depend on the case, air flow, loads. Bcuz of the design seems impossible to add heatpipe to this heatsink without need to changing it all, there is the +12 8 pi connector and x2 big caps there...
> Changing the whole heatsink on the CPU VRM side will improve the whole situation and make the board close to perfect, but will end removing the plastic cover. Still in my case the VRM cant get too hot, die to the perfect air flow, as you state before without case and some fan on that heatsink there is problem...


I turned my G5 off today to wait for the summer heat to cool off a bit. It wasn't instability but I didn't want extra heat in the room for no reason.

It was running in 90 °F ambient while I was away. At *stock* the VRM temps were roughly the same as when I tested at 80°F (~27°C) even with 120mm fan exhaust where an exhaust would be. That is VRM temp hitting 60-65°C. Keep in mind my system had been up for *over 60 hours* running BOINC in virtual machines to test various Linux distros' credits per hour.

That's not nearly the kind of stress my Sandy Bridge had , with over 350 hours uptime before I manually restart for Windows update (i.e. every Pentathlon). That's with 6 phase low RDS(on) Onsemi parts with a doubled low side , reaching ~65°C peak VRM temp at just under 1.3V. It survived 24/7 through multiple 2 week-long pentathlons that also included AVX workloads. Granted they were ONSemi 4921N + ONSemi 4935N and not these 4C06N low side parts like on the B350 boards. It had a dinky heatsink with some basic fins and I'm fine with it since I don't have a window and ran a NH-D14. Nothing fancy , worked, and cost me $120 new.

For $200 MSRP, the X370 Gaming K7 / G5 have decent parts but for that kind of money I'd expect some better VRM cooling and/or 50 or 60A PowIRStages for more mosfet surface area.

I think it boils down to : What kind of stability do _you_ strive for? 12 hours of encoding? Three to four hours of gaming not 100% load?









The Gaming 5 and Gaming K7 could use a heatsink rework IMO , along with a new IO cover that doesn't cover the heatsink (a terrible design decision). Plus the lack of p-states for the CPU in the BIOS is a real turnoff for Linux use. The quick fix would to send everyone a backplate and thermal tape.


----------



## Radical Vision

Well better the heatsink to be one of the prime issues, then some bad components, build quality or other.
Of course i want as well way better VRM cooling + the damn pipe, but at the moment that is what we get from Gigabyte, still i think this is one of the very best MB, and on this price point does not have any real competition...
Still the solution is very easy put some fans and the problem is gone, or just need to find better heatsinks + even the fans and it will end way better..
Still now i get about 50c VRM heat on GTA V +50% all fans, of course no fans on the VRM for now, bcoz i need to get thermal grizzly kryonaut, to replace the arctic MX-2 + to find the best spot for the VRM fans, and how to attach them on the heatsink is work, and just need to find time for this + it will take time to do that, bcuz i work slow to see if all is ok. For me is strange why Gigabyte have one of the very best cooling solutions on Aorus Extreme 1080TI, while way inferior cooling for the mobo, is not making any sense....


----------



## chew*

K7 arguably good price point.

Gaming 5 is not.


----------



## Radical Vision

Well the prime cons on K7 are the bad VRM cooling and the bios that lack many things, the rest is ok, and it give great build/components quality, lots of futures on this price, futures that have on more expensive boards for example MSI Titanium is 300$ and only that board have Steel slots on 90% of the slots, or the ASUS have great bios and utilities for max OC on AM4, but gigabyte have all this on better price + more things, this is why i think is best board from all, and great in this price point.


----------



## chew*

Point is gaming 5 is like $10 less. Honestly its overpriced in fact it should not even exist. It exists because k5 vrm sucks and populates the price point that gaming 5 should have populated.

Really strix 370 biostar gt7 are far better at that price point.

The msi carbon is meh. The titanium way over priced. Heck fatality by asrock over priced to.

Right now sub 200 is probably a slam dunk for strix x370. Am3/am4 heatsink compatibility. 3555 fets good bios.

Biostar would be my second choice.

Above $200 would be taichi/c6h tied for first based on your needs.

K7 following behind.


----------



## 0verpowered

You can get taichi for 189.99 at MC and i think there is a $10 mail in rebate right now as well. Great deal at that price, it and the fatality have the best VRM's I think.

edit: sorry, looks like its 199 with $10 rebate. i


----------



## chew*

On sale occasionally. usa prices do not equal global.


----------



## Radical Vision

Well that is your vision about the AM4 mobos..
I see the K7 above all:

tons of futures
great parts/ build quality
capable of 4GHz 24/7 OC
good RMA support
and all that in 210$ price tag

None of the other boards have all that futures on this price and quality..
CHVI have only better heatsink and better bios nothing more to offer, and if die asus will send you to buy new one bcuz they "rock"...

The X370GT7 seems a nice board, but still it have only what dual bios, while K7 have dual lan, dual audio, dual usb, steel slots.

Tai-Chi is nice board, but very bad luck from AM2, AM3 and AM3+ boards, so no more asrock they are in the black list for been bad, unstable and more...

As other guys here did show the K7 can OC as well as CVHI or very close, meaning is solid board + all futures, all the quality, the price and the looks the bad VRM cooling is a small price to pay. I did manage to get my old stove FX8350 on 4.6GHz 1.43v + LLC high on air cooling and summer in the room was like 35c my system never go above 60c no matter what, so the heatsink of the K7 is absolutely nothing compared to the insane 300+ total power draw of the FX8350 specially summer....


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Well that is your vision about the AM4 mobos..
> I see the K7 above all:
> 
> tons of futures
> great parts/ build quality
> capable of 4GHz 24/7 OC
> good RMA support
> and all that in 210$ price tag
> 
> None of the other boards have all that futures on this price and quality..
> CHVI have only better heatsink and better bios nothing more to offer, and if die asus will send you to buy new one bcuz they "rock"...
> 
> The X370GT7 seems a nice board, but still it have only what dual bios, while K7 have dual lan, dual audio, dual usb, steel slots.
> 
> Tai-Chi is nice board, but very bad luck from AM2, AM3 and AM3+ boards, so no more asrock they are in the black list for been bad, unstable and more...
> 
> As other guys here did show the K7 can OC as well as CVHI or very close, meaning is solid board + all futures, all the quality, the price and the looks the bad VRM cooling is a small price to pay. I did manage to get my old stove FX8350 on 4.6GHz 1.43v + LLC high on air cooling and summer in the room was like 35c my system never go above 60c no matter what, so the heatsink of the K7 is absolutely nothing compared to the insane 300+ total power draw of the FX8350 specially summer....


futures... perhaps you mean features?

I prefer vrm that are cooler. if dual bios is a feature, dual bios that doesn't corrupt itself, audio? don't care, hope it's good if it's part of the price difference. . dual lan is pointless if you're not leveraging it and steel slots? puhlease don't trot that marketing bs out. They're reinforced, yay. others do this without misleading advertising .

Decent board but not perfect. Don't drink the koolaid with any product.


----------



## chew*

I already saw future. Both mine are in RMA. Neither made it to ln2. C6h and taichi still live to tell tales after sub 0c however

I have all the boards. I draw my own personal conclusions.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I already saw future. Both mine are in RMA. Neither made it to ln2. C6h and taichi still live to tell tales after sub 0c however
> 
> I have all the boards. I draw my own personal conclusions.


Did you get the X370 STRIX yet? Look forward to seeing tests on that









I believe you mentioned it a few pages back ?

The G5 is now $170 (after $20 MIR) at Newegg , which is what it should have been.


----------



## chew*

Yah waiting availability at MC near me. My prime pro went into family members pc so need a replacement.


----------



## chew*

So i have been experimenting with ways around throttling max power draw. Its simple really just cooler = better.

Off hand whats the amp rating the prime b350 plus vrm is rated for?

Also at least on the board i am testing currently throttling hits @ 75c tdie.

I can actually video it i have managed a setup that you can actually catch it in software.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> So i have been experimenting with ways around throttling max power draw. Its simple really just cooler = better.
> 
> Off hand whats the amp rating the prime b350 plus vrm is rated for?
> 
> Also at least on the board i am testing currently throttling hits @ 75c tdie.
> 
> I can actually video it i have managed a setup that you can actually catch it in software.


Hey chew i thought you were going to blow out a B350 board at 1.425V? I really wanted to see how long it took to blow doing Prime95 with a 8 core Ryzen.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> Hey chew i thought you were going to blow out a B350 board at 1.425V? I really wanted to see how long it took to blow doing Prime95 with a 8 core Ryzen.


This is part of it big guy









Need to be able to pull the amps without cpu throttling back. If your going to do it make sure you do it right the first time


----------



## bardacuda

@chew*

Not sure if this is useful but here is the datasheet for 4C09N (br0da's list shows that board using 4C09B for high side and 2x4C06B for low side)

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C09N-D.PDF

If I am reading it right (Big "IF". I'm no engineer.) it is good for 39A @ 80°C.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> So i have been experimenting with ways around throttling max power draw. Its simple really just cooler = better.
> 
> Off hand whats the amp rating the prime b350 plus vrm is rated for?
> 
> Also at least on the board i am testing currently throttling hits @ 75c tdie.
> 
> I can actually video it i have managed a setup that you can actually catch it in software.


I would think 25A-30A per phase for high side fets, or ~100A-120A total will be the limit 24/7 on B350 with 4C09N high side , per spec. ASUS calls it "4C09B" but it is unlikely there's a drastic difference.

4C09N cites 25.3A continuous at 25°C based on no heatsink. This is based on junction to ambient, which is the safest calculation (assumes heatsink is garbage).

With zero thermal resistance to heatsink (unrealistic) and zero thermal resistance between heatsink and the air you get the theta J_C (junction to case). At 80°C you can can push 39A per phase and 52A at 25°C (good luck). The 52A is the number at the top of the datasheet. All of these numbers don't account for voltage changes , different inductors, different output voltage , different V_GS (Gate-source voltage).
--> thermal resistance to heatsink depends on the thermal tape and/or TIM: i.e. for 3M 8805 Thermally Conductive Adhesive Tape it is 3.2 °C cm^2/W , i.e. with a 5x6mm package you're looking at ~ 0.96°C/W
( Some 3M tapes such as 8815 or 8820 have 7.7 or 9.7 °C cm^2/W so this is the optimistic number)
--> 4.9 °C/W resistance from junction to casing

switching loss is approximated by P_D, sw=0.5*V_in*I_out*(t_r+t_f)*f_sw
for 4C09N t_r+t_f = 40ns
P_D=0.5*12V*I_out*(40ns)*300kHz
assume I_out = 39A (156A output total)
=0.5*12V*39A*40*(10^-9)*3*10^6
~2.81W

Temp at 2.81W with 3M 8805 tape = 2.81W * (4.9°C/W+0.96°C/W + R_heatsink) + T_amb= 16.47+25°C + 2.81*R_heatsink
= 41.47+2.81*R_heatsink _@ 25°C ambient_
---> with 8820 tape = 2.81W *(4.9°C/W + 2.91°C/W +R_heatsink) +T_amb = 22°C +25°C + 2.81*R_heatsink , so at least 47°C even if it's the perfect heatsink where R_heatsink = 0

Onsemi thermal info

AND9016/D AND9016 - Heat Sink Selection Guide for Thermally Enhanced SO8-FL
www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/AND9016-D.PDF


----------



## chew*

Well i need better cooling cpu was thermal throttled entire run.

Regardless of it living/surviving...temps hit 150C+ on pcb.

That is a loss in my book in fact i think i just got lucky and that is about it.

Watch first minute or so when i show vcore fast forward to like 28ish. Rest is boring uncut and live.


----------



## AlphaC

FR1 PCB has a glass transition temperature of 130°C, FR2 is 105°C... did it melt?

edit: see chart
http://www.epectec.com/pcb/laminate-material.html

Some FR4 laminates have high Tg

Also found FR4 thermal resistance to be *283°C/W* https://en-us.knowledgebase.renesas.com/?title=English_Content/Analog%26Power/Training_%26_Design_Support/Part_Selection/Part_Number_Decoder/Power_Devices/What_is_thermal_resistance_of_FR4_(no_heat_sink)_and_will_it_decrease%3F

Since thermal resistance in parallel 1/R_total = 1/R1 + 1/R2 = R1*R2/(R1+R2) the PCB is providing minimal help as far as heat dissipation.


----------



## chew*

Not in the 30 min timespan limit I promised. Still anyone reccommending it for 4 gig should be shot.

Here you go. Watch first min or so to record voltages.

Fast forward to about 27 min.

https://youtu.be/i4aUhki_KFM


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Not in the 30 min timespan limit I promised. Still anyone reccommending it for 4 gig should be shot.
> 
> Here you go. Watch first min or so to record voltages.
> 
> Fast forward to about 27 min.
> 
> https://youtu.be/i4aUhki_KFM


that would be worse in a case...


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> that would be worse in a case...


Yep, expect closer to 160-170 on the back of the board in a case. That is getting close to the point of the solder failing/softening and is beyond the point of damage for the epoxy/glass substrate.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Well i need better cooling cpu was thermal throttled entire run.
> 
> Regardless of it living/surviving...temps hit 150C+ on pcb.
> 
> That is a loss in my book in fact i think i just got lucky and that is about it.
> 
> Watch first minute or so when i show vcore fast forward to like 28ish. Rest is boring uncut and live.


Just breath and remember you are trying to make a point man, cause of your advise i actually helped a few people with VRM temps i'm sure others are doing the same.


----------



## chew*

Eh it is just the push back that is frustrating when you already know because you observed.

I do not want "b350" type vrm boards to suck.

In fact i have been lobbying to have a vendor build a nasty b350 built to overclock to the moon.

I see no point in x370 or paying extra for that chipset.


----------



## CriticalOne

Seeing how much the ASUS PRIME B350 struggles, this does not bode well for my system. My MORTAR is also a 4+2 board.

I was about to buy a Corsair H60, but I'm not sure if I can move away from a downdraft cooler.


----------



## polkfan

155C by the capacitors man its worse then i thought and the ASUS PRIME B350-PLUS that has better VRM then even the B350 Msi models still 4+2 phase but better VRM not the Niko crap.


----------



## Radical Vision

Is not about the X370 chipset, is about no good boards on B350, all are lower end class, only 4+2 VRM not 6 or more, lower fan headers, and lower of all other things.
Still the Zen processors are not champion overclockers, so B350 mobo for people that don`t care at all what is the board, and what features it have is ok, but i don`t like inferior motherboards..


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Is not about the X370 chipset, is about no good boards on B350, all are lower end class, only 4+2 VRM not 6 or more, lower fan headers, and lower of all other things.
> Still the Zen processors are not champion overclockers, so B350 mobo for people that don`t care at all what is the board, and what features it have is ok, but i don`t like inferior motherboards..


I can not understand why they are being so cheap on B350 for example my board only has 4 sata connectors you can get more on a 60$ intel board at release. My board also only has 5 USB connections i actually bought a 10$ USB 3.0 HUB just for my extra components i have. Tomahawk does have 6 fan headers though they probably knew it needed all the fans it could get lol.

I could easily recommend my board for people who are buying the 4 core ryzen its probably my favorite B350 board. Perhaps next generation mid range boards will have more features at that time maybe they will feel more confident in Amd i mean no one really knew Ryzen wasn't going to suck even i thought it was going to be 3ghz max speeds at release with sandy-ivy IPC at best.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> 155C by the capacitors man its worse then i thought and the ASUS PRIME B350-PLUS that has better VRM then even the B350 Msi models still 4+2 phase but better VRM not the Niko crap.


If B350 had any more niko it would be a steven segal movie.


----------



## Radical Vision

Well Tomahawk is nice mobo, visual, price and have even PCI ports, many people are still using some old PCI cards like Auzentech, or Xonar Essence ST or other. But MSI have inferior build quality and cheap quality components, this is big issue, this is why i don`t like MSI a bit, if they did use components like Gigabyte or ASUS yes, but not like that...
I think AMD is responsible for the low quality on B350 boards, die to they want to sell more X370 chipsets, so they have some deal with all board makers, that is the high end and all good stuff only on X370 even VRM components. But still even like this AMD`s most expensive MSI Titanium or ASUS CHVI or ASrock Fatality all fo them are way cheaper then what is on intel`s high end side, so all is ok AMD are not greedy as hell, not even back in the days of A64...

Too bad GloFo was not able to make at least 4.5GHz capable silicon, now intel was going to be so much mad, and miserable... Only thing now intel have better on their side is only the higher clock speed, in all other they are inferior...


----------



## chew*

Single thread ipc in certain tasks are still better on intel but AMD made a big stride in this department.


----------



## br0da

FDPC5030SG Fairchild TrenchFETs on the ASRock mini-ITX boards:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-26.html#post25687054
Also take a look at the strange "pads"... oO


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> FDPC5030SG Fairchild TrenchFETs on the ASRock mini-ITX boards:
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-26.html#post25687054
> Also take a look at the strange "pads"... oO


Saw that on newegg last night. Peaked my curiosity.


----------



## Radical Vision

Intel lose even there Zen have even better IPC...

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-1700x-benchmarks-leaked-beats-kaby-lake-ipc/

And on the places where intel still wins is from the clock speed + all the optimizations they have, bcuz they use all the same architecture since C2D, so they did so much fine tuning, + all software from 10 years is optimized for intel. And Zen is new architecture it will take time for developers to optimize things, and it need time for the whole platform to mature. Still Zen is unique it can gain IPC from the infinity fabric, just need time there as well to get mature and stable bioses, new AGESA codes and more, and then the Zen will brake total intel...
We will see how much impact will make Zen but on Zen+ bcuz it will have improved silicon meaning more clock speed and more IPC and faster memory for faster infinity fabric and CCX speed = even more IPC...


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Intel lose even there Zen have even better IPC...
> 
> http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-1700x-benchmarks-leaked-beats-kaby-lake-ipc/
> 
> And on the places where intel still wins is from the clock speed + all the optimizations they have, bcuz they use all the same architecture since C2D, so they did so much fine tuning, + all software from 10 years is optimized for intel. And Zen is new architecture it will take time for developers to optimize things, and it need time for the whole platform to mature. Still Zen is unique it can gain IPC from the infinity fabric, just need time there as well to get mature and stable bioses, new AGESA codes and more, and then the Zen will brake total intel...
> We will see how much impact will make Zen but on Zen+ bcuz it will have improved silicon meaning more clock speed and more IPC and faster memory for faster infinity fabric and CCX speed = even more IPC...


A lot of areas where yes Amd has time to work with Zen where intel is basically fully mature with their design. BUT i can't do it from a core to core basis i see haswell like IPC give or take 10%. Always better then sandy-ivy but more often even with Haswell.

Still out of the gate very good job and if ryzen could OC to 4.4+ i think most would not even talk about its 1080P high refresh rate gaming.

That's the issue haswell like IPC with 4ghz speeds in a world with 5ghz intel CPU's with 15%+ IPC.

Global foundry has a 14nm+ coming that Amd should hop on and Amd should focus on improving IPC not aiming for max core count or clock speed on the mainstream. 8 cores is plenty for 4-5 years at least


----------



## FlashFir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> 155C by the capacitors man its worse then i thought and the ASUS PRIME B350-PLUS that has better VRM then even the B350 Msi models still 4+2 phase but better VRM not the Niko crap.


What do you think about the models available at the MicroCenter?

http://www.microcenter.com/search/search_results.aspx?Ntk=all&sortby=pricehigh&N=4294966996+4294845156+4294843387+4294963346&myStore=true

Doing a comparison, I'm tempted to go with the Gigabyte since it has 4 phases for the CPU and 3 phases for SoC according to the chart whereas the ASUS Prime B350m-A/CSM appears to have only 4 and 2 respectively.


----------



## chew*

About time. Hopefully this has further rework in the trace change department.

Here is to hoping it is faster in super pi 32m as well.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11652/asus-republic-of-gamers-introduces-crosshair-vi-extreme-motherboard


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> A lot of areas where yes Amd has time to work with Zen where intel is basically fully mature with their design. BUT i can't do it from a core to core basis i see haswell like IPC give or take 10%. Always better then sandy-ivy but more often even with Haswell.
> 
> Still out of the gate very good job and if ryzen could OC to 4.4+ i think most would not even talk about its 1080P high refresh rate gaming.
> 
> That's the issue haswell like IPC with 4ghz speeds in a world with 5ghz intel CPU's with 15%+ IPC.
> 
> Global foundry has a 14nm+ coming that Amd should hop on and Amd should focus on improving IPC not aiming for max core count or clock speed on the mainstream. 8 cores is plenty for 4-5 years at least


As you can clearly see ZEN IPC is better then skylake/kabylake so is far from haswell...
Zen+ will have at least 20% more IPC (AMD`s road map did show this) + better Glofo silicon and will blow away even canon lake, and if AMD did make Zen+ even faster like they did expect before 40% more IPC over excavator, and they did get not 20% more IPC but 30% lol will be insane. And clock speeds of about 4.5-4.7GHz will just demolish intel`s offerings....
Most people are stupid, see many of them did even guides how to delid haswell processors instead, of blaming intel for doing this crap. Same is happend now ppl talk about zen been "inferior" in 1080P, 720p, 480p and lower no comment about this stupidity....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> About time. Hopefully this has further rework in the trace change department.
> 
> Here is to hoping it is faster in super pi 32m as well.
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/11652/asus-republic-of-gamers-introduces-crosshair-vi-extreme-motherboard


Nice now, this i can call one real and nice ROG AM4 mobo, that Zen deserves, still is overkill bcuz 95% of Zen at the moment can`t brake the 4GHz barrier. But still is a very nice mobo even without to be able to OC more then 4GHz...


----------



## polkfan

I'd like to know what tests you are using to get those IPC scores from are they also accounting for SMT as that is not 100% accurate.

Personally if we look at Intel and what they did with sany tp kaby then look at bulldozer to excavator i think IPC can go up 30% throughout Zen's whole life.

Zen+ will for sure be a lot better as Amd has always been a decent amount better at round 2 then 1. Intel is smart when it comes to finally bringing 6 cores to the masses they will need to if they want to fight off Amd.

Intel really needs a newer design if they are getting lower clock speeds with their 12 core then what Amd can do maybe Intel needs some of that glue Amd is using i guess.


----------



## Radical Vision

Im not testing die to 2 things:
first i don`t have intel based system (thank god, and i will not any time soon)
second there is much info in the internet, for the Zen IPC so no need of tests...

Other things Zen gains more power from, faster memory/infinity fabric, we did see the closing gap in 1080P on 3600MHz memory, meaning is like increased IPC, is very well made..
As we know haswell is not so far from broadwell and skylake/kabylake so what is the big deal about that. Intel are using the same damn architecture since more then 10 years the Pentium 3 tualatin, they did reach the max potential of this architecture, so there is no more for them, and we will see this on canon lake, will be not much better...

Zen+ will have about 15-20% more IPC (if AMD repeat the thing from Zen they did expect to gain 40% more iPC from excavator, but they did deliver over 50%, so maybe 25-30% will be insane), and the gains from better silicon from glofo will make 10% more performance to the table. And the matured bioses, platform and AGESA micro code will give AMD DDR4000 that will increase the Infinity fabric even more and the whole situation will be even more insane.
So in the end Zen+:

+ 15% more IPC (very best case 25-30%) = 15% more performance
+ better silicon at least 4.5GHz (4.7GHz in very best case) = 10% more performance
+ DDR4000 (in very best case maybe DDR4400) = 10% more performance

So in the very end Zen+ will have up to 35% more performance from all this.
And in the very best case scenario about 50-55% more performance is absolutely insane, is alien, is not normal..................


----------



## SuperZan

I've got a 4790K and gave away a 6700K, but for the most part my 1700X is equal to or better than the 4790k clock for clock in most scenarios, slower than the 6700K clock for clock in most scenarios (very competitive in FP ops), and only very rarely slower than both, usually in more obscure workloads. This jibes with the Zen team's goals of making their necessary compromises in less widely used workloads.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I've got a 4790K and gave away a 6700K, but for the most part my 1700X is equal to or better than the 4790k clock for clock in most scenarios, slower than the 6700K in most scenarios (very competitive in FP ops), and only very rarely slower than both, usually in more obscure workloads. This jibes with the Zen teams goals of making their necessary compromises in less widely used workloads l.


Fwiw At 1080 or 1200p with low graphics settings my 1800X/fury will give about 20 % more average fps than my 4790K @ 4.9ghz with the 290X lightning on BF1 64 player maps. ( no streaming )

Tried CSGO for a few rounds the other day with the Ryzen rig - averaged 344 fps for the game on dust 2 10VS10 when I lifted the fps cap from 300 to 999. I think the average was a little over 280 with the 300 fps cap in place.


----------



## Radical Vision

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-Ryzen-7-1800X-Review-Now-and-Zen/Clock-Clock-Ryzen-Broadwell-E-Kaby-Lake

http://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-1700x-benchmarks-leaked-beats-kaby-lake-ipc/

I don`t see the Kabylake to be much faster, maybe at best possible case 5%. But Zen is brand new platform, nothing is matures enough, while intel is so fine tuned .... In the end Zen with the level of fine tuning and cleared all possible bugs it will be better + higher memory speed ends up getting faster infinity fabric/CCX and as we can see the games where zen loses, are on par with 7700k...


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I've got a 4790K and gave away a 6700K, but for the most part my 1700X is equal to or better than the 4790k clock for clock in most scenarios, slower than the 6700K clock for clock in most scenarios (very competitive in FP ops), and only very rarely slower than both, usually in more obscure workloads. This jibes with the Zen team's goals of making their necessary compromises in less widely used workloads.


In a number of synthetics my R5 1400 @ 3.8ghz is equal to a 4.4ghz i7 4770k.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I've got a 4790K and gave away a 6700K, but for the most part my 1700X is equal to or better than the 4790k clock for clock in most scenarios, slower than the 6700K clock for clock in most scenarios (very competitive in FP ops), and only very rarely slower than both, usually in more obscure workloads. This jibes with the Zen team's goals of making their necessary compromises in less widely used workloads.


spot on as they say. for a bit more in depth as to why ryzen is a credible threat in the right situation, and it's weaknesses. I would suggest agner's cpu blog. He's concise about it's architectural advantages where Stilt's strictly technical thread brings attention to the process node limitations.

Both of which people ignore.

btw if my Gt7 does not run faster with pretty lights I will be somewhat disappointed.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Fwiw At 1080 or 1200p with low graphics settings my 1800X/fury will give about 20 % more average fps than my 4790K @ 4.9ghz with the 290X lightning on BF1 64 player maps. ( no streaming )
> 
> Tried CSGO for a few rounds the other day with the Ryzen rig - averaged 344 fps for the game on dust 2 10VS10 when I lifted the fps cap from 300 to 999. I think the average was a little over 280 with the 300 fps cap in place.


Yeah, that's about what I've experienced with BF1. I had got the 6700k to game on when I was still doing a lot of work on my 3930k. I got around to testing and the 3930k was smoother than the 6700k in terms of frame times. I went for the 1700X because it gives excellent performance in both gaming and work I bring home and its compromises don't really affect my use-case. I had no qualms about giving away that boring Skylake chip.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> In a number of synthetics my R5 1400 @ 3.8ghz is equal to a 4.4ghz i7 4770k.


Indeed. It take some very selective synthetics choices to make Ryzen look bad. It's just a good architecture, simply put.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> spot on as they say. for a bit more in depth as to why ryzen is a credible threat in the right situation, and it's weaknesses. I would suggest agner's cpu blog. He's concise about it's architectural advantages where Stilt's strictly technical thread brings attention to the process node limitations.
> 
> Both of which people ignore.
> 
> btw if my Gt7 does not run faster with pretty lights I will be somewhat disappointed.


Intriguing read, thank you. I think AMD made the right trade offs.

Breathe option for maximum overdrive.


----------



## polkfan

In many areas i get less IPC on a core to core basis in cases where 1 core is heavily used. Also older software i can tell is slower then my older haswell I7 for example AOE3 is slower and what not still miles ahead of piledriver.

Using all 8 cores and 16 threads and trying to measure IPC compared to a 4 core 8 thread CPU isn't accurate best to compare for example 1500X vs 7700K at the same frequency same with the 4790K. If trying to find IPC. EDIT turning off SMT on both CPU's would also show true IPC performance. Which is why i think the 1300X at 3.9ghz will perform around a locked I5 4460. I'm a big geek for IPC comparisons of different architectures.

I'm also gonna say maybe be nice and let all platforms use the fastest memory they can support.

I never did see a test where ryzen lost to sandy-ivy however great for a new design.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_5_1500X/

This is a great review they have a 1500X and comparing it to a 4770K both at stock 3.5Ghz in a lot of tests the 1500X loses meaning IPC lower then haswell in a lot of cases.

Anyways this is a VRM discussion haha


----------



## SaccoSVD

We are at the Prime X370 Pro forum debating whether vcore can differ from being sampled at the socket or sensor (software, given the software is accurate)

My friend suggests HWInfo is accurate, or at least the closest and I tend to agree to the later. Thing is I did many readings with my multimeter and they don't match.

Say you have 1.412v LLC3 and under load it becomes 1.418v (vboost) in the multimeter but HW info shows 1.38v (vdroop)

Is there a significant loss from the socket to the CPU cores? How accurate is to measure from the socket? How much can I trust HWInfo?


----------



## SuperZan

Socket reads will always be more accurate than software, barring some sort of read failure or just a terrible model.


----------



## chew*

x370 pro has a pad the empty pads where a cap was omitted is actually a very good place to measure as there is less resistance introduced over a little smd cap behind socket


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Socket reads will always be more accurate than software, barring some sort of read failure or just a terrible model.


Would there be any significant difference from the voltage measured at the socket and what the actual cores get?

Does anyone know if the people behind HWinfo had any statement on this? (I've searched in their forums already)


----------



## chew*

I honestly think that it depends on the voltage controller chip its reading and where the chip gets its reading which in many cases i have found the caps at vrm.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I honestly think that it depends on the voltage controller chip its reading and where the chip gets its reading which in many cases i have found the caps at vrm.


Mmm alright.

I took it from here (the one that says CPU voltage) I guess that one is less accurate? (prime x370 pro)


----------



## chew*

As long as your ground was @ socket. The cpu you pictured is the best location. The pad next to one circled is your ground.

Ground plane away from socket can skew readings. I got yelled @ by raja and tin about that along time ago.

After i got it right then i was told ocilloscope lol which is definitely more accurate and can catch spikes/dips a meter can not.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> As long as your ground was @ socket. The cpu you pictured is the best location. The pad next to one circled is your ground.
> 
> Ground plane away from socket can skew readings. I got yelled @ by raja and tin about that along time ago.
> 
> After i got it right then i was told ocilloscope lol which is definitely more accuate and can catch spikes/dips a meter can not.


Alright! thank you! that's what I needed to know.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> After i got it right then i was told ocilloscope lol


hahah


----------



## PriestOfSin

How bad am I kneecapping myself if I go with the X370 Killer SLI as opposed to the Taichi for OC? I missed the sale on the Taichi and it's slipped out of my budget, but the Killer looks decent (despite losing 3.1, ***).


----------



## chew*

I have heard horror stories in the memory OC department other than that no clue.


----------



## b0oMeR

Through my reaearch I don't think AMD incorporates VRMs into the new am4 platform which is causing the inconsistent memory performance.
Bad move by AMD tbh, not having a VRM makes it significantly harder to come down from 12v/5v


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> Through my reaearch I don't think AMD incorporates VRMs into the new am4 platform which is causing the inconsistent memory performance.
> Bad move by AMD tbh, not having a VRM makes it significantly harder to come down from 12v/5v


Wut?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Wut?


He's said the same thing several times in Ryzen threads, ostensibly to troll. It's not very funny, but I admire his persistence.


----------



## superstition222

Perhaps what he's trying to get at is the AM4 spec for the portion of VRM that delivers power to the memory. Cheaper AM3+ boards have just one phase for RAM and better boards typically have two, for instance.

The Stilt said the AM4 spec for droop is much tighter than AM3+ and FM2, tighter even than Intel's spec. So, maybe he's trying to say that the AM4 VRM spec, as it relates to memory, is not the reason why Ryzen has issues with RAM faster than 3200-3400.

If AM4 needs a very tight memory spec one could assume that the boards out right now may not be providing tight enough power delivery to support Ryzen running RAM faster than ~3200/3400.

However, the Patriot validation article Anandtech posted said Patriot verified compatibility for B350 boards (and even 320 or whatever the lowest-end boards are), not just the top-end boards. This implies that board quality isn't that central to the issue.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Im not testing die to 2 things:
> first i don`t have intel based system (thank god, and i will not any time soon)
> second there is much info in the internet, for the Zen IPC so no need of tests...
> 
> Other things Zen gains more power from, faster memory/infinity fabric, we did see the closing gap in 1080P on 3600MHz memory, meaning is like increased IPC, is very well made..
> As we know haswell is not so far from broadwell and skylake/kabylake so what is the big deal about that. Intel are using the same damn architecture since more then 10 years the Pentium 3 tualatin, they did reach the max potential of this architecture, so there is no more for them, and we will see this on canon lake, will be not much better...
> 
> Zen+ will have about 15-20% more IPC (if AMD repeat the thing from Zen they did expect to gain 40% more iPC from excavator, but they did deliver over 50%, so maybe 25-30% will be insane), and the gains from better silicon from glofo will make 10% more performance to the table. And the matured bioses, platform and AGESA micro code will give AMD DDR4000 that will increase the Infinity fabric even more and the whole situation will be even more insane.
> So in the end Zen+:
> 
> + 15% more IPC (very best case 25-30%) = 15% more performance
> + better silicon at least 4.5GHz (4.7GHz in very best case) = 10% more performance
> + DDR4000 (in very best case maybe DDR4400) = 10% more performance
> 
> So in the very end Zen+ will have up to 35% more performance from all this.
> And in the very best case scenario about 50-55% more performance is absolutely insane, is alien, is not normal..................


Or, Zen+ could be like Vega seems to be turning out to be. Who knows what the future will hold?


----------



## bardacuda

Jim Keller left again already so I'm not expecting any miracles in the IPC department. Maybe in the clock department...but unless they're using a separate process for desktop vs. server then I would expect them to target performance / watt again rather than pure performance.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Jim Keller left again already so I'm not expecting any miracles in the IPC department. Maybe in the clock department...but unless they're using a separate process for desktop vs. server then I would expect them to target performance / watt again rather than pure performance.


Jim Keller didn't design Ryzen in a vacuum. If the rest of AMD's Ryzen team wasn't good then Ryzen wouldn't be any good either. Bulldozer suffered the way it did because management basically told the engineers to fit a square peg into a round hole. Without that handicap, I don't see any reason why they can't improve on the design in every aspect.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Jim Keller left again already so I'm not expecting any miracles in the IPC department. Maybe in the clock department...but unless they're using a separate process for desktop vs. server then I would expect them to target performance / watt again rather than pure performance.


eh, Keller was good, no doubt but his job was done and he moved on, as he has a habit of doing. Process options are up to amd, expected gains from different nodes reasonably well known and there's still low hanging fruit with current design / manufacturing. Looks reasonably good, to me, going forward.


----------



## bardacuda

I'm not saying it can't be improved...just not expecting miracles is all.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PriestOfSin*
> 
> How bad am I kneecapping myself if I go with the X370 Killer SLI as opposed to the Taichi for OC? I missed the sale on the Taichi and it's slipped out of my budget, but the Killer looks decent (despite losing 3.1, ***).


It lacks USB 3.1 and uses a vastly cheaper VRM and ALC892. If you're looking at the Killer SLI I'd probably go with the MSI B350 Pro Carbon for ~$120...


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yendor*
> 
> eh, Keller was good, no doubt but his job was done and he moved on, as he has a habit of doing. Process options are up to amd, expected gains from different nodes reasonably well known and there's still low hanging fruit with current design / manufacturing. Looks reasonably good, to me, going forward.


Isn't there a rumor that AMD is going to use TSMC to supply more of its chips? I wonder if it would have to make rules changes to adapt Zen to be able to produced by both TSMC and GlobalFoundries/Samsung.

Instead of doing what Apple did, which is sell the same product without telling the customer which chip they're getting, AMD could use whichever company's process gives them the highest clocks for the premium SKUs. It would complicate things for board makers, though - having to deal with CPUs from two different processes. Since companies like AsRock can't even be bothered to do basic things like update BIOS to fix serious Skylake data corruption bugs...

I wonder if it's possible to have quad channel RAM for Zen+ 8 core 16 thread parts for a reasonable cost. And/or, how much can the infinity fabric be sped up?


----------



## chew*

I can not speak for the intel boards....but i can say they are working on the AMD stuff diligently.

Sometimes the problem lies not with the vendor but the seeded ocers who are only in it for a free sample for hwbot and could give a rats rump about the community and daily use or reporting issues other than some bugs interfering with there ability to get record scores.

Instead of reporting issues they are posting results on bot.

My board. Paid cash. But I will still work with them.


----------



## yendor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Isn't there a rumor that AMD is going to use TSMC to supply more of its chips? I wonder if it would have to make rules changes to adapt Zen to be able to produced by both TSMC and GlobalFoundries/Samsung.
> 
> Instead of doing what Apple did, which is sell the same product without telling the customer which chip they're getting, AMD could use whichever company's process gives them the highest clocks for the premium SKUs. It would complicate things for board makers, though - having to deal with CPUs from two different processes. Since companies like AsRock can't even be bothered to do basic things like update BIOS to fix serious Skylake data corruption bugs...
> 
> I wonder if it's possible to have quad channel RAM for Zen+ 8 core 16 thread parts for a reasonable cost. And/or, how much can the infinity fabric be sped up?


They do not have the option of working with a different primary foundry iirc. Legal reasons.


----------



## bardacuda

My understanding is they are obligated to buy a certain number of wafers from GF...but as long as they meet that minimum number they can go elsewhere for anything beyond that.


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Jim Keller left again already so I'm not expecting any miracles in the IPC department. Maybe in the clock department...but unless they're using a separate process for desktop vs. server then I would expect them to target performance / watt again rather than pure performance.


Yes Jim Killer Intel did left the company, but as AMD did state, he did write the Zen 2, the Zen 3, and maybe even something more for the future, and AMD can make them later, so what if he did left..
The good news for AMD is Raja Koduri did come back, and now AMD will strike with the full Radeon power over nVIDIA. After all Raja did left AMD in 2009, and there was the last good and competitive Radeon cards cards in the face of HD5xxx, HD6xxx and the end HD7xxx. Now i expect when he lead the Navi architecture to shine, and make nVIDIA funny, like they did with many Radeon cards long ago...


----------



## bardacuda

The thing is, the miracles happen when a whole new architecture comes out. K8 was a miracle, Ryzen was a miracle. On the Intel side Core2 was a miracle, and so was Sandy Bridge. Bulldozer and Pentium 4 were miracles too but in a bad way, because they actually managed to go backwards in IPC.

Zen+ or Zen2 or whatever is going to be an iteration on an already existing architecture. Looking at K10 vs. K8; Piledriver vs. Bulldozer; or Haswell vs. Ivy Bridge, etc. there's no way I'd predict 20 - 30% IPC gains as a possibility. I'm expecting more on the order of 10% +/- and leaning more towards the -

In the end it's all just speculation though until ppl have silicon in their hands.


----------



## Radical Vision

Even if you leave the IPC improvement on other side, you will have improved bioses, memory support, improved 14nm silicon, that will run better clock speeds, and even some overclocking to the 4.5GHz speed. High memory speeds boost the IF that boost the whole processor and system`s performance, so when you add IPC improvement, memory improvement, bioses, AGESA, better silicon/OC well you will see it will gain pretty good boost over the current gen. So the 30% is overall performance boost from all, and the IPC will be something like 10-15% (maybe 20 no one knows for sure), even if is 10% more IPC you calculate all the other things, and you will see the whole picture....


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> The Stilt said the AM4 spec for droop is much tighter than AM3+ and FM2, tighter even than Intel's spec.


That was prior to the fact that AMD stopped using the IVR (dLDO) for VDDCR_CPU in the final silicon (for AM4). The loadline spec for Zeppelin in bypass mode is actually looser than the one for 15h family parts (1.425mOhm vs. 1.3mOhm).


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Jim Keller didn't design Ryzen in a vacuum. If the rest of AMD's Ryzen team wasn't good then Ryzen wouldn't be any good either. Bulldozer suffered the way it did because management basically told the engineers to fit a square peg into a round hole. Without that handicap, I don't see any reason why they can't improve on the design in every aspect.


Agreed having a engineer as a CEO is a good idea and that is why Amd is doing so much better IMO.

I think we really are back to the original hammer days Amd is back and the revenue Amd reported proves it.

If desktops were more important like back in 2003 Amd would have gotten way more and they aren't even in laptops yet.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> The thing is, the miracles happen when a whole new architecture comes out. K8 was a miracle, Ryzen was a miracle. On the Intel side Core2 was a miracle, and so was Sandy Bridge. Bulldozer and Pentium 4 were miracles too but in a bad way, because they actually managed to go backwards in IPC.
> 
> Zen+ or Zen2 or whatever is going to be an iteration on an already existing architecture. Looking at K10 vs. K8; Piledriver vs. Bulldozer; or Haswell vs. Ivy Bridge, etc. there's no way I'd predict 20 - 30% IPC gains as a possibility. I'm expecting more on the order of 10% +/- and leaning more towards the -
> 
> In the end it's all just speculation though until ppl have silicon in their hands.


When comparing sandy to skylake its 30% or better in IPC
When comparing bulldozer to excavator one could say 30% IPC was improved

Guessing the best we will get from this design will be similar in 2020 when ryzen 3 comes out


----------



## bardacuda

That might actually be a worthy upgrade. I was hoping they'll have higher core count chips too, but I'm starting to think maybe that was wishful thinking. It would probably need a different socket with more pins.


----------



## st0neh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> The good news for AMD is Raja Koduri did come back


If Vega is anything to go by it's the complete opposite.


----------



## Radical Vision

Raja did not make the Vega, he just have some small part in the polishing process...
Raja is the mind behind Radeon 9xxx series, Radeon X850XT series, behind Radeon HD4xxx, Radeon HD5xxx, Radeon HD6xxx. All of that series and top cards did rekt nvidia back then, so Raja will be the leader on the Navi, the whole architecture will be his, so Radeon will smash nvidia, just like they did before...

Vega is architecture from other guys, seems not so good at this, and Raja was not there when AMD did start to make this card...


----------



## polkfan

I'd like to note that ATI didn't start to meet nvidia in performance until the 4850-4870 finally taking the 9800GTX down out of all the ATI/AMD cards i personally think the 5000 series was the best and arguably better then nvidia. Nvidia played it safe for awhile since they had no competition rebranding the old 8800 several times to it became a 250.

Ah i hope VEGA does compete with nvidia on the high-end but i don't care as much as i do about CPU's. IMO it takes more engineering and hard work to make a CPU architecture then a GPU one but i see that changing soon. I mean Pascal is nothing but a smaller maxwell with more CUDA cores shoved in and it works, CPU's are not the same. Once we get past 7-5nm the actual architecture will start to matter more and that is when i think Amd and Nvidia is going to have to change the way they make GPU's and try and get more with the same amount of space.

I read that Nvidia is looking into doing cluster based designs in the future to me that sounds like it would be cheaper BUT use more space.

What is even more worrisome if Amd can't beat a 1080Ti with HBM 2.0 to save them power consumption to shove more shaders in what happens when Nvidia uses HBM 2.0 and can save 30% TDP to shove more CUDA cores in? Nvidia still has the lead. Polaris while better is still closer to Maxwell on 28nm in terms of efficiency maybe a little tiny bit better, maybe VEGA will be more efficient then polaris even with gddr5x.

Ryzen sure in hell is efficient on performance per watt hopefully VEGA can be too. This stuff matters if VEGA isn't a performance per watt king it only gets in the way of hurting final APU performance.


----------



## bardacuda

Yeah Vega isn't looking so great so hopefully Navi is way better. nVidia already has Volta silicon out, just not for average joe yet. They can just sandbag whenever they want at this point.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> I'd like to note that ATI didn't start to meet nvidia in performance until the 4850-4870


I recall that the 9700 led the industry and was the card that killed Matrox's hopes that the Parhelia could become a competing platform to build from.

Yeah, I just looked back at the Anandtech article. The 9700 destroyed Nvidia's card. How cute is it that the PC Anand tested with was using RDRAM?









makes me feel old









Cooling was so primitive back then. Ugh.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> I'd like to note that ATI didn't start to meet nvidia in performance until the 4850-4870
> 
> 
> 
> I recall that the 9700 led the industry and was the card that killed Matrox's hopes that the Parhelia could become a competing platform to build from.
> 
> Yeah, I just looked back at the Anandtech article. The 9700 destroyed Nvidia's card. How cute is it that the PC Anand tested with was using RDRAM?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> makes me feel old
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cooling was so primitive back then. Ugh.
Click to expand...

I have 256 mb of RDRAM for sale if you want o speed up your system







( 1999 Dell XPS)


----------



## chew*

Interest peaked finally. Not 100% what i was hoping for but certainly a step in the right direction.

Looks like a 4phase vcore and 2 phase soc using IR 3556m fets.

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-AB350N-Gaming-WIFI-rev-10#kf


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Interest peaked finally. Not 100% what i was hoping for but certainly a step in the right direction.
> 
> Looks like a 4phase vcore and 2 phase soc using IR 3556m fets.
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-AB350N-Gaming-WIFI-rev-10#kf


Would u recommend this over the asrock itx boards?


----------



## chew*

I would say the quality of vrm is up there. The ability of it to dissipate heat is questionable at best.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Would u recommend this over the asrock itx boards?


I'd recommend anything over an AsRock ITX board since the company doesn't think a severe data corruption hyperthreading bug that Intel gave it code to fix in April is worth the effort to implement in a BIOS patch for a Skylake ITX board.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> I'd recommend anything over an AsRock ITX board since the company doesn't think a severe data corruption hyperthreading bug that Intel gave it code to fix in April is worth the effort to implement in a BIOS patch for a Skylake ITX board.


Well TBH i didn't even know the gigabyte board existed. The x370 itx asrock board is like $70 cad more than the b350 variant, and since x370 is mostly useless for itx the only advantage it seems that it actually has is that the b350 board has a half cm of "heat transfer" foam between the heatsink and the vrm's. ASrock seems to be doing weird stuff with its boards; I'm fairly certain they EOL'd my k4 in favor of the gaming X... i just thank gahd they at least gave the 1.0.0.6 agesa bios update for it.

reeeeally leaning towards the gigabyte.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> I'd recommend anything over an AsRock ITX board since the company doesn't think a severe data corruption hyperthreading bug that Intel gave it code to fix in April is worth the effort to implement in a BIOS patch for a Skylake ITX board.


By that logic I should not buy ANY board. All of the manufacturers have done something like this at one point or another.

Gigabyte on Socket A/AM3, Asrock on Skylake, Asus on AM2, MSI on AM2/AM3, etc. Don't try to feed me a line of bull about how only one manufacturer does these kinds of things.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> I'd recommend anything over an AsRock ITX board since the company doesn't think a severe data corruption hyperthreading bug that Intel gave it code to fix in April is worth the effort to implement in a BIOS patch for a Skylake ITX board.
> 
> 
> 
> By that logic I should not buy ANY board. All of the manufacturers have done something like this at one point or another.
> 
> Gigabyte on Socket A/AM3, Asrock on Skylake, Asus on AM2, MSI on AM2/AM3, etc. Don't try to feed me a line of bull about how only one manufacturer does these kinds of things.
Click to expand...

AGREED.

They ALL do it to a certain extent so why all the doom and gloom here? I still buy Asrock, Asus and MSI simply because they all have worked with the cpu's I purchased for them in the past.

Just don't go all negative because you need to save that, for far more important things like corrupt Governments pushing for War and ripping certain people off with dubious taxes.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> By that logic I should not buy ANY board. All of the manufacturers have done something like this at one point or another.
> 
> Gigabyte on Socket A/AM3, Asrock on Skylake, Asus on AM2, MSI on AM2/AM3, etc. Don't try to feed me a line of bull about how only one manufacturer does these kinds of things.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> AGREED.
> 
> They ALL do it to a certain extent so why all the doom and gloom here? I still buy Asrock, Asus and MSI simply because they all have worked with the cpu's I purchased for them in the past.
> 
> Just don't go all negative because you need to save that, for far more important things like corrupt Governments pushing for War and ripping certain people off with dubious taxes.


Faulty logic.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Faulty logic.


Actually your logic is flawed, you are excluding data because it opposes or disagrees with your point.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Actually your logic is flawed, you are excluding data because it opposes or disagrees with your point.


No, it's not flawed. You used a fallacy:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> By that logic I should not buy ANY board. All of the manufacturers have done something like this at one point or another.


That is a fallacy.

By actual logic, board makers need to support boards adequately - like when hyperthreading has to be disabled because of a crash/corruption bug in a processor and the processor maker releases microcode to update BIOS with. "One point or another" is a complete red herring. "All of the others" is the tu quoque fallacy.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Gigabyte on Socket A/AM3, Asrock on Skylake, Asus on AM2, MSI on AM2/AM3, etc. Don't try to feed me a line of bull about how only one manufacturer does these kinds of things.


This is called the tu quoque fallacy.

And, no, I'm not going to waste time on this debate because there's nothing to debate until you decide to respond to my original post without fallacies and red herrings. Consider this my last post on the subject here. I'm not interested in arguing with someone about whether or not water is wet.

I expect people here to do better than trot out a series of fallacies and irrelevancies when someone justly criticizes poor-quality support from a vendor.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> No, it's not flawed. You used a fallacy:
> That is a fallacy.
> 
> By actual logic, board makers need to support boards adequately - like when hyperthreading has to be disabled because of a crash/corruption bug in a processor and the processor maker releases microcode to update BIOS with. "One point or another" is a complete red herring. "All of the others" is the tu quoque fallacy.
> This is called the tu quoque fallacy.
> 
> And, no, I'm not going to waste time on this debate because there's nothing to debate until you decide to respond to my original post without fallacies and red herrings. Consider this my last post on the subject here. I'm not interested in arguing with someone about whether or not water is wet.
> 
> I expect people here to do better than trot out a series of fallacies and irrelevancies when someone justly criticizes poor-quality support from a vendor.


If you want to break things down, your initial argument could be seen as a hasty generalization or an appeal to fear. Also, I'm not making claims about your past, I'm bringing up data from the past that is relevant to the initial statement (which is not morally derived or questioning your past actions).

There is no red herring either, unless I am only allowed to argue about HT, data corruption, and Asrock. In reality you made a statement about the software team that is supporting the board, ergo any evidence about any vendors software support can be related to your claim.

You are now attacking me instead of the data or the argument anymore by incorrectly applying fallacies to my arguments in order to bring my character into question. I'm pretty sure there is a fallacy for that too.

Show me your data on how Asrock has an empirically worse track record than any other board manufacturer. Back your claim up or shut up.


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> He's said the same thing several times in Ryzen threads, ostensibly to troll. It's not very funny, but I admire his persistence.


I am merely trying to warn anyone that is looking to buy a Ryzen or Threadripper. No matter how good the CPU's are they will always be power draw limited by the VRM's.

Why did AMD remove them? I have yet to understand. Perhaps that is the only way to manufacture that many chips onto one motherboard.

Better safe than sorry IMO and buy Intel.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> I am merely trying to warn anyone that is looking to buy a Ryzen or Threadripper. No matter how good the CPU's are they will always be power draw limited by the VRM's.
> 
> Why did AMD remove them? I have yet to understand. Perhaps that is the only way to manufacture that many chips onto one motherboard.
> 
> Better safe than sorry IMO and buy Intel.


You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation. 5/10 meh troll.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If you want to break things down, your initial argument could be seen as a hasty generalization or an appeal to fear. Also, I'm not making claims about your past, I'm bringing up data from the past that is relevant to the initial statement (which is not morally derived or questioning your past actions).
> 
> There is no red herring either, unless I am only allowed to argue about HT, data corruption, and Asrock. In reality you made a statement about the software team that is supporting the board, ergo any evidence about any vendors software support can be related to your claim.
> 
> You are now attacking me instead of the data or the argument anymore by incorrectly applying fallacies to my arguments in order to bring my character into question. I'm pretty sure there is a fallacy for that too.
> 
> Show me your data on how Asrock has an empirically worse track record than any other board manufacturer. Back your claim up or shut up.


What's even more important its not just Asrock.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> What's even more important its not just Asrock.


Yep. You cant just say 'Asrock is bad, buy something else' without pointing to an alternative, and there is no alternative from a company that hasn't had unresolved problems on one product or another.

Perhaps if they had a board for AM4 with zero updates since day one you could say that it may be a problem, but that is not the case.


----------



## chew*

Bios for 170 or whatever intel asrock boards are in validation stage.

That means they have already been working on it for awhile...

That was the reply so there is your answer.


----------



## AlphaC

http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1066229540.html



Ryzen 7 @ 4GHz on B350 STRIX not advised
(1.44V was applied however)

MSI Xpower (1.407V , and 1.375V allows for normal temp):



Spoiler: 1.375V for comparison






http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1064996572.html

MSi Pro Carbon with 1400RPM fan

http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065142147.html

GB K7


http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065363202.html

GB G5:


http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065162814.html

Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro with more voltage (1.423V) than rest of those

http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065372205.html

CH VI Hero (3.9GHz , 1.35V)


http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1064690424.html


----------



## br0da

So the B350 Strix might be worse than the B350-Plus when it comes to OC?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> So the B350 Strix might be worse than the B350-Plus when it comes to OC?


Well the heatsinks are more chunk style.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Well the heatsinks are more chunk style.


Man these manufactures had 20+ years of making motherboards and easily 15 years of making higher demanding(CPU's that need 95+ watts) ones and they still have no clue on how to make a heat-sink over a VRM lol.

At this point i think a 10 year old can understand how a heat-sink works with fins vs a chunk of metal.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> So the B350 Strix might be worse than the B350-Plus when it comes to OC?


its a safer bet that the flir imaging was done with crummy equipment operatered by some who has no idea what they are doing.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Yep. You cant just say 'Asrock is bad, buy something else' without pointing to an alternative, and there is no alternative from a company that hasn't had unresolved problems on one product or another.


A fallacy a day keeps reality away.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If you want to break things down, your initial argument could be seen as a hasty generalization or an appeal to fear.


Yes, if you're incompetent or trolling.

edit: or astroturfing for AsRock or another board maker that has inadequate support


----------



## polkfan

Well guys i guess i don't have a video lol but i think the msi tomahawk has a shut down feature for VRM temps.

Its cutting point seems to be 95-100C i was measuring it myself when trying to set the quietest profile for my fans and running Prime 95 small FFTs. All what happens is a black screen my CPU was only at 72C and i doubt it was over that temp. BTW it took less then 6min under Prime95 to cause that.

1.275V 3.8Ghz was the settings.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> A fallacy a day keeps reality away.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Yes, if you're incompetent or trolling.
> 
> edit: or astroturfing for AsRock or another board maker that has inadequate support


You still have yet to provide any statistics on user support to back up your claim. Keep on with the straw men and character attacks though, each one is a fallacy on your part.

Show data to back up your argument. If you can't, your statement holds no water and is of no use to anyone.

Also, learn what fallacies actually are rather than trying to shoehorn every statement into one. Your misuse of fallacies to construct personal attacks just puts your position that much deeper in the hole.

And why not quote the whole thing instead of pulling things out to destroy context? Oh right, that would not fit with constructing personal attacks or self elevation. Weren't you done with this, or were you lying? If its the latter, how can anyone trust anything you say?


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> You still have yet to provide any statistics on user support to back up your claim. Keep on with the straw men and character attacks though, each one is a fallacy on your part.
> 
> Show data to back up your argument. If you can't, your statement holds no water and is of no use to anyone.
> 
> Also, learn what fallacies actually are rather than trying to shoehorn every statement into one. Your misuse of fallacies to construct personal attacks just puts your position that much deeper in the hole.
> 
> And why not quote the whole thing instead of pulling things out to destroy context? Oh right, that would not fit with constructing personal attacks or self elevation. Weren't you done with this, or were you lying? If its the latter, how can anyone trust anything you say?


Even Asrock criticized AMD for removing the VRM on their motherboard designs. Explains the lack of quality focused on their motherboards.


----------



## Nighthog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> Well guys i guess i don't have a video lol but i think the msi tomahawk has a shut down feature for VRM temps.
> 
> Its cutting point seems to be 95-100C i was measuring it myself when trying to set the quietest profile for my fans and running Prime 95 small FFTs. All what happens is a black screen my CPU was only at 72C and i doubt it was over that temp. BTW it took less then 6min under Prime95 to cause that.
> 
> 1.275V 3.8Ghz was the settings.


Are you sure it was not just too low voltage for your cpu overclock? That behaviour seems awfully similar to when I have too little voltage.


----------



## Radical Vision

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1066229540.html
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 7 @ 4GHz on B350 STRIX not advised
> (1.44V was applied however)


Seems all speak how bad is the K7 heatsink, while is only 5-10c more worse then other boards, seems after all Gigabyte did great job on the board even with this small heatsink....

I did add x2 powerful server fans on the VRM and one (from AM2 box cooler) on the chipset, now K7 VRM cooling is great...

Before

VRM 46-52c - light work
Chipset 44-47c - light work

Now

VRM 40-42 - light work
Chipset 37-40 - light work

All this is with 30% fans in the case (be quiet fans are on full speed 1000RPM, rest are under 1000 meaning is very quiet). All this on 3.9GHz 1.44v + LLC extreme, VSOC 1.2v...
No tests on max load for now, but im absolutely sure it will be way better then before, as last i remember on OCCT with this voltage and speed on CPU VRMs did hit 80+, now i don`t expect more then 60c...
And no pictures i did put the fans really fast....


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Seems all speak how bad is the K7 heatsink, while is only 5-10c more worse then other boards, seems after all Gigabyte did great job on the board even with this small heatsink....
> 
> I did add x2 powerful server fans on the VRM and one (from AM2 box cooler) on the chipset, now K7 VRM cooling is great...
> 
> Before
> 
> VRM 46-52c - light work
> Chipset 44-47c - light work
> 
> Now
> 
> VRM 40-42 - light work
> Chipset 37-40 - light work
> 
> All this is with 30% fans in the case (be quiet fans are on full speed 1000RPM, rest are under 1000 meaning is very quiet). All this on 3.9GHz 1.44v + LLC extreme, VSOC 1.2v...
> No tests on max load for now, but im absolutely sure it will be way better then before, as last i remember on OCCT with this voltage and speed on CPU VRMs did hit 80+, now i don`t expect more then 60c...
> And no pictures i did put the fans really fast....


95-75= 10C????
98-75 = 10C????









More like 20-23 degrees Celsius...

Also Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro is using more voltage.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Radical Vision*
> 
> Seems all speak how bad is the K7 heatsink, while is only 5-10c more worse then other boards, seems after all Gigabyte did great job on the board even with this small heatsink....
> 
> I did add x2 powerful server fans on the VRM and one (from AM2 box cooler) on the chipset, now K7 VRM cooling is great...
> 
> Before
> 
> VRM 46-52c - light work
> Chipset 44-47c - light work
> 
> Now
> 
> VRM 40-42 - light work
> Chipset 37-40 - light work
> 
> All this is with 30% fans in the case (be quiet fans are on full speed 1000RPM, rest are under 1000 meaning is very quiet). All this on 3.9GHz 1.44v + LLC extreme, VSOC 1.2v...
> No tests on max load for now, but im absolutely sure it will be way better then before, as last i remember on OCCT with this voltage and speed on CPU VRMs did hit 80+, now i don`t expect more then 60c...
> And no pictures i did put the fans really fast....
> 
> 
> 
> 95-75= 10C????
> 98-75 = 10C????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More like 20-23 degrees Celsius...
> 
> Also Asrock X370 Fatal1ty Pro is using more voltage.
Click to expand...

Measured by a cell phone attachment , held at varying angles under different lighting, operated by someone that hasn't a clue how to interpret flir imaging - nearly worthless tbh.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Measured by a cell phone attachment , held at varying angles under different lighting, operated by someone that hasn't a clue how to interpret flir imaging - nearly worthless tbh.


Isn't that what you wrote about other reviews with FLIR imaging as well?

I'm just providing more datapoints.









edit: AFAIK you would need to know the emissivity of the item to get a truly accurate measurement (I haven't seen anyone use calibration tape). Thermal camera may be angled to reduce reflection; real hot spot is a smooth pattern while a reflection isn't. If it was reflection the differing angle of the camera would not output the same temperature.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Measured by a cell phone attachment , held at varying angles under different lighting, operated by someone that hasn't a clue how to interpret flir imaging - nearly worthless tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't that what you wrote about other reviews with FLIR imaging as well?
> 
> I'm just providing more datapoints.
Click to expand...

They also were done using a cell phone attachement - basically a toy.

I understand why the reviewers use them - " cool pictures!" but knowing what I do I cringe when I see them.

Even the $10000 + Fluke we use at work can provide very mis-leading images .


----------



## Radical Vision

And on K7 i did use (before putting the VRM fans) 1.44 Vcore + 1.2 Vsoc + LLC Extreme, that end up little above 1.5v VRM temp was 80+ on this setup, but i have great air cooling in my case, so even with high voltage i don`t see 90c+ on VRM...


----------



## chew*

Honestly they should just plasti dip back of board flat black then flir it. Sure it might increase temps a little....if all boards are done same way it wont skew results.

Maybe a jig to hold the board at a fixed distance as well. Distance matters.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Honestly they should just plasti dip back of board flat black then flir it. Sure it might increase temps a little....if all boards are done same way it wont skew results.
> 
> Maybe a jig to hold the board at a fixed distance as well. Distance matters.


Flir camera's are great at showing thermal anomalies i.e. the hottest/coolest spot in a given area ( provided emissivity etc. are accounted for) but showing actual temps can be a crapshoot .

I've seen images where the handle on the panel cover read hotter than the switchgear etc inside because It was reflecting the light from an overhead fixture that had an HID bulb







.


----------



## chew*

Lol. I like my IR handheld. Might not be accurate...the one i brought from shop that was brandy new is actually at the max deviation.

+/- 2-4F. Mine is -4F off.

Higher temp range = less accuracy sadly.

But i know this and can just state it when using it.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Lol. I like my IR handheld. Might not be accurate...the one i brought from shop that was brandy new is actually at the max deviation.
> 
> +/- 2-4F. Mine is -4F off.
> 
> Higher temp range = less accuracy sadly.
> 
> But i know this and can just state it when using it.


That's a huge part of it, you understand the equipment you are using.

To be honest , I have more trust in the numbers I get from the Raynger than our thermal imaging camera.

That said , the camera is great for finding trouble quickly within a breaker panel etc.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> Are you sure it was not just too low voltage for your cpu overclock? That behaviour seems awfully similar to when I have too little voltage.


Always possible i guess i heard once the CPU starts to heat-up it could take more voltage for a stable OC but i ran Prime95 blend for 4 hours when i had VRM temps under control and that test for just 5min lol.


----------



## gtbtk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> There are gains in performance from running dual rank alone. A single sided set gets @ 3200 roughly 50k read 49k write 46k copy. @ 3333 it jumps to 52k R 51k W 48k C and 3466 should be coming in around 54k R 52k W 49-50k C.
> 
> There are other factors as well. Some programs just benefit from shear speed alone...some require speed + performance ( tighter timings )
> 
> The reality is you should run what is reliable however not ragged edge stability for a reliable system.
> 
> Ryzen tends to perform better in my experience the more stable you are.
> 
> 
> 
> Benchmark at 3066mhz 15-15-15-15-35 (best of 3 runs)
> 
> 
> Benchmak at 2933mhz 15-17-17-17-35
> 
> 
> Latency at 2933 is around 82ns compared to 77ns at 3066 yet I got a higher score at 2933
> 
> I couldn't stay at 3066 either, it failed Aida64 stress test and I booted twice then it didn't boot again.
> 
> Could not go to 3200 or higher at all no matter the voltage (1.45v) or timings (tried from 15-15-15-15-35 up to 24-24-24-24-48)
> 
> Tried with ProDT at 68.8ohm and 60ohm
> Tried setting 2T and Geardown disabled.
> 
> No way to go higher than 3066 unstable.
> 
> I guess I give up at this point. Those failed POST and reboot times are killing me.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you have sorted this out yet or not but it appears that you have Performance Bias enabled in the UEFI on the 3066 Aida64 test but have Performance Bias setting disabled on the 2933. Possibly it is the auto setting randomly turning it on and off to confuse you.

I think that the general consensus is to disable that setting in the UEFI so that the the only thing you are changing is the memory timings


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gtbtk*
> 
> I don't know if you have sorted this out yet or not but it appears that you have Performance Bias enabled in the UEFI on the 3066 Aida64 test but have Performance Bias setting disabled on the 2933. Possibly it is the auto setting randomly turning it on and off to confuse you.
> 
> I think that the general consensus is to disable that setting in the UEFI so that the the only thing you are changing is the memory timings


If by bias you mean CB15 bias and so. Yes, but I always keep it on. (kept it on at all tests)

Something tells me if I get better CB performance I will get better realtime performance for audio.

RAM speed is not critical when it comes to that, CPU is.

Right now I just gave up on RAM OC...seems like it cannot go above rated speed without running into instability. I just wanted to find out if I could get some extra infinity fabric speed by OCing the RAM. But really...I'm more than happy with the realtime audio performance on this machine.

I was considering a threadripper for next year, but honestly I don't think I need more juice for several years.


----------



## gupsterg

I tested CB15 bias and in reality for all applications it doesn't give the benefit as true clock bump gives.

For example 3.9GHz gives me score ~1750 (without bias). I lower clock to 3.8GHz and enable bias, so I have CB15 again at same score. I do 3x runs of 3DM FS and SD, the phyics and combined scores do not match 3.9GHz without bias. They are as 3.8GHz without bias.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> I tested CB15 bias and in reality for all applications it doesn't give the benefit as true clock bump gives.
> 
> For example 3.9GHz gives me score ~1750 (without bias). I lower clock to 3.8GHz and enable bias, so I have CB15 again at same score. I do 3x runs of 3DM FS and SD, the phyics and combined scores do not match 3.9GHz without bias. They are as 3.8GHz without bias.


Yeah I guess is more of a placebo thing for me.

Note that realtime audio is much more CPU intensive (as CB is) than a game.


----------



## st0neh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Yeah I guess is more of a placebo thing for me.
> 
> Note that realtime audio is much more CPU intensive (as CB is) than a game.


How have you been doing on AM4 with regards to DPC latency?


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st0neh*
> 
> How have you been doing on AM4 with regards to DPC latency?


Very good. No warnings after disabling my PCIe Wifi card.

Not that it caused any dropouts either when on.

I tried playing a bunch of YT videos, running OBS and playing on FL studio and there were no dropouts at 256 samples on a project using 50% CPU. All while monitoring with DPC monitor.


----------



## ericorg87

I'm considering selling my Gigabyte AB350 for a better x370 board as I with the VRM overheating it is pretty much useless for me.

what is the cheapest x370 with decent VRM that won't overheat at 3.8ghz 1.375v stress use? (X264 encode)?
I was thinking about a Asrock x370 SLI but I was told they are also garbage and only 4x2 with cheap Taiwanese MOS. In my country taxes makes these boards really expensive so a Taichi or a CH6 is already too expensive for me right now.


----------



## Radical Vision

ASUS Prime Pro or Gigabyte Aorus 5, the Aorus have small heatsink, so a fan will help there, but the VRM components are high quality and is 6+4...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ericorg87*
> 
> I'm considering selling my Gigabyte AB350 for a better x370 board as I with the VRM overheating it is pretty much useless for me.
> 
> what is the cheapest x370 with decent VRM that won't overheat at 3.8ghz 1.375v stress use? (X264 encode)?
> I was thinking about a Asrock x370 SLI but I was told they are also garbage and only 4x2 with cheap Taiwanese MOS. In my country taxes makes these boards really expensive so a Taichi or a CH6 is already too expensive for me right now.


ASUS Prime Pro and Strix X370-F Gaming, Biostar X370 GT7, Gigabyte AB350N-Gaming Wifi, and ASRock AB350 Gaming-ITX and Fatal1ty X370 Gaming-ITX/ac are all good options at a lower price. Asus Strix and Biostar GT7 would be the top-tier VRM in this list, followed by the Prime Pro, ASRock ITX boards, and then the Giga ITX.


----------



## AlphaC

Some results found on a German site

https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/photos/16001/
Just in case anyone decided to buy a Biostar GT5 for whatever reason...

Article https://www.hardwareinside.de/biostar-racing-x370gt5-im-test-25531/5/
Quote:


> We have now raised the clock to 3.9 gigahertz and have a voltage of 1.276 volts. This means that we are already crossing the 100 ° C limit at the Mainboard Sensor. It should however be noted that the maximum temperature can reach 150 ° C. The more heat the MOSFET becomes, the more inefficient it becomes. This has the consequence that the more current is needed and the power supply becomes more unstable. The CPU MOSFET cooler is 76.6 ° Celsius warm.


Same reviewer on CH VI Hero ... 46 degrees @ 1.4V

Article https://www.hardwareinside.de/asus-rog-crosshair-vi-hero-im-test-25335/4/
https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/albums/asus-rog-crosshair-vi-hero.622/
Quote:


> Of course we also measure the temperatures of the MOSFET / converter coolers during this test, we use four profiles. The normal settings, which runs the CPU on 3.5Ghz (1.194 Volt) and additionally with 3.8GHz, 3.9GHz and 4GHz. The surface temperature of the converter coolers is measured with an infrared temperature meter with full utilization of the CPU cores.
> We see that even with 4 gigahertz and a voltage of 1.4 Volt the MOSFET coolers do not reach 50 ° Celsius. This is very exemplary and we have little to worry about the longevity and stability of the converters at overclocking.


X370 Pro Carbon ... about 70 degrees at 1.35V

https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/photos/15564/
Quote:


> To test how warm the MOSFETs are, I have run with different OC profiles each 15 minutes Prime95. Here I have the previously mentioned 4GHz and various everyday OC settings for the test. The temperatures of the MOSFET I could read out with HW monitor and with the help of an infrared temperature measuring device I measured the MOSFET cooler temperature. Here it turned out that the MOSFET even at 4 GHz with 1.394 volts only 91 ° C warm. It should be noted here that water cooling was used here and that this did not provide an active airflow over the MOSFET coolers. The cooler, which cools the MOSFETs responsible for the CPU voltage, was thereby 75.6 ° C warm. The voltages shown in the diagram correspond to the voltage sensor of the mainboard and do not reflect the actual CPU voltage, which is somewhat higher or lower depending on the motherboard. With the Gaming Pro Carbon, more voltage was displayed than real systems. Worse would be the opposite. If, for example, according to the mainboard 1.45 Volt are displayed, but 1.55 volts. The CPU sensor was always about 0.08V below the mainboard sensor.


https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/threads/review-des-msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon.4635/

Asrock X370 K4

https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/albums/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4.574/
https://www.hardwareinside.de/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-im-test-24804/5/
"Finally, we test how warm the MOSFET coolers with 1.26 V, 1.25 V, 1.35 V and 1.2 V, and the required voltage for 4GHz. To do this we measure with an infrared temperature measuring device and look at the temperatures of the mainboard sensors. The ASRock motherboard displays the MOSFET temperatures with the sensor VRM in the HW monitor. This shows that the MOSFET temperature at 86 ° C is still in the green range even at 1.456 volts."
^ not sure why the chart reads 60...

B350 Tomahawk struggling at 1.35V , *87* degrees C

https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/albums/msi-b350-tomahawk.590/
https://www.hardwareinside.de/msi-b350-tomahawk-im-test-25145/5/
Quote:


> The stability is tested with Prime95 for 15 minutes, while we also measure the heat sinks with an infrared temperature measuring device, which cool the MOSFETs for the CPU and the storage voltage supply. We start with the attempt to reach 4000Mhz stable, since we know the necessary voltage from our test with other mainboards, we set 1.425 volts. After Prime95 crashes, we increase the voltage to 1.44 Volt and restart the stability test again, we monitor the MOSFET sensor with the hardware monitor. After 12 minutes we see a critical value of 124 ° C. To avoid it being a measurement error, we measure the temperature of the cooler and this is 96.6 degrees Celsius. Shortly thereafter Prime95 also shows an error. It is fixed that the set voltage of 1.44 volts is the limit, although the maximum temperature of the MOSFET is indicated at 150 ° C. According to AMD, 1,425 volts is the maximum which should be set, in order not to shorten the life of the processor. We start a new test with 3900 Megahertz and a voltage of 1.35v. Now the temperature is slightly lower at 109 ° Celsius. With 1.25 volts and a frequency of 3.8 gigahertz we reach a significantly better temperature of 86 ° C and at 1.15v with a clock frequency of 3.65 GHz harmless 73 ° C. It should also be noted that the read-out values for CPU-Z do not ask the sensor of the CPU, but the mainboard. There may be differences. So the adjusted 1.44 Volt according to CPU sensor were only 1.419v. Depending on the mainboard, however, it could be that it shows less voltage in CPU-Z, but significantly more! The MOSFETs for the CPU power supply are located under the vertical radiator and under the horizontal radiator the MOSFETs are located for the working memory voltage supply.


Testing only 15 minutes of Prime95... but the result is illustrative how quick heatsinks overloaded with heat


----------



## KarathKasun

The charts are the heatsink temp, not the diode temps. Diode temps can be substantially higher than the heatsinks.

87c on the Tomahawk heatsink is likely 100c+ at the board.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> The charts are the heatsink temp, not the diode temps. Diode temps can be substantially higher than the heatsinks.
> 
> 87c on the Tomahawk heatsink is likely 100c+ at the board.


It's 120+ degrees C at 4GHz /1.44V per hwinfo (B350 Tomahawk)



and ~ 87 degrees C at 1.256V (B350 Tomahawk)


Biostar GT5 hits 105 degrees C at ~ 1.276 / 39x multi


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Some results found on a German site
> 
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/photos/16001/
> Just in case anyone decided to buy a Biostar GT5 for whatever reason...
> 
> Article https://www.hardwareinside.de/biostar-racing-x370gt5-im-test-25531/5/
> Same reviewer on CH VI Hero ... 46 degrees @ 1.4V
> 
> Article https://www.hardwareinside.de/asus-rog-crosshair-vi-hero-im-test-25335/4/
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/albums/asus-rog-crosshair-vi-hero.622/
> X370 Pro Carbon ... about 70 degrees at 1.35V
> 
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/photos/15564/
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/threads/review-des-msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon.4635/
> 
> Asrock X370 K4
> 
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/albums/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4.574/
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/asrock-fatal1ty-x370-gaming-k4-im-test-24804/5/
> "Finally, we test how warm the MOSFET coolers with 1.26 V, 1.25 V, 1.35 V and 1.2 V, and the required voltage for 4GHz. To do this we measure with an infrared temperature measuring device and look at the temperatures of the mainboard sensors. The ASRock motherboard displays the MOSFET temperatures with the sensor VRM in the HW monitor. This shows that the MOSFET temperature at 86 ° C is still in the green range even at 1.456 volts."
> ^ not sure why the chart reads 60...
> 
> B350 Tomahawk struggling at 1.35V , *87* degrees C
> 
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/community/gallery/albums/msi-b350-tomahawk.590/
> https://www.hardwareinside.de/msi-b350-tomahawk-im-test-25145/5/
> Testing only 15 minutes of Prime95... but the result is illustrative how quick heatsinks overloaded with heat


Very good info in that and yeah that is for sure the temps i'm seeing while doing a prime 95 test at those voltages. Also I laugh at the people who say what do you expect well I look on newegg on my ryzen 1700 and guess what Amd has listed under "overview" yeah my Tomahawk haha.


----------



## st3roids1

So taichi seems the best still , what about the x370 prof gaming i havent seen much info about it , is it better or worse than taichi ?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> So taichi seems the best still , what about the x370 prof gaming i havent seen much info about it , is it better or worse than taichi ?


It's the same thing but with 5Gbps LAN, power/reset button, and a useless plastic cover that increases temperatures.


----------



## st3roids1

deleted : nvm found the answer i was after i think ill go with the hero maybe the wifi version(i need wifi ) because i like the software that comes with it better than ther asrock one and in the new pc i wont planning to overclock so having a tad worse vrm wont affect me at all


----------



## chew*

Neither vrm in either board will limit you in the least. You will be fine.


----------



## st0neh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's the same thing but with 5Gbps LAN, power/reset button, and a useless plastic cover that increases temperatures.


It's not useless if it has...LEDs! ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)


----------



## xSpartan

Hey guys, what do u think about mini itx motherboards? Which is the best between the gigabyte ab350 gaming itx, asrock b350 gaming or b350gtn on vrm side?


----------



## cooljaguar

Damn, those VRM temps are rough.. what voltages are safe on the 1600? I have the B350M Mortar.

I was planning on a 4GHz OC once I got a proper cooler on this thing, but now I'm wondering if I should even bother.


----------



## chew*

@ Broda


----------



## br0da

Awesome, thank you very much!


----------



## st3roids1

what about other features , which has the best audio for instance , or better quality overall , more features etc.

Maybe someone should make a post like that


----------



## chew*

We discuss quality of vrms.

Board quality is tough and highly debatable topic

Components used can be an indicator but not the final say.

Features is a joke to an extent. Depends on what you feel deems it a feature and what the vendor calls a feature.

A heatsink for example that actually dissipates heat could be called a feature....but it should dissipate heat to begin with...and if it did not on prior models...then i call that a flaw.

None of us imo are qualified to lay claim to what has better "quality" sound as I doubt any of us have the required equipment to measure that.


----------



## st3roids1

regardless this post is golden , i link it to a reddit post because there many people who are so clueless and they disseminate misinformation over there


----------



## AlphaC

You can use rightmark audio analyzer to measure the audio , but it won't be a perfect way to measure it.

If audio is THAT important you shouldn't be using onboard audio. It's only about 2-4 square inches on a board when a sound card has many more components.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cooljaguar*
> 
> Damn, those VRM temps are rough.. what voltages are safe on the 1600? I have the B350M Mortar.
> 
> I was planning on a 4GHz OC once I got a proper cooler on this thing, but now I'm wondering if I should even bother.


1600 has a very low 3.2ghz stock frequency you could probably be safe at 1.3V during overclocks meaning you could get it to 3.7-3.8ghz just fine totally worth it. I'm currently at stock with my 1700 and then I just use MSI command center when I want to game and set voltages to 1.375V 3.95ghz.


----------



## cooljaguar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> 1600 has a very low 3.2ghz stock frequency you could probably be safe at 1.3V during overclocks meaning you could get it to 3.7-3.8ghz just fine totally worth it. I'm currently at stock with my 1700 and then I just use MSI command center when I want to game and set voltages to 1.375V 3.95ghz.


Thank you, I'll give 3.8ghz @ 1.3v a try!


----------



## chew*

Looks like he was on a slightly newer bios than I was on after we sorted some issues.

To sum up...overall great with a complaint about the wifi device used.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8309/asrock-x399-taichi-threadripper-tr4-motherboard-review/index.html


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Looks like he was on a slightly newer bios than I was on after we sorted some issues.
> 
> To sum up...overall great with a complaint about the wifi device used.
> 
> http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8309/asrock-x399-taichi-threadripper-tr4-motherboard-review/index.html


43C max heat man i hope Asrock keeps up the good work on their Taichi boards


----------



## chew*

Clocks/voltage used and testing used were vague.

43c seems a bit low for a hefty oc on a 16c imo.

I will put one from retail channel through the gauntlet soon.


----------



## br0da

Just in case you don't know, there is another thread dedicated to TR4.








http://www.overclock.net/t/1635296/amd-x399-socket-tr4-vrm-thread


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Just in case you don't know, there is another thread dedicated to TR4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1635296/amd-x399-socket-tr4-vrm-thread


Awsome. I am horrible at searching lol.


----------



## virpz

@br0da

ASRock's Fatal1ty! X370 ITX

6x SM7341EH for cpu

https://smallformfactor.net/reviews/motherboards/fatal1ty-asrocks-x370-ab350-gaming-itxac-motherboards-reviewed#The-Unboxing


----------



## br0da

Oh really interesting, hadn't expected different FETs on B350 and X370.







Thanks!


----------



## st3roids1

does taichi comes with any kind of software though like asus rog or prof gaming series?

i mean ok good vrm but apart that what?

Crappy wifi , mo rpg leds , average sound without sound software , no gaming apps , no oc software , im sorry but a top of the line motherboard that comes at a high price should have more


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> does taichi comes with any kind of software though like asus rog or prof gaming series?
> 
> i mean ok good vrm but apart that what?
> 
> Crappy wifi , mo rpg leds , average sound without sound software , no gaming apps , no oc software , im sorry but a top of the line motherboard that comes at a high price should have more


The Taichi has the best VRM overall, Dolby DTS ( Yes, surround through optical ), two m.2 slots and also the extra m.2 slot used with the wi-fi module.
Software like what ? oc software, gaming apps... who ever installs motherboard software ? Leds? Yes, the C6H is much better in that department, I personally could not care less as I have these disabled all the time.

Many people will agree that the X370 Taichi is hands down the best bang for the buck.


----------



## xSpartan

Hey guys, what about this? https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-GAMING-M7-ACK.html#productFeature-section

i hope they haven't used nikos mosfets even here.


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xSpartan*
> 
> Hey guys, what about this? https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-GAMING-M7-ACK.html#productFeature-section
> 
> i hope they haven't used nikos mosfets even here.


Typical dark cap and titanium choke marketing. No mention of fets.

2+2= 4 simple math not hard to figure out.


----------



## br0da

I'm pretty sure we'll find NIKOs on this board too, check out this picture from the MSI site:


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> I'm pretty sure we'll find NIKOs on this board too, check out this picture from the MSI site:


Dang !
NIKOs like fet arrangement and needs.
But then, 8 phase for the CPU ? Are the Nikos even capable of that ? What is the efficiency like? 70% at [email protected] ?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> I'm pretty sure we'll find NIKOs on this board too, check out this picture from the MSI site:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dang !
> NIKOs like fet arrangement and needs.
> But then, 8 phase for the CPU ? Are the Nikos even capable of that ? What is the efficiency like? 70% at [email protected] ?
Click to expand...

http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf

http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2016628133257-PK632BA_REV1.2_20160623.pdf

That ought to keep you entertained for a while







.

The numbers that really matter are 4175 mhz , 1.5V, and 50C


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2016628133257-PK632BA_REV1.2_20160623.pdf
> 
> That ought to keep you entertained for a while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The numbers that really matter are 4175 mhz , 1.5V, and 50C


Well, we are way past datasheets for these now, go back like 20 pages









Thing is that these NIKO's can't really do 8 phase without sub crap like efficiency. Judging by the size of the heatsink they are using with M7 ( like less than half the mass of the Titanium's VRM heatsink ) it is likely they are using top grade mosfets with the M7.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2016628133257-PK632BA_REV1.2_20160623.pdf
> 
> That ought to keep you entertained for a while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> The numbers that really matter are 4175 mhz , 1.5V, and 50C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, we are way past datasheets for these now, go back like 20 pages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is that these NIKO's can't really do 8 phase without sub crap like efficiency. Judging by the size of the heatsink they are using with M7 ( like less than half the mass of the Titanium's VRM heatsink ) it is likely they are using top grade mosfets with the M7.
Click to expand...

Not a huge concern of mine to begin with coming from FX but why is it that the Titanium was shown to be just as efficient or more so than other boards in the reviews?


----------



## virpz

Efficiency= it's thermal performance is bellow cheapier boards, even with the *gigantic* VRM heatsink it has. You are trying to deny the mosfets datasheets, physics and all the freaking serious reviews









By the way, we are still waiting on that video of you with unicorns dancing around your boards VRM... After all these months you still can't find your camera ?









Not a huge concerd of mine but how much is MSI paying you to play that game ?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Not a huge concern of mine to begin with coming from FX but why is it that the Titanium was shown to be just as efficient or more so than other boards in the reviews?


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Efficiency= it's thermal performance is bellow cheapier boards, even with the *gigantic* VRM heatsink it has. You are trying to deny the mosfets datasheets, physics and all the freaking serious reviews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, we are still waiting on that video of you with unicorns dancing around your boards VRM... After all these months you still can't find your camera ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not a huge concerd of mine but how much is MSI paying you to play that game ?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Not a huge concern of mine to begin with coming from FX but why is it that the Titanium was shown to be just as efficient or more so than other boards in the reviews?
Click to expand...

Not sure you can handle the truth .....


----------



## virpz

Wake me up once you land on planet earth.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Not sure you can handle the truth .....


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> Wake me up once you land on planet earth.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> Not sure you can handle the truth .....
Click to expand...

I was correct a long time ago... unworthy.


----------



## st3roids1

aparent
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> The Taichi has the best VRM overall, Dolby DTS ( Yes, surround through optical ), two m.2 slots and also the extra m.2 slot used with the wi-fi module.
> Software like what ? oc software, gaming apps... who ever installs motherboard software ? Leds? Yes, the C6H is much better in that department, I personally could not care less as I have these disabled all the time.
> 
> Many people will agree that the X370 Taichi is hands down the best bang for the buck.


well apparently not everyone , many legit reviewers have these complaints , this for instance https://youtu.be/U5IpXvOFtPU?t=2073

Btw you just validate my original post , that taichi has zero propriety software , it doesnt even have a proper manual. Maybe you dont care but i do

software is essential in todays top of the line motherboards


----------



## MaKeN

So taichi is the winner as i see...
sad
I love msi so much ,their bios makes me do that


----------



## virpz

Is this really OCN ?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> aparent
> well apparently not everyone , many legit reviewers have these complaints , this for instance https://youtu.be/U5IpXvOFtPU?t=2073
> 
> Btw you just validate my original post , that taichi has zero propriety software , it doesnt even have a proper manual ffs. Maybe you dont care but i do
> 
> software is essential in todays top of the line motherboards


Really? The last thing I want on my rig is software especially when in the past i never needed it ala rc blutooth/rog connect.

I do not want that crap on my system ever running in background.

Why would i when i can just open app on phone to see all parameters and even overclock my rig.

Software on pc = regression.

Lets try software in practice....try adjusting timespy cpu clock speed on the fly in game tests then lowering so it passes cpu tests...oh the app stops? Heh...works for me on my phone


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> aparent
> well apparently not everyone , many legit reviewers have these complaints , this for instance https://youtu.be/U5IpXvOFtPU?t=2073
> 
> Btw you just validate my original post , that taichi has zero propriety software , it doesnt even have a proper manual ffs. Maybe you dont care but i do
> 
> software is essential in todays top of the line motherboards


If you are getting bent out of shape over not having "ROG like" branding of free software available on the internet... you have a problem.


----------



## polkfan

The only time i look at the manual is for my front panel connectors, and if the board doesn't obviously show which 2 dimm slots to use first.

I guess i still have the manual however.

As for software, i guess MSI command center is ok i'd never use software to mess with my sound though and as long as i can download all the latest drivers off the manufactures site i'm good.

I actually hate having to use CAM software to control my AIO even :/

Ryzen master is pretty cool and easy to use hopefully Amd keeps it around.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I do not want that crap on my system ever running in background.


This man deserves a PRIZE for brilliance.

The biggest gripe in the world is in spending huge sums of money to buy hardware, that forces you to run software to give you any type of so-called performance.

If you can't use the actual piece of hardware without installing software time to look elsewhere. Never install software just so the hardware gets to run at some settings, it's like what Razer did to their once great Mouse line, of forcing everyone to install synapse bloat so it can follow and record all of your usage and transmit back to home base (much like Trojan 10).


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I do not want that crap on my system ever running in background.
> 
> 
> 
> This man deserves a PRIZE for brilliance.
> 
> The biggest gripe in the world is in spending huge sums of money to buy hardware, that forces you to run software to give you any type of so-called performance.
> 
> If you can't use the actual piece of hardware without installing software time to look elsewhere. Never install software just so the hardware gets to run at some settings, it's like what Razer did to their once great Mouse line, of forcing everyone to install synapse bloat so it can follow and record all of your usage and transmit back to home base (much like Trojan 10).
Click to expand...

A good percentage of the industrial builds ive been hired to do are because of this very reason.


----------



## st3roids1

hm ok ill bite , i dont use many of those programs my self only the sound ones usually but im gona try a taichi i guess and see how it goes.


----------



## st0neh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elrick*
> 
> This man deserves a PRIZE for brilliance.
> 
> The biggest gripe in the world is in spending huge sums of money to buy hardware, that forces you to run software to give you any type of so-called performance.
> 
> *If you can't use the actual piece of hardware without installing software time to look elsewhere.* Never install software just so the hardware gets to run at some settings, it's like what Razer did to their once great Mouse line, of forcing everyone to install synapse bloat so it can follow and record all of your usage and transmit back to home base (much like Trojan 10).


What's it like using a computer without drivers?


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st0neh*
> 
> What's it like using a computer without drivers?


Drivers is one thing...needing software period or it will not work is another thing entirely.

I have an old nostromo...required a driver only....i have a tartarus....requires software or to bad...you can't use it.


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *st0neh*
> 
> What's it like using a computer without drivers?
> 
> 
> 
> Drivers is one thing...needing software period or it will not work is another thing entirely.
> 
> I have an old nostromo...required a driver only....i have a tartarus....requires software or to bad...you can't use it.
Click to expand...

Love my G13 - but not because of gaming.
We aren't allowed to have our industrial control workstations on a network with web access ( outside control of our processes would be bad), so we have to migrate production data manually to our web accessible business machines typically as batches are completed as close to real time as possible. The information has to be entered into several spreadsheets/systems - recording macros to do that on the G13 probably saves me an hour or so a shift during peak production in one of our facilities.


----------



## st0neh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Drivers is one thing...needing software period or it will not work is another thing entirely.
> 
> I have an old nostromo...required a driver only....i have a tartarus....requires software or to bad...you can't use it.


That's the thing though, you can use most any piece of hardware without the drivers or software, you just can't use all the features.


----------



## chew*

Not with razer...and some of these latest and greatest vgas...you can run with a driver...but without the software it will not work the way its "rated" to.


----------



## sydefekt

I bought the Crosshair VI Extreme for my custom loop rebuild. Here are my VRM photos:









And according to user JOE711 from the ROG forums:
1. PCB layer upgrade from 6 layers to 8 layers, it will cool down the whole system and make mobo more stable.
2. 8 PINS CPU EATX & 16 PINS EATXPOWER were upgraded to solid metal pins which can carry higher current with lower heat.
3. Both M.2 support X4 PCIE GEN3, but they can only make SATA RAID. Due to the fact that AMD hasn't released the driver for PCIE RAID.
4. VRM driver IC has changed into combo IC with MOSFET, we internally have proved that thermal performance is better then.
5. Double Front USB 3.0 ports. (moving two USB3.0 to the front side)
6. FRONT EZ_PLUG can add more VGA Power.
7. WB_SENSOR which can support Water Block from bits power. (it include water in out checking and water leakage prevention)
8. Supper Audio Connector with LED light inside.
9. Wifi Lan card. (C6H also have the Wifi Lan Card version)
10. Addressable RGB LED support.
11. No need installed IO Shielding.
12. Stronger DIMM Memory Slot with metal in the middle of DIMM slot.


----------



## br0da

Are those IR3555 or IR3556 ICs?
The controller is an ASP1405I, right?
Doublers on the backside are 6x IR3599?


----------



## st3roids1

these days i was searching pcpartpicker for the final touches with my new build.

I came across pc build in reddit too ... man so many useing crap b350 motherboards for 8 core overclocking is unbelievable , they also believe that is the same thing a msi b350 vs an asrock taichi only difference is the sli ... go explain them that msi has **** 6 phase vrm of the lowest quality vs 16 the taichi has let laone the other differences


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> Are those IR3555 or IR3556 ICs?
> The controller is an ASP1405I, right?
> Doublers on the backside are 6x IR3599?


I assume the vrm IC is similar to the Hero 4+2 doubled. Yes the controller is ASP14051. Backside 4x IR3599.


----------



## br0da

I was curious about if those powIRstages are IR3556 or IR3555 parts.


----------



## chew*

It looks like a very very nice board.

Lack of rog connect is a deal breaker for me till they go back to it.


----------



## GotYaNoob

Heya! Can someone help me figure out if Asus ROG Strix B350-F Gaming has better VRMs than MSI B350 Krait Gaming?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Heya! Can someone help me figure out if Asus ROG Strix B350-F Gaming has better VRMs than MSI B350 Krait Gaming?


The B350 Krait is almost certainly using the same Nikos PK616BA + PK632BA parts as the rest of their range. They're fine, though their performance on the X370 xpower Titanium is helped immensely by the quality of the heatsink on that motherboard. Unfortunately, the Krait doesn't seem to have the same level of heatsink as the xpower. I also doubt that it'll feature the same phase design as the xpower, given that the rest of the range is variants of 4 and 4 x 2 on the CPU. I'm not sure if the B350 Krait will be 4 x 2; the x370 Krait is, so I'm not sure if MSI considers SLI capability enough differentiation for the two SKU's. Best case scenario it'll be using the same 4 x 2 scheme (which just means doubling up the components on the drivers) as the x370 Krait with the same PK616BA + PK632BA parts. It'd deliver enough power for a mild overclock, provided heat was controlled with good airflow across the board.

The B350-F Gaming uses the On Semi-type parts common to the majority of their range (4C09B + 4C06B) in a simple 4-phase design. Like the Krait, this isn't anything special. These parts in this design are not much different from the Nikos parts in such a basic scheme and would still need airflow attention if overclocking.

Nothing to write home about, in either case. I'd pick the one you prefer features-wise, they'll both want to tap out around the same volts as most other B350 boards on an eight-core.


----------



## GotYaNoob

Ok honestly i don't know much about specific VRMs, i know how they work and thas pretty much it..







I just want to know which board has better VRMs . X370 is out of my budget so im looking for the best B350 board i can find


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Ok honestly i don't know much about specific VRMs, i know how they work and thas pretty much it..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to know which board has better VRMs . X370 is out of my budget so im looking for the best B350 board i can find


The Asus Prime B350-Plus isn't bad, but from what I read the MSI B350 Pro Carbon is nice as well.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Ok honestly i don't know much about specific VRMs, i know how they work and thas pretty much it..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to know which board has better VRMs . X370 is out of my budget so im looking for the best B350 board i can find


That's what I said at the end. In a practical sense, they're pretty much the same and they're going to have very similar limitations.


----------



## GotYaNoob

So im just curious now, this is probbably gonna be a stupid question but does MSI B350 Krait have the same VRMs as MSI X370 Krait? To me they look exactly the same


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> So im just curious now, this is probbably gonna be a stupid question but does MSI B350 Krait have the same VRMs as MSI X370 Krait? To me they look exactly the same


Potentially. Can't confirm without seeing the board sans sinks, and br0da's excellent resource hasn't got any confirmation either. I'm assuming that it does when I say the boards will offer similar potential given that the price difference between the B350 and X370 Krait is minimal.


----------



## delerious

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> aparent
> well apparently not everyone , many legit reviewers have these complaints , this for instance https://youtu.be/U5IpXvOFtPU?t=2073
> 
> Btw you just validate my original post , that taichi has zero propriety software , it doesnt even have a proper manual. Maybe you dont care but i do
> 
> software is essential in todays top of the line motherboards


A quick check of the support web page for the board(s) you're interested in will usually have the manual for download among other things. I downloaded the Taichi manual back in April (80 pages). I see it's still available (ver 1.0 Jan. 2017).


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> I bought the Crosshair VI Extreme for my custom loop rebuild. Here are my VRM photos:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101982/width/350/height/700
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101983/width/350/height/700
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101984/width/350/height/700
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101985/width/350/height/700
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101986/width/350/height/700
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101987/width/350/height/700
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3101989/width/350/height/700
> 
> And according to user JOE711 from the ROG forums:
> 1. PCB layer upgrade from 6 layers to 8 layers, it will cool down the whole system and make mobo more stable.
> 2. 8 PINS CPU EATX & 16 PINS EATXPOWER were upgraded to solid metal pins which can carry higher current with lower heat.
> 3. Both M.2 support X4 PCIE GEN3, but they can only make SATA RAID. Due to the fact that AMD hasn't released the driver for PCIE RAID.
> 4. VRM driver IC has changed into combo IC with MOSFET, we internally have proved that thermal performance is better then.
> 5. Double Front USB 3.0 ports. (moving two USB3.0 to the front side)
> 6. FRONT EZ_PLUG can add more VGA Power.
> 7. WB_SENSOR which can support Water Block from bits power. (it include water in out checking and water leakage prevention)
> 8. Supper Audio Connector with LED light inside.
> 9. Wifi Lan card. (C6H also have the Wifi Lan Card version)
> 10. Addressable RGB LED support.
> 11. No need installed IO Shielding.
> 12. Stronger DIMM Memory Slot with metal in the middle of DIMM slot.


It's glorious. Possibly the only true high end board besides the X370 Fatal1ty Pro (Taichi is a cut down Fatal1ty Pro) but as far as extreme OCing the Fatal1ty Pro doesn't have LN2 mode or anything like that

Whether it is worth $350 is up for debate (i.e. $100 more the CH VI Hero) , but it is definitely a true high end board.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Ok honestly i don't know much about specific VRMs, i know how they work and thas pretty much it..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to know which board has better VRMs . X370 is out of my budget so im looking for the best B350 board i can find


Best B350 board is the MSI B350 Pro Carbon


----------



## polkfan

If going B350 just make sure you get a board with true 4 phase not 3X2 phase so one can control voltage a bit better. Asrock B350 pro 4 is having major issues with that.


----------



## MadOver

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's glorious. Possibly the only true high end board besides the X370 Fatal1ty Pro (Taichi is a cut down Fatal1ty Pro) but as far as extreme OCing the Fatal1ty Pro doesn't have LN2 mode or anything like that
> 
> Whether it is worth $350 is up for debate (i.e. $100 more the CH VI Hero) , but it is definitely a true high end board.
> Best B350 board is the MSI B350 Pro Carbon


Was thinking the Taichi was just the same as Fatal1ty but w out the 5Gbp Lan... where did u see this?


----------



## st3roids1

its the same without some software like soundblaster and missing power - reset buttons

O and has fewer led.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MadOver*
> 
> Was thinking the Taichi was just the same as Fatal1ty but w out the 5Gbp Lan... where did u see this?


Taichi is missing Power/Reset buttons + 5GBps LAN. It's a reasonably priced board with high end VRM and good audio.


----------



## chew*

Fwiw ln2 mode = higher pll higher sb...pci gen 1.

Thats it. Thats all it does.

Also fwiw...if you get a crappy cold chip...it does not matter...all the boards are drama.


----------



## br0da

ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Extreme Review @ XFastest


----------



## sydefekt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Extreme Review @ XFastest


Very comprehensive review. Thanks for sharing









I wish they did not put that serial # sticker on the 24pin. I'm going to cover that with a build logo


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's glorious. Possibly the only true high end board besides the X370 Fatal1ty Pro (Taichi is a cut down Fatal1ty Pro) but as far as extreme OCing the Fatal1ty Pro doesn't have LN2 mode or anything like that
> 
> Whether it is worth $350 is up for debate (i.e. $100 more the CH VI Hero) , but it is definitely a true high end board.
> Best B350 board is the MSI B350 Pro Carbon


Does the Crosshair 6 Extreme have IR3555 powerstages? I know they should be IR355x but not exact model


----------



## br0da

Yes the C6E has got IR3555 powIRstages, just take a look in the review linked above.

Edit: Another one: ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Extreme Review @ coolpc TW


----------



## sydefekt

Good to see more reviews. Ironically, the Extreme's backplate that is supposed to prevent bending, is hitting the screws on my MB tray and causing the MB to bend slightly. Does anybody have experience what happens if the backplate pushes into the pins? Will it short? I read on an older thread that the backplate material does not cause a short, but I am still wary.


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sydefekt*
> 
> Good to see more reviews. Ironically, the Extreme's backplate that is supposed to prevent bending, is hitting the screws on my MB tray and causing the MB to bend slightly. Does anybody have experience what happens if the backplate pushes into the pins? Will it short? I read on an older thread that the backplate material does not cause a short, but I am still wary.


Should be fine imo.

All PCBs have some sort of flex to them anyhow.


----------



## VRMfreak

Hey guys, i am counting VRM heat output on few AM4s and i am curious.
Doubling High-Side does halve Iout, does it halve Rds(on) as well?
Doubling low side does halve on Rds(on) right?
Thanks very much


----------



## xSpartan

TUF b350m plus

https://www.techpowerup.com/236652/asus-intros-tuf-b350m-plus-gaming-motherboard


----------



## spyshagg

How is the asus x370 Prime-pro rated in this regard?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> How is the asus x370 Prime-pro rated in this regard?


Actually very good. Used components are very similiar to crosshair 6 hero. Mosfets are NexFET CSD87350 by TI (40A, efficency 90% up to 25A current draw) and voltage controller ASP1405i which should be type of IR35201, it runs in 6+2 mode and SoC is doubled


----------



## spyshagg

nice

thanks!


----------



## br0da

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Doubling High-Side does halve Iout, does it halve Rds(on) as well?
> Doubling low side does halve on Rds(on) right?


It's your choice. Either you halve the current through every FET and use the normal RDS(on) value or you take the whole current drawn through the phase and halve the RDS(on). But you better don't mess those two methods up.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> It's your choice. Either you halve the current through every FET and use the normal RDS(on) value or you take the whole current drawn through the phase and halve the RDS(on). But you better don't mess those two methods up.


Amazing, thank you.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xSpartan*
> 
> TUF b350m plus
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/236652/asus-intros-tuf-b350m-plus-gaming-motherboard


Looks like marketing to me , we'll see. They should have at least heatsinked the SOC VRM.
Quote:


> The components that make up the VRM are of a very high grade, enough to warrant TUF branding.


Realtek RTL8111H LAN + Realtek ALC887 ...


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Looks like marketing to me , we'll see. They should have at least heatsinked the SOC VRM.
> Realtek RTL8111H LAN + Realtek ALC887 ...


Looks nice. If only they were paired by decent software.


----------



## VRMfreak

Guys how is it with the VRMs on the ASSRock X370s and B350s ? I mean, they can have both Niko and Sinopower setups (both get rekt by X370 Pro lul) but i cannot find the PZ0903BK spec sheet
It should have 1 high and 1 low fet per phase, the weirdo 8 phase with 6+2 phase IR35201 with 2 doubled up phases using IR3598.
Thanks


----------



## chew*

No clue. I use the x370 taichi...where the prime pro getz rekt lulz in both memory overclocking and vrm temps.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> No clue. I use the x370 taichi...where the prime pro getz rekt lulz in both memory overclocking and vrm temps.


well thats obvious when you have double the phase count


----------



## chew*

I was unaware phase count improved memory overclocking or temps.

Usually the heatsink has quite a bit to do with it.

C6h sure seems to run cooler with the heatpipe distributing heat and a little more mass to its sinks.


----------



## bardacuda

Yep the Prime Pro's chokes get up to 90°C with 1.325 Vcore and a 26°C ambient. The VRM heatsink stays cool, however ppl have measured the VRM area on the bottom of the board, and were also seeing ~90° there as well.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Yep the Prime Pro's chokes get up to 90°C with 1.325 Vcore and a 26°C ambient. The VRM heatsink stays cool, however ppl have measured the VRM area on the bottom of the board, and were also seeing ~90° there as well.


That's actually kind of sad you talking about this board

Edit even the Krait doesn't get that hot from MSI

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index10.html


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> That's actually kind of sad you talking about this board
> 
> Edit even the Krait doesn't get that hot from MSI
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index10.html


Mmm depends, MOSFETS can run at 100+ without issues. I'm not concerned about my VRM temps, which were 70-95 under heavy load. Measured from the back of the board.


----------



## chew*

Yah its not omg bad...i was just throwing some numbers out for the other guy.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Did anyone ever see any VRM dying while OCing? (not considering super extreme OCing such as beyond 1.6v)

My last Intel rig was on a P8Z77-LX



As you can see the VRM is quite small compared to nowadays, and no heatsinks. Yet that board worked for 5 years at extreme OC/LLC...at the end I just sold it, no problem from the buyer either.

Am I alone if I think all these super duper VRMs with heatsinks on them are more marketing hype than anything else?

In other words, don't you think vendors are forcing us to believe we really need a 6 phase VRM with big ass heatsinks?

There are two markets that in my experience are very pumped by hype, 1) Guitars 2) Computers.


----------



## chew*

Umm not sure yet. I have not killed one but also control all my testing.

I am sure i could but try to avoid to...not for concern for board...just trying to spare cpus from unnecessary death.


----------



## SaccoSVD

I think I was quite reckless with that P8Z77-LX board. Just because my knowledge in OC wasn't as refined.

I remember people telling me "you're gonna kill your board" ....then I bought a thermal gun to check and the temps weren't crazy in any way.


----------



## AlphaC

It's not great.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *polkfan*
> 
> That's actually kind of sad you talking about this board
> 
> Edit even the Krait doesn't get that hot from MSI
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8132/msi-x370-krait-gaming-motherboard-review/index10.html


That is at STOCK speeds. Stock speed is ~1.2V for the Ryzen 7 "X" CPUs , not 1.3V+.


----------



## PsyM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> I think I was quite reckless with that P8Z77-LX board. Just because my knowledge in OC wasn't as refined.
> 
> I remember people telling me "you're gonna kill your board" ....then I bought a thermal gun to check and the temps weren't crazy in any way.


The P8Z77-LX uses double fets per phase and lga 1155 cpus weren't all that power hungry, especially the ivy bridge parts. It was enough.


----------



## SaccoSVD

True also.

My 3770k was 70W TDP. Probably I pushed it close to 90 or 100 at 4.6Ghz

But Ryzen is 124W the CPU alone. 134 CPU and SOC


----------



## PsyM4n

As both core count and frequency increase, power requirements increase exponentially. So heatsinks and air flow are required if you want to avoid adding more phases.


----------



## SaccoSVD

I think someone should try to kill one of these B350 boards for science


----------



## chew*

I tried with my b350...but it appears i got one of the good ones...sure if i let it roast for a day pcb would seperate...then copper would burn like a fuse.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I was unaware phase count improved memory overclocking or temps.
> 
> Usually the heatsink has quite a bit to do with it.
> 
> C6h sure seems to run cooler with the heatpipe distributing heat and a little more mass to its sinks.


i meant Taichi has more surface area for the heat when it has 12 phases for the cpu with 12 csd87350.


----------



## chew*

4+4 doubled is still 4 but now we are splitting hairs.

The vrm on prime pro is solid.

Runs a tad warm but thats just some heatsink related issue...the lack of a proper one imo.

Bios support on memory side of things has been poor for that board in contrast to c6h.

I own it,c6h,taichi, both gigas and just shipped msi titanium to a buddy and used the biostar gt7 so speaking from actual use.

Quite honestly all the mainstream x370 have had bad mem support...hell some b350 clock mem better so no bias...they are all guilty of it.

Many mainstream have meh vrm...the prime pro is certainly better in that respect.

With the mem support being what it is in price range i would grab the gt7 open box in all honesty though.

More bang for the buck and i have had less drama memory wise on it and the vrm ran cooler.

Hard to beat it at this pricing...
https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16813138447R


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 4+4 doubled is still 4 but now we are splitting hairs.
> 
> The vrm on prime pro is solid.
> 
> Runs a tad warm but thats just some heatsink related issue...the lack of a proper one imo.
> 
> Bios support on memory side of things has been poor for that board in contrast to c6h.
> 
> I own it,c6h,taichi, both gigas and just shipped msi titanium to a buddy and used the biostar gt7 so speaking from actual use.
> 
> Quite honestly all the mainstream x370 have had bad mem support...hell some b350 clock mem better so no bias...they are all guilty of it.
> 
> Many mainstream have meh vrm...the prime pro is certainly better in that respect.
> 
> With the mem support being what it is in price range i would grab the gt7 open box in all honesty though.
> 
> More bang for the buck and i have had less drama memory wise on it and the vrm ran cooler.
> 
> Hard to beat it at this pricing...
> https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16813138447R


Yeah, you NA guys can speak about value.
Here the prime costs $180, Taichi like $250, Crosshair $310.
Biostar isnt available at most retailers here








I had to stick with the B350-F with 4+2*2. . .
The B350-F Strix has pretty fine memory support, i mean, it can run SK Hynix at 3200+ for some people


----------



## chew*

Yah that does not surprise me its similar to the b350 plus and that one has done 3200 for me without to much drama.


----------



## bardacuda

@chew*

Have you checked max mem clocks/stability on Prime Pro since BIOS 0805+? I'm not sure it's an issue any more.

I've only just started to re-do my OC (last time I messed with it was April w/ 0604 BIOS) and I've been able to boot at 3066 with dual rank E-die with negligible fiddling. It threw errors in HCI MemTest, but that was my first try. I'm sure with some meddling with timings and stuff I could get it stable. From what I've seen in the Prime Pro thread there are lots of users getting 3066+ with dual rank and 3200+ with SR dimms.


----------



## chew*

With cheaper b die still stuck @ 2933.

Will not do 16-16-16 3200


----------



## bardacuda

But what can it do in a different board with the same CPU?


----------



## chew*

3200...


----------



## bardacuda

Hmm ok well hopfully things will improve with updates still. If I could get this kit running at 3200 or 3333 that would be amazeballs.


----------



## br0da

MSI X370 Gaming M7 ACK: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X370-GAMING-M7-ACK/Overview
List price is 229€ according to the german site computerbase while the VRMs most likely are made up of 8+4 phases using NIKO FETs if the shots on the website are accurate.


----------



## VRMfreak

The more Nikos used, the more i am losing my MSI fanboyism.
I used to really like them but the Nikocrap garbage is disgusting.
Only hope would be if they use PK618BA. X370-F Strix will have better VRM than this for 30 euro less.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> The more Nikos used, the more i am losing my MSI fanboyism.
> I used to really like them but the Nikocrap garbage is disgusting.
> Only hope would be if they use PK618BA. X370-F Strix will have better VRM than this for 30 euro less.


Intel just discontinued the 6700K four days ago or so. AsRock still hasn't applied the BIOS microcode to fix the Skylake hyperthreading bug even though Intel provided board makers with that code in *April*.

Board makers clearly think we're idiot sheep. Meanwhile, the tech press has been asleep on this story.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1633994/will-asrock-ever-bother-to-update-the-bios-to-fix-hyperthreading-bug-z170-gaming-itx-ac


----------



## VRMfreak

I know this sounds really bad but how do you make heat loss for the integrated power stage like CSD87350 or IR3555?
Buildzoid has the number in taichi breakdown but i couldnt find any formula for that.


----------



## 99belle99

Is the Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming K3 any good? It is very reasonably priced so thinking about picking one up but if there is better boards let me know.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> Is the Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming K3 any good? It is very reasonably priced so thinking about picking one up but if there is better boards let me know.


The VRMs are trash, second worst on AM4


----------



## 99belle99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> The VRMs are trash, second worst on AM4


What board would you recommend for price performance?


----------



## b0oMeR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What board would you recommend for price performance?


The new Intel boards all have very good VRM modules and a more consistent load ramp.
It probably has to do with the sheer TDP of those AMD chips that causes the VRM to fail.

Value doesn't always mean the cheaper option, sometimes for components like the motherboard which gets upgraded less often than other components, spending something that offers less "value" may give you way more performance in the long term.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What board would you recommend for price performance?


I don't think you can beat the GT7 in the $150 and under category.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What board would you recommend for price performance?


Intel just discontinued the 6700K last week. Meanwhile, Intel gave board makers the microcode update for BIOS patching in April to fix the serious hyperthreading bug in Skylake. AsRock never bothered to patch the "Fatality" ITX board I picked for a colleague's VR system.

So, don't just look at VRM quality. Look at the quality of support. If a board maker can't be bothered to issue a patch using code provided to it by a company like Intel or AMD, to fix a serious issue (hyperthreading being able to be on without data loss/crash concerns) - then think again.

I'm still waiting, too, for a board maker to make the effort to bring feature parity to AMD by offering a hybrid air/water sink. I paid for a water loop and would much rather be able to simply hook it up to a board rather than have to hack apart a board to put in an at-cost 3rd party water VRM block that may or may not be available and/or rarer than hen's teeth.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *99belle99*
> 
> What board would you recommend for price performance?


Well, Asus B350-F is pretty nice, good mem support just as others say, from X370, ASRock´s cheaper offerings dont have bad VRM. Avoid Gigabyte and most MSI, their VRM sucks for price or sucks completely (Tomahawk clones and cheaper). MSI B350 Carbon doesnt have bad components but i had some issues with LAN and BIOS.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *b0oMeR*
> 
> The new Intel boards all have very good VRM modules and a more consistent load ramp.
> It probably has to do with the sheer TDP of those AMD chips that causes the VRM to fail.
> 
> Value doesn't always mean the cheaper option, sometimes for components like the motherboard which gets upgraded less often than other components, spending something that offers less "value" may give you way more performance in the long term.


Yeah exactly. The VRMs wont fail like on 970s, but the B350 VRMs arent that super strong to sustain R7 overclocked over limits of Wraith Spire for a long time, WS will limit the CPU voltage and provide some airflow over the VRM heatsink.
Too bad that Gigabyte puts the crappy VRM on all mobos except G5/K7.
A really good board for the money is the X370-F Strix, it has VRM that vipes the floor with any MSI or Gigabyte motherboard and has BCLK gen for approx $200


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> I know this sounds really bad but how do you make heat loss for the integrated power stage like CSD87350 or IR3555?
> Buildzoid has the number in taichi breakdown but i couldnt find any formula for that.


It's in the datasheets
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Well, Asus B350-F is pretty nice, good mem support just as others say, from X370, ASRock´s cheaper offerings dont have bad VRM. Avoid Gigabyte and most MSI, their VRM sucks for price or sucks completely (Tomahawk clones and cheaper). MSI B350 Carbon doesnt have bad components but i had some issues with LAN and BIOS.


B350-F STRIX is B350-Plus VRM for the CPU , with doubled SOC phases


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> It's in the datasheets
> B350-F STRIX is B350-Plus VRM for the CPU , with doubled SOC phases


Yeah i know it is B350 Plus, but if you are building 1000+ PC (Euro, USD, GBP) i recommend the Strix because it has way better Audio and better LAN.
Also, can i use the normalized heat loss graphs with the exact given values to compare? The Texas Instruments calulations require some things that you dont know unless you are an engineer of that mobo.


----------



## chew*

I prefer taichi in that price range.

Strix is just a prime pro with lipstick.

It runs a tad warm as does the prime pro.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I prefer taichi in that price range.
> 
> Strix is just a prime pro with lipstick.
> 
> It runs a tad warm as does the prime pro.


Well it has IR3555 and BCLK Gen.
The chokes look to be the same ones as on the primes.
Looks pretty good as well and has good onboard audio and lan.


----------



## chew*

MY pro was plagued with memory issues. I gave it away due to frustration.


----------



## polkfan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> MY pro was plagued with memory issues. I gave it away due to frustration.


Chew have you gotten your hands on some flare X 3200mhz memory have you tried overclocking it to like 3466mhz with lets say tighter timings on a Ryzen 1700 not 1700x or 1800x. I know you said higher speeds are very dependent on the IMC so i was curious i'm thinking about buying that memory to go with my taichi in a month or so i should have my board by next week just gonna use my current memory on the taichi which is currently as 3066mhz at 16-16-16-36 and 56TRC not sure maybe the Asrock taichi will actually be more stable at 3200 with my current memory then my B350 MSI Tomahawk.


----------



## chew*

I have a set. one randomly died to lazy/busy to rma.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Yeah i know it is B350 Plus, but if you are building 1000+ PC (Euro, USD, GBP) i recommend the Strix because it has way better Audio and better LAN.
> Also, can i use the normalized heat loss graphs with the exact given values to compare? The Texas Instruments calulations require some things that you dont know unless you are an engineer of that mobo.


I'm not sure what you're asking.

The graphs have the total loss. The normalized values are factors you multiply by to adjust for the output voltage or different output impedance (chokes). The calculation procedure is listed in detail.
NexFET : www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf
IR3553 : http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3553.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd94ee1767

It's a given that between 300kHz and 500kHz switching frequency , which is what motherboards running NexFETs / Powerstages have been found to run there's no major effects for power loss. The switching times are relatively small compared to the LKPAKS / PowerPAKs. So switching frequency isn't that big a deal for those parts.


----------



## virpz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SaccoSVD*
> 
> Did anyone ever see any VRM dying while OCing? (not considering super extreme OCing such as beyond 1.6v)
> 
> My last Intel rig was on a P8Z77-LX
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see the VRM is quite small compared to nowadays, and no heatsinks. Yet that board worked for 5 years at extreme OC/LLC...at the end I just sold it, no problem from the buyer either.
> 
> Am I alone if I think all these super duper VRMs with heatsinks on them are more marketing hype than anything else?
> 
> In other words, don't you think vendors are forcing us to believe we really need a 6 phase VRM with big ass heatsinks?
> 
> There are two markets that in my experience are very pumped by hype, 1) Guitars 2) Computers.


http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents


----------



## bardacuda

@virpz @SaccoSVD

Haha yep you can add one more to that list too. I killed an MSI NF980-G65 while overclocking. Kind of my fault because I let the voltage get above 1.5V while stressing with IBT. Still, if the board had better voltage regulation, and more headroom from using higher quality parts, it wouldn't have happened.


----------



## SaccoSVD

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *virpz*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/a/database-of-motherboard-vrm-failure-incidents


:O

Thank you, that's really useful to see the symptoms of such failures.

I guess those FETS are easy to find and replace in such cases. I have a hot gun soldering station and if that happens ever to mine (which I doubt at this point) I'm gonna have some fun repairing it.


----------



## chartiet

Does the ASRock Fatal1ty X370 GAMING X have the same VRM design as the ASRock Fatal1ty X370 GAMING K4? Read yes and no. Interested in a <$175 board and the K4 seemed legit until the EOL'd it for not hitting 3200 apparently. Thanks


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> @virpz @SaccoSVD
> 
> Haha yep you can add one more to that list too. I killed an MSI NF980-G65 while overclocking. Kind of my fault because I let the voltage get above 1.5V while stressing with IBT. Still, if the board had better voltage regulation, and more headroom from using higher quality parts, it wouldn't have happened.


I have more than a dozen of NF 980-G65's being used as industrial control workstations - no climate controls , dirty, and prone to strong electromagnetic fields ( 1055T for cpu's). Most have been in continuous 24/7 service since 2009/10. To date I've had to replace one of them because of a failed Sata controller - that board had 50,000 hrs + on it . The on-site electrician said at the time it died , he had several other components die in the same work area on the same PLC network.
The onboard video and number of pci-e slots on that board made it a good choice for the application.

Not sure what I will go with for replacements when they decide its time , but I'm hoping what we decide to go with will be as trouble free as these have been.


----------



## TriWheel

Even the Gaming X is limited to 2933 iirc,
Nice boards, but even knowledgeable end users have trouble wringing 3200 out of either of the cheaper ASRock X370s
I dropped the idea and went with the Taichi.


----------



## chartiet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TriWheel*
> 
> Even the Gaming X is limited to 2933 iirc,
> Nice boards, but even knowledgeable end users have trouble wringing 3200 out of either of the cheaper ASRock X370s
> I dropped the idea and went with the Taichi.


From what I understand, they kinda released the X because there ended up being a hardware limitation on the K4. Asrock officially specs and QVL's 3200 on the X but doesnt on the K4. Maybe there is threadedge somewhere that has users struggling with 3200 on the X, I just haven't come across yet. The Taichi is nice, but just little too much, even with promo at $180. I may just be compelled if this $150 range is this murky.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chartiet*
> 
> From what I understand, they kinda released the X because there ended up being a hardware limitation on the K4. Asrock officially specs and QVL's 3200 on the X but doesnt on the K4. Maybe there is threadedge somewhere that has users struggling with 3200 on the X, I just haven't come across yet. The Taichi is nice, but just little too much, even with promo at $180. I may just be compelled if this $150 range is this murky.


I have the k4, I dunno much about it's vrm design, but I don't think it's going to limit you from any OCing outside extreme stuff like Ln2 and dice. I would, though; steer clear because of the memory compatibility. I see my kit on QVL's doing 3200 and I'm limited to 2933 with this board. Kinda left me a little salty.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chartiet*
> 
> From what I understand, they kinda released the X because there ended up being a hardware limitation on the K4. Asrock officially specs and QVL's 3200 on the X but doesnt on the K4. Maybe there is threadedge somewhere that has users struggling with 3200 on the X, I just haven't come across yet. The Taichi is nice, but just little too much, even with promo at $180. I may just be compelled if this $150 range is this murky.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1638147/newegg-asus-prime-x370-pro-am4-x370-mobo-114-99-after-15-mir

Asus X370 Prime Pro for $115 smokes the Asrock X370 K4 / Killer in VRM & USB as far as featureset


----------



## bardacuda

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> I have more than a dozen of NF 980-G65's being used as industrial control workstations - no climate controls , dirty, and prone to strong electromagnetic fields ( 1055T for cpu's). Most have been in continuous 24/7 service since 2009/10. To date I've had to replace one of them because of a failed Sata controller - that board had 50,000 hrs + on it . The on-site electrician said at the time it died , he had several other components die in the same work area on the same PLC network.
> The onboard video and number of pci-e slots on that board made it a good choice for the application.
> 
> Not sure what I will go with for replacements when they decide its time , but I'm hoping what we decide to go with will be as trouble free as these have been.


That's nice and all but I doubt those workstations were overclocked. I don't doubt the VRM was good enough for stock usage just like every other board would be, but Sacco was asking about killing boards by OCing specifically. It is well known that MSI (and Gigabyte to a lesser extent) had many failures on AM3, which can easily be seen from that list.

The take-away here is that boards dieing from OCing with weak VRMs is a very real thing...and it's important to have a good one and watch the temps.


----------



## ozlay

Any idea when the TUF B350M-Plus Gaming is coming out? I'm looking for a good mATX option.

(It looks good on paper anyways...)


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1638147/newegg-asus-prime-x370-pro-am4-x370-mobo-114-99-after-15-mir
> 
> Asus X370 Prime Pro for $115 smokes the Asrock X370 K4 / Killer in VRM & USB as far as featureset


I mean, i would have gone for it if it didnt cost $180 here. It runs super chilly for the price, 60°C heatsink with R7 at 1.425V
@chew* umm, as you said about the Asus B350s, do you think it would be good if Asus made a revision of the B350-F with the Z270-F level VRM (full 8+2 phase, 4C09N and 4C06N) ?


----------



## chew*

I think not just asus but all companies need to make heatsinks bigger and design them in a way that actually dissipates heat.

That is problem #1.

I've tried to pop them and failed but the heat they are producing is the problem and will eventually if tested like i tested kill something...most likely separate pcb then burn out a trace.


----------



## Elrick

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I think not just asus but all companies need to make heatsinks bigger and design them in a way that actually dissipates heat.
> 
> That is problem #1.


Hasn't MSI done that already with their rather 'expensive' X370 Xpower Gaming Titanium Motherboard ?

Horrible naming category but their 'heatsink' is quite good even for the average OCN overclocker.


----------



## chew*

Sure they did it on a flagship board and then like every other company screwed the pooch on the lower tier stuff.


----------



## ozlay

I still want to know why ASUS doesn't just integrate Xonars into all of their boards and do away with the realtek garbage. I would pay extra for a board with a Xonar. Not that i use on-board sound but still.


----------



## AlphaC

https://smallformfactor.net/reviews/motherboards/amds-am4-m-itx-platform-round-vrm-temperature-investigation
Quote:


> To test, I went for both a short stability test, and for VRM temperatures. This is a good way to see the VRM issue at it's worst. I ran the CPU-Z stress test on each board for 4 hours, in a room with an ambient of 21 degrees Celsius. The boards were tested on an open test bench, but with an AMD stock cooler from the AM3 generation, for a best-worst case scenario.
> 
> During testing, the BIOSTAR X370GTN, ASRock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming-ITX/ac and ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming-ITX/ac boards all measured a peak VRM surface temperature between 50-51 degrees Celsius. However, the Gigabyte AB350N Gaming-WiFi measured a toasty 70 degrees! This is clearly a result of the Gigabyte board's considerably smaller VRM heatsink.
> 
> ...
> 
> Using the manufacturer supplied, as well as third-party software, I attempted to measure the reported VRM temps, however I was unsuccessful for the BIOSTAR and ASRock boards. However, the Gigabyte software did give me some insight to the VRM temperatures on that board, with it reporting an 80c temperature on "VRM" and 76c on "VSOC MOS". This leads me to believe that there is around a 10 degree delta between VRM and heatsink surface, meaning that we had a range of 60-80c VRM temperatures. This seems really hot, compared to the 50c CPU temperature I was getting.
> 
> One more myth to dispel. The ASRock thermal pad issue - that some boards are shipped with thin thermal pads under the thicker VRM heatsink, and some with thicker pads, and a thinner VRM heatsink. In testing, I noticed no major difference between the two - as I was supplied the X370 board with the "better" thick heatsink, and the AB350 board with the thinner heatsink. Either way, and on the image below, the VRM chips are well below their max temperature.
> 
> EDIT: ASRock did notice some difference, as below;
> 
> 
> ...
> Based on features, performance and value for money, I have ranked the motherboards as follows;
> 
> ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming-ITX/ac
> Gigabyte AB350N-Gaming Wifi
> Equal, BIOSTAR X370GTN and ASRock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming-ITX/ac


ITX datapoints


----------



## chew*

cpu-z stress test not prime with avx 512 = throw his results out the window.

I read that already as soon as I got to cpu-z stress test I closed the window and stopped reading.


----------



## Atomfix

What's everyone's thoughts on the Gigabyte X370 Gaming K5?

I didn't even look at the VRM count when I bought it. I've got my Ryzen 1700 running at 3.6GHz at 1.2V

Looking the the temperature being given by Ryzen Master, VRMs reach about 70-72C full load on with Prime95

Tbh, I'm not looking at going to 4.0GHz anytime soon or even thinking about running crazy volts. May look into 3.8GHz when I upgrade from the stock cooler sometime next year though.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Atomfix*
> 
> What's everyone's thoughts on the Gigabyte X370 Gaming K5?
> 
> I didn't even look at the VRM count when I bought it. I've got my Ryzen 1700 running at 3.6GHz at 1.2V
> 
> Looking the the temperature being given by Ryzen Master, VRMs reach about 70-72C full load on with Prime95
> 
> Tbh, I'm not looking at going to 4.0GHz anytime soon or even thinking about running crazy volts. May look into 3.8GHz when I upgrade from the stock cooler sometime next year though.


Well, it is still the crappy 4+3.
It could go close to or over 100°C with R7 at higher voltages (1.35+)
When under stress, i've seen this VRM touch 100°C with 6 core at 1.4V


----------



## VRMfreak

I just measured my B350-F With R5 stock (XD) and with all core stress, the heatsink got maximally 31.3 degrees and the hottest place was the capacitor bank closest to the CPU with 37 degrees.
@chew* I have never overclocked with an offset before, what do you suggest to try so i can hit my CPU´s maximum?
Will NH-U12S be enough for R5 1600 close to 1.4?
It will be just temporary OC for the VRM heat testing, then i will roll back to stock because i dont need that performance.


----------



## Atomfix

Doubt it would ever see 1.35V in it's lifetime. 3.6GHz at 1.2V seems golden for me atm, CPU gets to about 56C full load on Prime on stock cooler which is impressive.. I'm only rocking a GTX770 also.

Even though it's 4+3 Phase, I've also heard that they've supposed to be the good quality brand?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Atomfix*
> 
> Doubt it would ever see 1.35V in it's lifetime. 3.6GHz at 1.2V seems golden for me atm, CPU gets to about 56C full load on Prime on stock cooler which is impressive.. I'm only rocking a GTX770 also.
> 
> Even though it's 4+3 Phase, I've also heard that they've supposed to be the good quality brand?


The lowside is similiar to Asus, no problems there but the highside sucks, like PK616BA (MSI crap)
It is only 4 high 8 low, the highside gets abused the most.
Here is a pic from guy running R5 1600 at 1.4V (like 70A, bit more than R7 at stock) after 10 minutes of P95, he has 4 case fans. . .

96°C


----------



## Atomfix

Aha I see now ? I've never seen it go any higher than 72C thankfully. The VRMs on my Phenom X6 on a Crosshair V got hotter than the Gaming K5 ?

Still feel like I've been conned with this board though. It's Overclocking facilities are no where near superior as it's more expensive X370 boards


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Atomfix*
> 
> Aha I see now ? I've never seen it go any higher than 72C thankfully. The VRMs on my Phenom X6 on a Crosshair V got hotter than the Gaming K5 ?
> 
> Still feel like I've been conned with this board though. It's Overclocking facilities are no where near superior as it's more expensive X370 boards


It has at least digi controller, but that wont affect anything except LLC really.
For example Prime X370 Pro will blow its ass with 6 nexfets


----------



## Atomfix

Ah. So it does have a digi controller then? Wish I did a bit more research on the board before buying... well... didn't buy it technically, had it for free from contents insurance claim when my 1055T system died.

Voltage sometimes jumps to 1.22V when stress testing, I assume that's the LLC kicking in right?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Atomfix*
> 
> Ah. So it does have a digi controller then? Wish I did a bit more research on the board before buying... well... didn't buy it technically, had it for free from contents insurance claim when my 1055T system died.
> 
> Voltage sometimes jumps to 1.22V when stress testing, I assume that's the LLC kicking in right?


I am really sorry man, the VRM chart on hardwareluxx is messed up on phone.
It is Cancersil ISL95712 old school no digi


----------



## Atomfix

No sweat









I've undervolted even further to around 1.14V at 3.6GHz stable. May try my luck on pushing it lower. VRM temps remain steady on the K5 at around 53-55C


----------



## zinonino

Hi,

what is best choce between ASUS PRIME X370-PRO and ASROCK Fatal1ty X370 Gaming X .
Who have more good VRMs and more good phases.
Will use with 4x8 memory and more good BIOS ?

Regards


----------



## SuperZan

in terms of VRM's, the Prime Pro uses better parts in a better scheme. Prime Pro has a 6 phase scheme with NexFET's vs, Asrock's 4 phases of Sinopower or NIKOs parts (can be either one). Neither has been exceptional in thermal performance or firmware quality based on user reports around OCN, so call BIOS a wash and say that Prime Pro should have markedly superior thermal performance if care is taken to provide good airflow over the board. Memory support with four 8GB DIMM's can be dodgy on even the high-end X370 boards so it really depends on what you're shooting for as far as speed. 3200 on B-die with 32GB has been done on the Prime Pro, haven't seen anyone confirm the same on the Fatal1ty Gaming X. I'd only count on 2667 with 4 DIMM's and hope for the best beyond that. Assuming B-die, you'd at least have a shot at 3200.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zinonino*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> what is best choce between ASUS PRIME X370-PRO and ASROCK Fatal1ty X370 Gaming X .
> Who have more good VRMs and more good phases.
> Will use with 4x8 memory and more good BIOS ?
> 
> Regards


As SuperZan stated:

The X370 Prime Pro is the better option because it uses 6x 40A rated TI NexFETs to provide power to the CPU. Each 40A NexFET is 91% efficient up until about 30A ; even with 80°C ambient and no heatsink they're supposed to put out 25A.
Given that a Ryzen 7 can consume > 160W (so roughly 110A at 1.4V) this is good.

Users have been able to get 2x16GB on X370 Prime pro : https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f219/asus-prime-x370-pro-am4-1156996.html

The Gaming X is not really suitable for Ryzen 7 overclocks. It is using Sinopower SM4336 and SM4337 (some variants are worse with noname mosfets that don't have specsheets), doubling 4 phases in a manner that emulates 8 phases' maximum power but NOT the stability / ripple suppression. This means you just get double the max amperage but the ripple is similar to that of 4 phases.

See http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/2480#post_26273896 in which the X370 Fatal1ty K4 with the same VRM setup was tested.

Keep in mind, you can fix a poor heatsink (such as through a new VRM cooler , VRM waterblock, or a monoblock waterblock) but unless you plan on resoldering your motherboard & fixing the parts to work with the PWM controller, you can't fix cheap power delivery.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> As SuperZan stated:
> 
> The X370 Prime Pro is the better option because it uses 6x 40A rated TI NexFETs to provide power to the CPU. Each 40A NexFET is 91% efficient up until about 30A ; even with 80°C ambient and no heatsink they're supposed to put out 25A.
> Given that a Ryzen 7 can consume > 160W (so roughly 110A at 1.4V) this is good.
> 
> Users have been able to get 2x16GB on X370 Prime pro : https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f219/asus-prime-x370-pro-am4-1156996.html
> 
> The Gaming X is not really suitable for Ryzen 7 overclocks. It is using Sinopower SM4336 and SM4337 (some variants are worse with noname mosfets that don't have specsheets), doubling 4 phases in a manner that emulates 8 phases' maximum power but NOT the stability / ripple suppression. This means you just get double the max amperage but the ripple is similar to that of 4 phases.
> 
> See http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/2480#post_26273896 in which the X370 Fatal1ty K4 with the same VRM setup was tested.
> 
> Keep in mind, you can fix a poor heatsink (such as through a new VRM cooler , VRM waterblock, or a monoblock waterblock) but unless you plan on resoldering your motherboard & fixing the parts to work with the PWM controller, you can't fix cheap power delivery.


The Gaming X can ship in variants with PK618BA as lowside. It also lacks any VRM control. It has the ISL95712, K4 had IR35201, it is EOL sadly.

I have one more question, the graphs from TI indicate that the CSD87350 powerstage has almost linear heat output.
Taichi has 12, you´re pulling 8.3A through each which means loss of approx. 1W (probably a bit less) and the final loss is around 12W. Crosshair has 8 and pulls 12.5A per one, which is roughly 1.5W of heat output per phase, so final loss is 12W as well. Prime has 6 and is pulling 17A through each, this corresponds to 2W on the graph, 2W per stage means 12W total heat output.
It this right? It should be, because with such current draw you are still within over 90% efficiency.
Thanks


----------



## AlphaC

The Taichi has less heat output per mosfet so the mosfets don't get as hot as the CH VI Hero , provided the heatsink has a similar amount of dissipation per mosfet. If you have an undersized / inadequate heatsink, you get what you have on the Gigabyte X370 Gaming 5 / K7 , where the heat isn't dissipated fast enough even if it the heat produced is lower than the garbage mosfets.

Whatever heat isn't dissipated means the mosfet has higher operating temperature which tends to mean more losses. That's thermal runaway.

That's why the B350 Pro Carbon is superior to the Tomahawk even though they use the same parts. The high side has half the current load per mosfet.


----------



## st3roids1

Hey whats the best plug and play motherboard , considering no overclocking , between asus x370 strix and gigabyte k7. if both are in the same price range around 200$


----------



## allikat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> Hey whats the best plug and play motherboard , considering no overclocking , between asus x370 strix and gigabyte k7. if both are in the same price range around 200$


Strix, every time.
Because you'll end up "overclocking" to get the memory speed from anything over 2400 speed. Yes, we know it's not really overclocking, but it is in AMD's book.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> Hey whats the best plug and play motherboard , considering no overclocking , between asus x370 strix and gigabyte k7. if both are in the same price range around 200$


Most likely Asus.
The VRMs are quite a lot better and Asus has always very good BIOS and memory support.
Both have BCLK gen.
From the data here, K7 runs pretty hot when overclocked. Strix has by a level better mosfets (60A/ FET on Strix vs 40A/FET on K7)
K7 has too much RGB and crap.
I would pick Asus.
I recommended it few weeks ago and the guy is super happy with it.


----------



## bardacuda

If you're not considering overclocking, then you don't really need to consider the VRMs. I don't think the ASUS's are really better anyway, just maybe a better heatsink implementation.
I seem to recall @chew* saying the K7 and the Taichi have the best memory compatibility, so if that's the case I would go with the K7...unless you don't plan on overclocking memory anyway either...in which case why not save your money and get a B350 board?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> If you're not considering overclocking, then you don't really need to consider the VRMs. I don't think the ASUS's are really better anyway, just maybe a better heatsink implementation.
> I seem to recall @chew* saying the K7 and the Taichi have the best memory compatibility, so if that's the case I would go with the K7...unless you don't plan on overclocking memory anyway either...in which case why not save your money and get a B350 board?


If Strix X370-F doesnt have a better VRM, then tell me why it is 120A stronger.
Strix has 6 IR3555 and K7 6 IR3553.
X370s will be more futureproof.
If he is deciding between these two, lets give him the answer and that is the Strix.


----------



## bardacuda

Ok maybe the VRM is better, honestly I didn't check. Doesn't change the fact that if overclocking is not a factor, either one is overkill. Why not get one that saves money and/or provides better memory compatibility?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Ok maybe the VRM is better, honestly I didn't check. Doesn't change the fact that if overclocking is not a factor, either one is overkill. Why not get one that saves money and/or provides better memory compatibility?


Well, afaik, the Strix has good memory compatibility too, the guy who bought it has the same kit as i do, he just activated XMP and he runs 3200MHz stable.
It is the SK Hynix Corsair LPX Vengeance 3200MHz C16.
If they cost the same price, the Strix gives you better features.


----------



## st3roids1

Its not for my pc, i went with the hero wifi edition long ago

Only problem with the strix is lack of debug screen and clear cmos button. My friend wont ever overclock the cpu , i dont know how much the vrm effects ram overclock.

I did read a lot of issues with k7 in gigabyte thread.

edit , o btw which has better audio features and build quality apart vrm superiority. Seems Buildzoid was quite happy with k7 and suggested back then


----------



## bardacuda

I don't understand why you would recommend a $200 board at all in that case.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> Its not for my pc, i went with the hero wifi edition long ago
> 
> Only problem with the strix is lack of debug screen and clear cmos button. My friend wont ever overclock the cpu , i dont know how much the vrm effects ram overclock.
> 
> I did read a lot of issues with k7 in gigabyte thread.
> 
> edit , o btw which has better audio features and build quality apart vrm superiority. Seems Buildzoid was quite happy with k7 and suggested back then


Audio most likely Asus.
Build quality should be the same, but because i have good experience with Strix mobos i would recommend the Strix.
He originally wanted to get the X370-F, but the got sponsored with the garbage K5 so he sticks with that.


----------



## VRMfreak

@chew* okay, i did some measurments on the B350 Strix.
I have a tower cooler and 4 case fans.
I ran my 1600 at 3.8GHz, VCore 1.35V, Fsw 200KHz, LLC auto, Phase control auto.
I ran P95 maximum power test for 30 minutes.
VRM sensor was reporting 51°C, the heatsink (measured by IR Thermometer) has max 44°C and the hottest were the chokes with 55°C. This was performed with latest bios 0902.
I ran 3.95GHz at 1.38-1.39V and max VRM sensor temp was 53°C, the heatsink had about 45°C, chokes were the same. The power draw in both of these scenarios is similiar to Ryzen 7 at stock, so overclocking it would be fine. The heatsink is massive and seems to get the job done right, because even if i put Intel stock fan at 2300RPM over it, it had no impact on the thermals.
However, i am getting a weird issue. If i use any clock higher than 3.8GHz, the system crashes (P95) and the RAM debug LED is on and flashing, fans are spinning but no video out.
Does this mean that my chip is garbage, or should i ramp up Fsw, LLC or Phase control? I'd rather not mess with the LLC or Phase control. Would raising VSOC to 1.1V help too?
Maximum voltage difference during load (between min and max) was approx. 0.01V


----------



## chew*

Dont bother with IR on front of board.

Just set up a custom 12k iteration and check back of board.

It only takes about 10 mins to peak heatsink saturation points.

Flashing debug led crash on prime is cpu cores bsod. Basically you need more volts or more cool.

Instant crashes are usually core.

Windows has encountered a problem is usually severe mem/imc instability.

Prime dropping threads is imc/mem in blend test with high K iterations 512k and 896k are common fail points.


----------



## st3roids1

Because i think b350 suck big time and i wouldnt reccomend a 1700x , nvidia gtx 1080 with any of those

If the lack of debug screen isnt a big deal ill tell him to get the strix


----------



## bardacuda




----------



## AlphaC

https://www.hkepc.com/15604/AMD_X370_Mini-ITX%E5%B9%B3%E5%8F%B0_ASROCK_Fatal1ty_X370_Gaming-ITXac

Sinopower SM7341EHKP confirmed for x370 ITX board


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://www.hkepc.com/15604/AMD_X370_Mini-ITX%E5%B9%B3%E5%8F%B0_ASROCK_Fatal1ty_X370_Gaming-ITXac
> 
> Sinopower SM7341EHKP confirmed for x370 ITX board


Yeah br0da had that on HWLuxx.
So the X370 will be slightly better than the B350 (FDPC5030), the Sinopowers are stronger than the Fairchild.
Don't you know how it is with the ASRock X370s? Is there a revision that would tell me if i got the Niko garbage or Sinopower?


----------



## AlphaC

I wouldn't say the X370 ITX Sinopower mosfets are outright better than the Fairchild ones on the B350 ITX. They look to be worse as far as switching goes. I wouldn't be surprised if it's just an alternate supplier.

The B350's Fairchild mosfet is rated 35A at 100°C , while the Sinopower is rated 19A at 70°C.

In addition, the thermal resistance on the Sinopower is 75°C/W to ambient on 1 sq. in. 2oz copper , while the Fairchild ones are 60°C/W to ambient when mounted on 1sq. in of 2oz copper. Junction to case thermal resistance is 5.6°C/W for the Fairchild part while 4°C/W junction to case for the Sinopower.

The rise and fall times are also substantially higher on the Sinopowers.

http://www.sinopowersemi.com/temp/SM7341EHKP_datasheet.pdf
Channel 1 Rise time = 9.6 ns , Fall time = 19 ns --- typical
Channel 1 Rds(on) = 3.9mΩ @ V_GS = 10V, 6.5mΩ @ V_GS = 4.5V
Channel 2 Rise time = 14ns, Fall time = 24 ns --- typical
Channel 2 Rds(on) = 1.2mΩ @ V_GS = 10V , 2mΩ @ V_GS = 4.5V

http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/FDPC5030SG-D.pdf
Channel 1 rise time = 2ns (10ns max) , fall time = 2ns (10ns max)
Channel 1 Rds(on) = 5.0mΩ @ V_GS = 10V , 6.5mΩ @ V_GS = 4.5V
Channel 2 rise time = 4ns (10ns max) , fall time = 3ns (10ns max)
Channel 2 Rds(on) = 2.4mΩ @ V_GS = 10V , 3.0mΩ@V_GS = 4.5V


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Dont bother with IR on front of board.
> 
> Just set up a custom 12k iteration and check back of board.
> 
> It only takes about 10 mins to peak heatsink saturation points.
> 
> Flashing debug led crash on prime is cpu cores bsod. Basically you need more volts or more cool.
> 
> Instant crashes are usually core.
> 
> Windows has encountered a problem is usually severe mem/imc instability.
> 
> Prime dropping threads is imc/mem in blend test with high K iterations 512k and 896k are common fail points.


Its not instant, it passes CB but when i want to stress the VRM in P95 it crashes.
Thanks for the tip, i will try as soon as i get home.
Today i tried 1.15V SoC, 1.35-37 VCore, 3.9GHz and still getting the same type of crash.
Looks like my CPU silicon is garbage. It crashed even if i went to 1.38-1.4V.
I will try medium LLC and 300KHz, if it crashes, i am hopeless.
CPU runs chilly (63°C) and VRMs too.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I wouldn't say the X370 ITX Sinopower mosfets are outright better than the Fairchild ones on the B350 ITX. They look to be worse as far as switching goes. I wouldn't be surprised if it's just an alternate supplier.
> 
> The B350's Fairchild mosfet is rated 35A at 100°C , while the Sinopower is rated 19A at 70°C.
> 
> In addition, the thermal resistance on the Sinopower is 75°C/W to ambient on 1 sq. in. 2oz copper , while the Fairchild ones are 60°C/W to ambient when mounted on 1sq. in of 2oz copper. Junction to case thermal resistance is 5.6°C/W for the Fairchild part while 4°C/W junction to case for the Sinopower.
> 
> The rise and fall times are also substantially higher on the Sinopowers.
> 
> http://www.sinopowersemi.com/temp/SM7341EHKP_datasheet.pdf
> Channel 1 Rise time = 9.6 ns , Fall time = 19 ns --- typical
> Channel 1 Rds(on) = 3.9mΩ @ V_GS = 10V, 6.5mΩ @ V_GS = 4.5V
> Channel 2 Rise time = 14ns, Fall time = 24 ns --- typical
> Channel 2 Rds(on) = 1.2mΩ @ V_GS = 10V , 2mΩ @ V_GS = 4.5V
> 
> http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/FDPC5030SG-D.pdf
> Channel 1 rise time = 2ns (10ns max) , fall time = 2ns (10ns max)
> Channel 1 Rds(on) = 5.0mΩ @ V_GS = 10V , 6.5mΩ @ V_GS = 4.5V
> Channel 2 rise time = 4ns (10ns max) , fall time = 3ns (10ns max)
> Channel 2 Rds(on) = 2.4mΩ @ V_GS = 10V , 3.0mΩ@V_GS = 4.5V


I must've had a wrong datasheet for the fairchild.
Sorry!


----------



## bardacuda

ASUS Prime X370-Pro. Using a fairly conservative OC of 1.319V & LLC 4 @ 3.8GHz.

This board is pretty decent for the price and uses solid mosfets...but man does that area get hot! Even though there is voltage and thermal headroom (with a better cooler anyway), the VRMs seem to be the limiting factor for OCing with this board. I didn't check the mosfets from the back of the board because I can't with this case. The heatsink on top was maybe 50°C max...but look at those chokes! My ambient is ~27°C, or ~81°F, so nothing crazy.


----------



## sakae48

anyone has idea how much could the FETs differs in height? i have some idea to get a better heat transfer but if some of them has lower height, this might cause overheat on that FET
also, do you think Asus Strix's heatsink is no more than aesthetic pleasing? i mean.. they looks like a chunk of aluminum and no fins at all


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> anyone has idea how much could the FETs differs in height? i have some idea to get a better heat transfer but if some of them has lower height, this might cause overheat on that FET
> also, do you think Asus Strix's heatsink is no more than aesthetic pleasing? i mean.. they looks like a chunk of aluminum and no fins at all


It looks bad but from my tests it gets its work done.
I had an idea with it but it was too difficult.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> It looks bad but from my tests it gets its work done.
> I had an idea with it but it was too difficult.


well, yeah.. i don't have any throttling at all but, it seems like Prime's heatsink does better since there's some slit to let the air dissipate heats. i'd like to replace the thermal pad w/ ceramic pad and thermal paste. what do you think? i also might do some hackjob for choke cooling. I don't abuse them w/ extreme overclock but i'd like to make them runs a bit cooler for prolonged 24/7 usage


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> well, yeah.. i don't have any throttling at all but, it seems like Prime's heatsink does better since there's some slit to let the air dissipate heats. i'd like to replace the thermal pad w/ ceramic pad and thermal paste. what do you think? i also might do some hackjob for choke cooling. I don't abuse them w/ extreme overclock but i'd like to make them runs a bit cooler for prolonged 24/7 usage


Yeah, should be fine.
I will eventually replace the thermal pad as well.


----------



## VRMfreak

Okay, so i've got info about the Strix B350-F VRMs.
The guy ran Ryzen 7 at 1.363V, 3.7GHz. This is very close to R7 maximum, the CPU eats 120W at that config and it is overclocked on the edge you would want on B350 mobo or Ryzen CPU daily in general (voltage-wise)
The VRM sensor had 75-80°C and that is on mosfets.
From my measurments, the heatsink is usually 10°C colder.
This means that with reasonably OCd R7, the Strix runs 70°C on the heatsink at the worst.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Yeah, should be fine.
> I will eventually replace the thermal pad as well.


hmm.. i might do this!
i want to do the same thing to the chipset but ehh... there's Asus hologram sticker across the screw








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Okay, so i've got info about the Strix B350-F VRMs.
> The guy ran Ryzen 7 at 1.363V, 3.7GHz. This is very close to R7 maximum, the CPU eats 120W at that config and it is overclocked on the edge you would want on B350 mobo or Ryzen CPU daily in general (voltage-wise)
> The VRM sensor had 75-80°C and that is on mosfets.
> From my measurments, the heatsink is usually 10°C colder.
> This means that with reasonably OCd R7, the Strix runs 70°C on the heatsink at the worst.


1.36v for 3.7GHz? that's quite high. silicone lottery i guess?
mine runs at 1.337v for 3.78GHz
so, at that voltage, it runs around 75-80C? not that bad..


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> hmm.. i might do this!
> i want to do the same thing to the chipset but ehh... there's Asus hologram sticker across the screw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.36v for 3.7GHz? that's quite high. silicone lottery i guess?
> mine runs at 1.337v for 3.78GHz
> so, at that voltage, it runs around 75-80C? not that bad..


This means that B350-F stock absolutely trashes other B350 VRMs and as you can see from the graphs somewhere in this thread, is on par with MSI X370 Carbon (Same VRM as B350 Carbon/Krait). For example, Garbagehawk had 90°C on heatsink (!!!!) with similiar settings as the guy who ran the R7, he must've had heatsink at 70°C maximally, more likely 60-65°C.
I will replace the stock thermal pads with Fujipoly Exteme or Ultra Extreme, they are expensive as hell but should improve the temps quite a lot.


----------



## chew*

I thought the strix b350 was using asus b350 plus parts.

If so i was able to get that to 158c.

Id hardly call that a thrashing.

Fuji poly pads are pointless as far as comparisons go.

Jacks price of board up to another tier.

Why bother when buying just better board is more cost effective.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I thought the strix b350 was using asus b350 plus parts.
> 
> If so i was able to get that to 158c.
> 
> Id hardly call that a thrashing.
> 
> Fuji poly pads are pointless as far as comparisons go.
> 
> Jacks price of board up to another tier.
> 
> Why bother when buying just better board is more cost effective.


It uses the same parts, probably better caps (the ones for the entire Strix line).
I mean, if i want a decent X370 like the Prime, i have to hand out $200 which i wont have until the end of the year and i wanted to invest into decent 144Hz 1080P screen.
Strix B350 has most likely better heatsink than the Prime.
I will have 4GHz/1.365V results coming in most likely today.
*it trashes most of its competition in B350s*
I mean, i can hand out 13 or 15 euros for the pad or $250 for X370 Strix.


----------



## chew*

The good fuji poly are like $100 usd.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> This means that B350-F stock absolutely trashes other B350 VRMs and as you can see from the graphs somewhere in this thread, is on par with MSI X370 Carbon (Same VRM as B350 Carbon/Krait). For example, Garbagehawk had 90°C on heatsink (!!!!) with similiar settings as the guy who ran the R7, he must've had heatsink at 70°C maximally, more likely 60-65°C.
> I will replace the stock thermal pads with Fujipoly Exteme or Ultra Extreme, they are expensive as hell but should improve the temps quite a lot.


3.7GHz is hardly a great clockspeed.

Power would be another 10% or more just from going to 3.9 or 4 GHz , and the increase to 1.4 or 1.45V would be another 106% or 113% multiplier (goes up with square of voltage too).
Can be up to 25 or 30% more power for a 1.45V overclock and 4GHz.

As I wrote several times in this thread: you can fix the VRM heatsink but fixing a poor VRM is far more difficult. At the end of the day they're still just 4C06N (4C06B) and 4C09N (4C09B) on the B350 STRIX.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> The good fuji poly are like $100 usd.


Indeed. Could just buy a board with good components at that point. Might even save a tenner or so in the bargain after shipping.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> 3.7GHz is hardly a great clockspeed.
> 
> Power would be another 10% or more just from going to 3.9 or 4 GHz , and the increase to 1.4 or 1.45V would be another 106% or 113% multiplier (goes up with square of voltage too).
> Can be up to 25 or 30% more power for a 1.45V overclock and 4GHz.
> 
> As I wrote several times in this thread: you can fix the VRM heatsink but fixing a poor VRM is far more difficult. At the end of the day they're still just 4C06N (4C06B) and 4C09N (4C09B) on the B350 STRIX.


Yeah youre right :/ i am just trying to take it optimistically.
I will most likely screw it and get Taichi or X370 Strix (might get used C6H as well) because i want something better so i dont have to worry about it.
10% more for clock and some more for the voltage so yeah, they will eventually overheat.
I still think that the mobo is fine for R5 1600 because the temps are pretty low even with high OC.
I wonder why buildzoid said you can run 8core 4GHz on any better 4phase, because that is impossible.


----------



## Nighthog

You can but at your own risk and high temperatures.

Running that edge if you want to see smoke or not.









Though finding a chip that does 4.0Ghz stable is another matter. Some might need way too much voltage to be viable or even possible at all no matter the motherboard.


----------



## monitorhero

So I read a lot about VRMs in this thread. I had an B350-Plus that bricked after 2 weeks. So I am considering buying a new board. Can anyone suggest me a good one that doesn't need to be great at overclocking but solid and stable. My Asus B350-Plus was not stable at all.

My system is a 1800x,G.Skill 3200 CL14 (F4-3200C14D-32GVK), Soundblaster Z, Asus ROG STRIX-GTX1080-O8G-GAMIN . Didn't get my Ram to run on my Asus Board above 2933mhz. I read contradictory information about Ram support on Asus boards. My experience was pretty bad. Some say its very good, some say Asus has the worst.

I want a system that might be able to overclock to 3,9ghz and still keep cool. If it was future proof for coming Ryzen generations it would be nice as well.

My budget is 120-130€ (I live in Germany)

Thanks for any help ( I have been without my pc for a week now and I am getting impatient







)


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> So I read a lot about VRMs in this thread. I had an B350-Plus that bricked after 2 weeks. So I am considering buying a new board. Can anyone suggest me a good one that doesn't need to be great at overclocking but solid and stable. My Asus B350-Plus was not stable at all.
> 
> My system is a 1800x,G.Skill 3200 CL14 (F4-3200C14D-32GVK), Soundblaster Z, Asus ROG STRIX-GTX1080-O8G-GAMIN . Didn't get my Ram to run on my Asus Board above 2933mhz. I read contradictory information about Ram support on Asus boards. My experience was pretty bad. Some say its very good, some say Asus has the worst.
> 
> I want a system that might be able to overclock to 3,9ghz and still keep cool. If it was future proof for coming Ryzen generations it would be nice as well.
> 
> My budget is 120-130€ (I live in Germany)
> 
> Thanks for any help ( I have been without my pc for a week now and I am getting impatient
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Check this one out.
10 euros more for really solid VRM.
The things you want are not on any other mobo in that price category
Asus Prime X370 Pro


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Check this one out.
> 10 euros more for really solid VRM.
> The things you want are not on any other mobo in that price category
> Asus Prime X370 Pro


Thanks VRMfreak. I was considering it but reading a lot of user reviews about it with bricked boards and bad ram compatibility I am torn apart whether or not I should buy it. How important is the quality of the SOC VCC controller for Ram overclocking?
Is there any chance there will be better boards out in the near future?

OT: My old CPU was an i7 2600k which unfortunately I sold and still it was faster then my Ryzen rig. I was using Blender for example and couldn't rotate around a larger object without some microlags. Its hard to describe the problem. I just feel very laggy and unsmooth, simple operations took a second to load which before didn't even take a millisecond on the Intel. I am using Windows 10 64bit. Are there any options on Ryzen you need to set before it works perfectly smooth? Maybe it was just an software issue. But so far my Ryzen experience is very frustrating.

What also concerns me are the absurd temperatures on the x370-pro that another user posted here:

http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3122298/width/1000/height/2000/flags/LL


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Thanks VRMfreak. I was considering it but reading a lot of user reviews about it with bricked boards and bad ram compatibility I am torn apart whether or not I should buy it. How important is the quality of the SOC VCC controller for Ram overclocking?
> Is there any chance there will be better boards out in the near future?
> 
> OT: My old CPU was an i7 2600k which unfortunately I sold and still it was faster then my Ryzen rig. I was using Blender for example and couldn't rotate around a larger object without some microlags. Its hard to describe the problem. I just feel very laggy and unsmooth, simple operations took a second to load which before didn't even take a millisecond on the Intel. I am using Windows 10 64bit. Are there any options on Ryzen you need to set before it works perfectly smooth? Maybe it was just an software issue. But so far my Ryzen experience is very frustrating.
> 
> What also concerns me are the absurd temperatures on the x370-pro that another user posted here:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3122298/width/1000/height/2000/flags/LL


My 1600 is too fast for me 
You can get the Strix X370-F for 180 euro, it has really good mem support (tested by a guy who bought it on my recommendation with crappy SK Hynix corsair memory).
I am a freak when it comes to OS.
I keep my SSD clean from temporary garbage, have all drivers up to date, use Ryzen optimized power plan and always flash the newest BIOS because Asus makes already great things even better (i have B350-F).
Prime line is the last in the chain.
1. ROG
2. Strix/TUF
3. Prime


----------



## monitorhero

From this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/66ggjd/psa_about_ryzen_and_memory_compatibility/ I learned that if it works for someone else it doesn't necessarily have to work for me too.

I pretty much do the same too on my OS. But what is an Ryzen optimized power plan?

Regarding great Asus Bios. I recently installed the latest 0902 for the B350-Plus and it was worse and gave me bluescreens with DOCP. Trying to downgrade to the previous version it bricked my board beyond repair because it froze halfway through. I tried every possible recovery attemp. Thats why I am very sceptical of Asus now. But I goes I give it another shot.

Can you tell me anything about the heat problem bardacuda described on post 2670
I wish I had the money for a Strix but right now that is not an optionl I guess it will be the Prime x370pro and I hope it does work better this time.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> From this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/66ggjd/psa_about_ryzen_and_memory_compatibility/ I learned that if it works for someone else it doesn't necessarily have to work for me too.
> 
> I pretty much do the same too on my OS. But what is an Ryzen optimized power plan?
> 
> Regarding great Asus Bios. I recently installed the latest 0902 for the B350-Plus and it was worse and gave me bluescreens with DOCP. Trying to downgrade to the previous version it bricked my board beyond repair because it froze halfway through. I tried every possible recovery attemp. Thats why I am very sceptical of Asus now. But I goes I give it another shot.
> 
> Can you tell me anything about the heat problem bardacuda described on post 2670
> I wish I had the money for a Strix but right now that is not an optionl I guess it will be the Prime x370pro and I hope it does work better this time.


DOCP on Ryzen should be ignored.
Anyone who means it seriously with the fast mem should overclock it himself.
You can get the best combination by doing it that way.
I am running Corsair LPX Vengeance 3200MHz/C16 rated and latest 0902 BIOS.
I am running 3066MHz, 1.36V and 16-16-16-36 timings stable.
3200MHz works too but boots only 80% of the time.


----------



## VRMfreak

@chew*
https://www.amazon.de/Smart-fujipoly-Extreme-Thermo-Pad-W%C3%A4rmeleitf%C3%A4higkeit/dp/B00ZSJPZQ2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1506350546&sr=8-1&keywords=fujipoly+extreme
I meant those


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> DOCP on Ryzen should be ignored.
> Anyone who means it seriously with the fast mem should overclock it himself.
> You can get the best combination by doing it that way.
> I am running Corsair LPX Vengeance 3200MHz/C16 rated and latest 0902 BIOS.
> I am running 3066MHz, 1.36V and 16-16-16-36 timings stable.
> 3200MHz works too but boots only 80% of the time.


DOCP worked fine for me before with a lowered speed of 2933mhz.

If all Prime X370-Pro boards get as hot as bardacuda's one I am concerned about the boads lifetime. I don't want to buy a new board in a year or two. I used my last one for 5 years and planning on doing so with my Ryzen too.


----------



## chew*

They make different grade fuji poly. The cheap ones are about same quality as factory. The good ones are expensive.

It cost for example $100 to do 1 290x thermal pad swap with iirc the 15kw quality stuff.

Doubt the pads will make much of a difference tbh on any heatsink that has no mass to it.

Sure they would do wonders on say a titanium though.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> DOCP worked fine for me before with a lowered speed of 2933mhz.
> 
> If all Prime X370-Pro boards get as hot as bardacuda's one I am concerned about the boads lifetime. I don't want to buy a new board in a year or two. I used my last one for 5 years and planning on doing so with my Ryzen too.


Prime X370 Pro's VRM does gets quite hot (i touched it once and i regret it. it burns my finger like a toasted shrimp). i was running at 3.7GHz 1.3v-ish all core. it should be fine if you could gave enough airflow through VRM heatsinks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> They make different grade fuji poly. The cheap ones are about same quality as factory. The good ones are expensive.
> 
> It cost for example $100 to do 1 290x thermal pad swap with iirc the 15kw quality stuff.
> 
> Doubt the pads will make much of a difference tbh on any heatsink that has no mass to it.
> 
> Sure they would do wonders on say a titanium though.


Chew, do you know how good / bad does the stock thermal pads are? i haven't order my ceramic pads yet so, i'd like your opinion about replacing those chewing gum pads w/ solid things like ceramic pads + some decent thermal paste. i ever replaced thermal pads w/ thermal paste only but i didn't OC that hard at that time (Athlon II times)


----------



## chew*

The fujipoly are good. Nowadays the caps are so tall and fets are so low profile bare naked with paste is most likely to cause a short to heatsink.

I put a straight edge over some fets recently to check...dangerously close to the smd resistor caps.

I would stick with the pads. Offers a cushion without crushing the smds next to fets.


----------



## monitorhero

I don't have a good airflow and no extra fan because I like it quiet. Thats a big no-go if i am running an 1800x @stock.
Is the Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming any better? And why does it have 1x PCIe 16x 2.0 where the x370-Pro has 2x 3.0 PCIe x16?


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> I don't have a good airflow and no extra fan because I like it quiet. Thats a big no-go if i am running an 1800x @stock.
> Is the Asus ROG Strix X370-F Gaming any better? And why does it have 1x PCIe 16x 2.0 where the x370-Pro has 2x 3.0 PCIe x16?


hmm... that condition was on heavy load, crunching x265 video and BOINC at same time.. enough air flow could be quiet








i haven't try to touch my Strix VRM heatsink so, wait for it maybe tomorrow? if i do it now, i could trip my MCB









both has 2x PCIe 3.0 x16 which runs either x16 or x8 + x8 configuration.

both also has 1x PCIe 2.0 x16 wired at x4 that could be configured as x4 or 4*x1. that x4 slot shared its bandwidth w/ another 3 x1 slot


----------



## monitorhero

Yeah I can wait til tomorrow. let me know then, thanks in advance

Can somebody tell me the difference in VRMs between X370-Pro and Strix 370-F

What is better CSD 87350 or IR3555?


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Yeah I can wait til tomorrow. let me know then, thanks in advance
> 
> Can somebody tell me the difference in VRMs between X370-Pro and Strix 370-F
> 
> What is better CSD 87350 or IR3555?


The CSD's are more efficient but they output less overall amperage than the IR3555's. The Strix can output nearly double the amperage as the X370-Pro, but there's an efficiency curve that comes into play concerning temperatures. IE, it's hard to tell exactly how much heat one will generate over the other, but you know that the Strix board will be cooler.

Edit: Datasheets:

https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/pb-ir3555.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a40153567fd3ac28d3
http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Yeah I can wait til tomorrow. let me know then, thanks in advance
> 
> Can somebody tell me the difference in VRMs between X370-Pro and Strix 370-F
> 
> What is better CSD 87350 or IR3555?


no problem! i'm happy to help









CSD87350 has 40A 1.5MHz max. capability while IR3555 has 60A 1MHz

IR3555 also has higher efficiency but i'm not really sure about this since 87350 were rated 90% on 25A while 3555 rated 95% on 1.2v which is different measurement approach.
IR3555 has built in driver while 87350 needs external driver
IR3555 also has internal thermal and current sensor


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> no problem! i'm happy to help
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CSD87350 has 40A 1.5MHz max. capability while IR3555 has 60A 1MHz
> 
> IR3555 also has higher efficiency but i'm not really sure about this since 87350 were rated 90% on 25A while 3555 rated 95% on 1.2v which is different measurement approach.
> IR3555 has built in driver while 87350 needs external driver
> IR3555 also has internal thermal and current sensor


Where did you find efficiency ratings for IR3555?


----------



## monitorhero

The Strix sounds good overall but it only has 1x usb 3.1 and no PS/2 compared to the X370-Pro which I find useful sometimes when having issues with USB.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> Where did you find efficiency ratings for IR3555?


i got it from 3550 datasheet. i assume they're quite similar?
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3550.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd7c831761
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> The Strix sounds good overall but it only has 1x usb 3.1 and no PS/2 compared to the X370-Pro which I find useful sometimes when having issues with USB.


oh yeah.. Prime has P/S2 and 2 USB 3.1 (if i'm not wrong. only a week off my Prime and i forgot some details already)


----------



## monitorhero

Did you sell your Prime for a Strix? But yeah the specs on the Prime say 2x USB 3.1 and PS/2


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Did you sell your Prime for a Strix? But yeah the specs on the Prime say 2x USB 3.1 and PS/2


not yet.. my Prime still on RMA process. that damn board gave me wrong temperature readings. sometimes it's stuck on 31C for a few hours and sometimes it's stuck on high temp. so, it's either annoys me on late midnight or piss me off while i'm doing something heavy


----------



## monitorhero

Another Asus in RMA. This is what concerns me here. I had mine in RMA after two weeks. The build quality doesn't seem that great. Or is it all lottery? Damn it's a hard choice to make...but I need my computer soon to get back to work. It's a pain right now


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Another Asus in RMA. This is what concerns me here. I had mine in RMA after two weeks. The build quality doesn't seem that great. Or is it all lottery? Damn it's a hard choice to make...but I need my computer soon to get back to work. It's a pain right now


looks like a lottery. i lose in a bad way since my strix has no problem at least for a week now.. temperature reading were low but no more sticky temps







just a matter of fan curve tweak and bam!
it also has no problem w/ 3200 CL14 (my stick were rated on 3200 CL15). awesome thing but if only the VRM sink has practical fins instead of mostly-aesthetic-aluminum-brick, i could be happier than now


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> looks like a lottery. i lose in a bad way since my strix has no problem at least for a week now.. temperature reading were low but no more sticky temps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just a matter of fan curve tweak and bam!
> it also has no problem w/ 3200 CL14 (my stick were rated on 3200 CL15). awesome thing but if only the VRM sink has practical fins instead of mostly-aesthetic-aluminum-brick, i could be happier than now


Wow CL14 and 3200 sounds nice. I have 2x16gb which I don't think 3200 is even possible with. But we'll see. Which AM4 board has fins instead of blocks?


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> i got it from 3550 datasheet. i assume they're quite similar?


I'm not sure we can assume the 3555 is as effecient as the 3550's. I really wish the 3555 datasheet was as thorough as the 3550 datasheet you found.


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Wow CL14 and 3200 sounds nice. I have 2x16gb which I don't think 3200 is even possible with. But we'll see. Which AM4 board has fins instead of blocks?


there's some slit on Prime's heatsinks.. i think those slits could help the air dissipate heats being produced?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LuckyImperial*
> 
> I'm not sure we can assume the 3555 is as effecient as the 3550's. I really wish the 3555 datasheet was as thorough as the 3550 datasheet you found.


yeah. too bad 3555's datasheet were that short








dissapointing very much


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Yeah I can wait til tomorrow. let me know then, thanks in advance
> 
> Can somebody tell me the difference in VRMs between X370-Pro and Strix 370-F
> 
> What is better CSD 87350 or IR3555?


The IR powerstages are by no means better.
They have more features (vs NexFETs) and are stronger.
They will run at similiar values, i did a lil comparison with the included graphs from the datasheets.
Both of them are approx. at 2W/stage, so both 12W in total.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> The IR powerstages are by no means better.
> They have more features (vs NexFETs) and are stronger.
> They will run at similiar values, i did a lil comparison with the included graphs from the datasheets.
> Both of them are approx. at 2W/stage, so both 12W in total.


I think this goes beyond what I can comprehend







. But I can tell that the difference is minimal.
I guess I'll give the Prime X370-Pro a chance since my budget doesn't do for a Taichi.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> I think this goes beyond what I can comprehend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . But I can tell that the difference is minimal.
> I guess I'll give the Prime X370-Pro a chance since my budget doesn't do for a Taichi.


Yep, the most important thing to know is that in practical application neither set of components will hold you back from 3.9GHz.


----------



## bardacuda

Keep in mind that those temps I recorded were with IBT AVX which is about as heavy of a load as you can possibly have. I did the same test in Prime 95 w/ 12k FFT size and I was seeing "only" 100°C on the chokes. Also keep in mind those were choke temps not VRM temps. Although I only had VCore set to 1.32, I was using LLC 4 and you can see the VRM was putting out over 1.46V (VDDCR CPU) @ ~120 amps. My ambient was around 27 or 28°C for those tests.

Since I wasn't able to measure the VRMs from the back of the board I'm not really sure how hot they are getting. Some ppl have reported that temps 3 - 6 in HWiNFO matches their VRM temp, but I've also seen @chew*'s video showing that those sensors match up better with PCH temp rather than VRM. He also reports that the same RAM kit and chip will clock the RAM higher when they are used in a different board. Personally I can't seem to get 3066 stable with dual rank E-die...although it is close and I _might_ be able to get there with more tweaking.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Keep in mind that those temps I recorded were with IBT AVX which is about as heavy of a load as you can possibly have. I did the same test in Prime 95 w/ 12k FFT size and I was seeing "only" 100°C on the chokes. Also keep in mind those were choke temps not VRM temps. Although I only had VCore set to 1.32, I was using LLC 4 and you can see the VRM was putting out over 1.46V (VDDCR CPU) @ ~120 amps. My ambient was around 27 or 28°C for those tests.
> 
> Since I wasn't able to measure the VRMs from the back of the board I'm not really sure how hot they are getting. Some ppl have reported that temps 3 - 6 in HWiNFO matches their VRM temp, but I've also seen @chew*'s video showing that those sensors match up better with PCH temp rather than VRM. He also reports that the same RAM kit and chip will clock the RAM higher when they are used in a different board. Personally I can't seem to get 3066 stable with dual rank E-die...although it is close and I _might_ be able to get there with more tweaking.


Holy moly, so many VRM settings.
And i thought that the 5 i have on B350-F Strix is premium
@chew* I did not expect the B350-F to turn out so bad








Could you recommend a decent thermal pads to upgrade?
Or should i sell the Strix and get X370-F Strix or Prime or something ?
I am quite sad








I could get used Prime X370 Pro for really cheapo :/


----------



## monitorhero

I have to admit I am a noob when it comes to overclocking and it seems really tricky on Ryzen.
Also the more reviews on the X370-Pro I read the less I want to buy it...so much negative reviews and bricked boards that it doesn't seem like a coincidence. On the strix it seems a little better but there are less reviews of it. So it's hard to tell. Maybe I go for the Taichi and save me some trouble even though its out of my budget. I can't deal with another bricked board and the hassle that comes along with it.

Or can I expect the same problems with the Taichi?


----------



## bardacuda

I think I would have rather had the Taichi myself. It's too bad that all the boards are pricey for what you get. If you could get the Taichi at the price of the Prime Pro and/or if the Prime Pro was cheaper it would be an easier choice. I think the Prime Pro is probably the best in its price range though.


----------



## monitorhero

Yeah that would help a lot. But if I can spare me some frustration I'd go for the Taichi. What do the others think?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Yeah that would help a lot. But if I can spare me some frustration I'd go for the Taichi. What do the others think?


Taichi is great


----------



## monitorhero

Can somebody tell me about Asrock support? And ram support on their boards?


----------



## bardacuda

The Biostar GT7 is also worth looking at but I think it's been discontinued.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Can somebody tell me about Asrock support? And ram support on their boards?


Very good
@polkfan (its me, dave_k)


----------



## monitorhero

I wish it wasn't so damn expensive. And it only has 1x USB 3.1. Just checked out its Bios. Looks horrible compared to the Asus UEFI







(not that it is important) But does it miss any features that you have on the Asus x370?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> I wish it wasn't so damn expensive. And it only has 1x USB 3.1. Just checked out its Bios. Looks horrible compared to the Asus UEFI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (not that it is important) But does it miss any features that you have on the Asus x370?


Yeah, the UI is awful.
The features should be similiar, the Strix has prob better audio.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Yeah, the UI is awful.
> The features should be similiar, the Strix has prob better audio.


Audio is no problem since I am using a Soundblaster Z. As long as I can deactivate the Onboard sound everything is good


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> The Biostar GT7 is also worth looking at but I think it's been discontinued.


I'm not convinced of an early EOL yet. It just recently got a 1.0.0.6b BIOS and can still be readily purchased in the form of the model with the LED fan. If anything, it's just being ordered in smaller quantities because it doesn't sell like one of the 'big four'. It's still, IMO, unbeatable at the $150 and under tier when it goes on offer.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm not convinced of an early EOL yet. It just recently got a 1.0.0.6b BIOS and can still be readily purchased in the form of the model with the LED fan. If anything, it's just being ordered in smaller quantities because it doesn't sell like one of the 'big four'. It's still, IMO, unbeatable at the $150 and under tier when it goes on offer.


You guys in US








GT7 is not available here, not in Czech rep., not on amazon.de
The one time i saw it it cost 10% or 15% more than Crosshair


----------



## bardacuda

I don't see it on any Canadian sites anymore either.


----------



## SuperZan

To be fair, it wasn't even available in much of Europe or the UK to begin with. I was in Ipswich when I got mine back at launch, had to have it sent by my sister in the US. From what I saw, Newegg has been pretty much the primary retail option for the board in North America, where it's still available:https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138447 . Biostar's largest market presence is in Asia, where it still appears to be in stock. I wouldn't at all be surprised to learn that the vast majority of orders are coming from US Newegg and Asian retailers.


----------



## monitorhero

Sorry to bother again but is there a difference between the *Strix X370-F Gamin*g and the *X370 Taichi*?
I don't really need wifi and bluetooth. Other than that from what I read on hardwareluxx the VRM is pretty much the same. And the Strix is 30€ cheaper plus nicer Bios.
Or is the build quality and heatsink better on the Taichi?

Just read that the Taichi doesn't display temperatures correctly. Is that still a thing?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Sorry to bother again but is there a difference between the *Strix X370-F Gamin*g and the *X370 Taichi*?
> I don't really need wifi and bluetooth. Other than that from what I read on hardwareluxx the VRM is pretty much the same. And the Strix is 30€ cheaper plus nicer Bios.
> Or is the build quality and heatsink better on the Taichi?
> 
> Just read that the Taichi doesn't display temperatures correctly. Is that still a thing?


Taichi is better in terms of troubleshooting, you have a clear CMOS button + Debug LED.

Since it has been out longer more people are using it and also has a heatpipe heatsink (so I'd also be less skeptical of the heatsink) I'd not be too concerned as far as support. The fact that it uses double the mosfets for CPU power delivery and of similar quality means you have less than half the heat output per mosfet (due to nonlinear power loss).

The Taichi also has 2nd M.2 slot, which is rare on X370 boards.

The price difference on Newegg in the USA is minimal , it's ~ $170 for Taichi and ~ $155 for X370-F STRIX.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Taichi is better in terms of troubleshooting, you have a clear CMOS button + Debug LED.
> 
> Since it has been out longer more people are using it and also has a heatpipe heatsink (so I'd also be less skeptical of the heatsink) I'd not be too concerned as far as support. The fact that it uses double the mosfets for CPU power delivery and of similar quality means you have less than half the heat output per mosfet (due to nonlinear power loss).
> 
> The price difference on Newegg in the USA is minimal , it's ~ $170 for Taichi and ~ $155 for X370-F STRIX.


Oh wow thats almost cheap compared to german prices. Converted it costs 245$ here! Though newegg sells it for 189$ right now.

I woud love to get something cheaper with the same quality and low heat output. But I guess that is unlikely to find?


----------



## janice1234

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Can somebody tell me about Asrock support? And ram support on their boards?


asrock support suck, they eol x370 k4 come out just after a few month.

i rather get asus.


----------



## monitorhero

https://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/asus_rog_strix_x370_f_gaming_review,18.html Is this information valuable? Because the Strix doesn't convince performance-wise. How come some boards have massive advantages on some testes and loose on others. Very confusing.

Edit: I think this is a not reliable source


----------



## sakae48

so, i'm doing some task here, 75~80% CPU usage and the VRM sink does runs hot even tho it doesn't burn as bad as Prime's. maybe, it's because i add a shroud to force some air flows through VRM block.

my room ambient temp is ranging around 29~32C-ish



i can't really trust the sensor readings but i quite trust my fingers. there's hot air flowing from VRM block to the exhaust. much hotter than the air flowing from my CPU cooler to exhaust.

condition : open case (still waiting my intake fans to arrive. SW3 1000RPM doesn't do a good enough job for me)
so, the air flow on the case isn't quite forced flowing through the components. too bad my multimeter has no temperature features. i'd like to attach a k-probe on the VRM block


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Sorry to bother again but is there a difference between the *Strix X370-F Gamin*g and the *X370 Taichi*?
> I don't really need wifi and bluetooth. Other than that from what I read on hardwareluxx the VRM is pretty much the same. And the Strix is 30€ cheaper plus nicer Bios.
> Or is the build quality and heatsink better on the Taichi?
> 
> Just read that the Taichi doesn't display temperatures correctly. Is that still a thing?


Taichi has 12 phase NexFETs
Strix has 6phase IR3555s.
Taichi will run cooler, because it has bigger heatsink and more mosfet surface area than Strix.
Dont know about the temps tho.


----------



## chew*

Its not really 12 iirc its 4+4 and 2+2.

Basically 4 phase doubled and 2 phase doubled.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> so, i'm doing some task here, 75~80% CPU usage and the VRM sink does runs hot even tho it doesn't burn as bad as Prime's. maybe, it's because i add a shroud to force some air flows through VRM block.
> 
> my room ambient temp is ranging around 29~32C-ish
> 
> 
> 
> i can't really trust the sensor readings but i quite trust my fingers. there's hot air flowing from VRM block to the exhaust. much hotter than the air flowing from my CPU cooler to exhaust.
> 
> condition : open case (still waiting my intake fans to arrive. SW3 1000RPM doesn't do a good enough job for me)
> so, the air flow on the case isn't quite forced flowing through the components. too bad my multimeter has no temperature features. i'd like to attach a k-probe on the VRM block


Hey thanks for sharing your impressions. Guess I will go with the Taichi then. I would still be curious to see some temperature measurments on it.
But the bios is really bad why I would like to go with Asus: https://youtu.be/4v73oXX1C-Q


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Hey thanks for sharing your impressions. Guess I will go with the Taichi then. I would still be curious to see some temperature measurments on it.


sure, no problem at all








Taichi is a good board. hope you like it


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> sure, no problem at all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taichi is a good board. hope you like it


I am still not sure. The more I read about any board the less convinced I am. Because like in the video above the Bios is really confusing if you come from Asus which is really nice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v73oXX1C-Q So he says 2T isn't possible on the Taichi apparently


----------



## sakae48

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> I am still not sure. The more I read about any board the less convinced I am. Because like in the video above the Bios is really confusing if you come from Asus which is really nice.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v73oXX1C-Q So he says 2T isn't possible on the Taichi apparently


lol yeah.. i know the feel. it's quite hard to pick one
did you really need 2T?


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> lol yeah.. i know the feel. it's quite hard to pick one
> did you really need 2T?


I'd like to have the option.

I found a good site that did some thermal testing on different Am4 Boards:

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8099/asrock-x370-taichi-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html

Taichi does have the best temperatures of their tested products but also the Gigabyte k7 is solid. I could get a Gigabyte K7 for 204€ with a 20€ steam offer, while the Taichi costs 207€.

EDIT: I think I will still go with the Taichi because of the extra features and better VRMs temperature. The Gigabyte has 3x Usb 3.1 Gen 2 Type A Ports while the Taichi has only 1


----------



## monitorhero

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/68o5tj/asrock_x370_taichi_bios_update_went_really_bad/

So I just found out there is no DualBios or Bios recovery on the Taichi. And I already had problems with my Asus board regarding Bios recovery. This worries me already because with bad luck you're in another RMA process. Also the Taichi Bios looks really confusing and it resets your settings if you don't put them in in a certain order:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/69rhk0/asrock_x370_taichi_bios_220_it_gets_worse/

I really can't decide









My budget says Prime X370-Pro but I don't want anymore problems.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/68o5tj/asrock_x370_taichi_bios_update_went_really_bad/
> 
> So I just found out there is no DualBios or Bios recovery on the Taichi. And I already had problems with my Asus board regarding Bios recovery. This worries me already because with bad luck you're in another RMA process. Also the Taichi Bios looks really confusing and it resets your settings if you don't put them in in a certain order:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/69rhk0/asrock_x370_taichi_bios_220_it_gets_worse/
> 
> I really can't decide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My budget says Prime X370-Pro but I don't want anymore problems.


Buildzoid contacted ASRock and helped them fix the issues.
You could look for ASRock Killer SLI/ac but it is a pretty big hit or miss if you get Niko garbage or the Sino version.


----------



## VRMfreak

Guys what do you think about the Thermal Grizzly Minus 8 pad?
Der8auer uses them and they are not that expensive as well.
Also, he did a testing with X299 and they helped quite a bit from the stock ones.
https://www.amazon.de/Thermal-Grizzly-Thermo-Minus-St%C3%BCck/dp/B00ZJSBRE6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1506432794&sr=8-1&keywords=thermal+grizzly+minus+pad+8


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Buildzoid contacted ASRock and helped them fix the issues.
> You could look for ASRock Killer SLI/ac but it is a pretty big hit or miss if you get Niko garbage or the Sino version.


I am not willing to take that risk. I am still undecided between the Strix x370-f or the Taichi. I am not a massive overclocker though. I wish i had some thermal imaging on the Strix like on the Asrock here:
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8099/asrock-x370-taichi-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html

If i am not going for big overclocks do you guys think the VRMs of the Strix are efficient? It seems like there is no board like the Taichi when it comes to phase layout.

Are those temps comparable to the taichi http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065372205.html? (AlphaC posted those a while ago, just found out about them now)


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> I am not willing to take that risk. I am still undecided between the Strix x370-f or the Taichi. I am not a massive overclocker though. I wish i had some thermal imaging on the Strix like on the Asrock here:
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8099/asrock-x370-taichi-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html
> 
> If i am not going for big overclocks do you guys think the VRMs of the Strix are efficient? It seems like there is no board like the Taichi when it comes to phase layout.
> 
> Are those temps comparable to the taichi http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1065372205.html? (AlphaC posted those a while ago, just found out about them now)


As i posted the graphs yesterday, the heat output in terms of pure numbers is identical on Prime X370 Pro, Strix X370, Crosshair, Taichi, Profi gaming.
Taichi (profi gaming) and Crosshair have bigger heatsinks and more mosfets, so they will run cooler.
Strix vs Prime is similiar, but the powerstages on Strix are better (and more expensive) than the NexFETs.
I think the Strix is no frills, well enough even for R7 watercooling OC.
With the crosshair/taichi it comes down to just being the cool kid on the block with 12 phases and heatsink heavier than neutron star.
The best BIOS safety features are on Crosshairs and Gigabyte K7/Gaming 5 if you are into that but i never had any problems with BIOS bricking


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> As i posted the graphs yesterday, the heat output in terms of pure numbers is identical on Prime X370 Pro, Strix X370, Crosshair, Taichi, Profi gaming.
> Taichi (profi gaming) and Crosshair have bigger heatsinks and more mosfets, so they will run cooler.
> Strix vs Prime is similiar, but the powerstages on Strix are better (and more expensive) than the NexFETs.
> I think the Strix is no frills, well enough even for R7 watercooling OC.
> With the crosshair/taichi it comes down to just being the cool kid on the block with 12 phases and heatsink heavier than neutron star.
> The best BIOS safety features are on Crosshairs and Gigabyte K7/Gaming 5 if you are into that but i never had any problems with BIOS bricking


I was just looking at those pictures http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/2450#post_26266445

And the gigabyte and strix don't convince me when it comes to heat rejection. The strix b350 and x370 seem to have the same blocky heatsink. But I guess it gets cooler because it has more phases?
I can only hope the bios doesn't brick on an update. Read from a few people about this problem happening to them. I guess this is the only flaw on the Taichi.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> I was just looking at those pictures http://www.overclock.net/t/1624051/vrm-on-the-new-am4-motherboards/2450#post_26266445
> 
> And the gigabyte and strix don't convince me when it comes to heat rejection. The strix b350 and x370 seem to have the same blocky heatsink. But I guess it gets cooler because it has more phases?
> I can only hope the bios doesn't brick on an update. Read from a few people about this problem happening to them. I guess this is the only flaw on the Taichi.


Strix has the best heatsink out of the blocky competition.
MSI uses complete solid blocks, just like Gigabyte.
I tried the Strix heatsink with the B350-F as i was running the R5 1600 1.4V medium LLC 200KHz 3.9GHz..
I reached temps much lower than other boards.
I had MSI B350 Carbon before and it ran hotter because the heatsinks are pure blocks of aluminium.
I think the X370 Strix should be good, Taichi is good as well but it is 35 euro more expensive.


----------



## monitorhero

But there is a difference between r5 and r7, isn't there? Regarding heat output. I am so torn. With the Asus I had such problems before and no stable system. I am curious if I have less problems with Asrock. But then the price tag! Waaaahhhh I am going crazy


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> But there is a difference between r5 and r7, isn't there? Regarding heat output. I am so torn. With the Asus I had such problems before and no stable system. I am curious if I have less problems with Asrock. But then the price tag! Waaaahhhh I am going crazy


Yeah, R5 has lower power consumption, i just wanted to show you how the Strix heatsink performs.
Dont forget, the Prime B350 Plus is super budget choice and not good for 1800X


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Yeah, R5 has lower power consumption, i just wanted to show you how the Strix heatsink performs.
> Dont forget, the Prime B350 Plus is super budget choice and not good for 1800X


Yeah but I used an 1700x with this one.

The Asrock page didn't update their drivers since februrary? Whats up with that?
https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X370%20Taichi/index.de.asp#osW1064


----------



## ManofGod1000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/68o5tj/asrock_x370_taichi_bios_update_went_really_bad/
> 
> So I just found out there is no DualBios or Bios recovery on the Taichi. And I already had problems with my Asus board regarding Bios recovery. This worries me already because with bad luck you're in another RMA process. Also the Taichi Bios looks really confusing and it resets your settings if you don't put them in in a certain order:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/69rhk0/asrock_x370_taichi_bios_220_it_gets_worse/
> 
> I really can't decide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My budget says Prime X370-Pro but I don't want anymore problems.


The Taichi does have bios recovery. Also, that link you posted is from 4 months ago.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Its not really 12 iirc its 4+4 and 2+2.
> 
> Basically 4 phase doubled and 2 phase doubled.


I thought it has 6 phases. So is a x370-f better in that regard or has more?

@ManofGod1000 I know but couldn'tf find an update. But they don't seem to update their drivers on the website which is confusing to me.


----------



## chew*

All depends if it was doubled right.

In taichis case it was.

Half the videos are old.

2T works fine.

Bios has matured alot .


----------



## monitorhero

I still don't understand the difference sorry. What does doubeling mean? Would you suggest the taichi or the strix?


----------



## chew*

I don't suggest one brand over another.

I use Asrocks. For some they could perceive that as being biased.

Buy based on features you need.

Don't pay for features you won't use.

Best suggestion I can make.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> I don't suggest one brand over another.
> 
> I use Asrocks. For some they could perceive that as being biased.
> 
> Buy based on features you need.
> 
> Don't pay for features you won't use.
> 
> Best suggestion I can make.


Yeah that makes sense of course. But I read that with 2x16gb the Asus C6H is not working properly.

Because I already have 2x16gb G.Skill F4-3200C14D-32GVK and I want them to work. (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?293130-Ryzen-Return-of-the-Jedi&p=5257438&viewfull=1#post5257438)

Or is that solved by now?


----------



## chew*

Fairly certain its been resolved on the top tier x370 boards.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Fairly certain its been resolved on the top tier x370 boards.


Does that include the x370-f gaming?


----------



## bardacuda

If the Strix and Taichi are close to the same price I would go for the Taichi. It is one of the best AM4 boards there is. Strix is more like upper end of mid range and doesn't have anything going for it over the Taichi afaik.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> If the Strix and Taichi are close to the same price I would go for the Taichi. It is one of the best AM4 boards there is. Strix is more like upper end of mid range and doesn't have anything going for it over the Taichi afaik.


The bios looks nicer though and I don't know about Asrock's RMA process. Asus is very uncomplicated here in Germany. Also it's 35$ price difference which makes it harder to decide...

EDIT: You know. I flipped a coin and got the Taichi. Now let's hope it lives up to its promise.


----------



## bardacuda

I've found it's better to spend more on your system and be satisfied than spend too little and be disappointed. After a week or whatever you won't remember the hit to your wallet but bad components will always haunt you with 'what if' questions about your hardware choices. (Not that Strix is bad by any means though)


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> Does that include the x370-f gaming?


Nope. That would be mid tier and since mid tier support has sucked monkey nutz I have abandoned mid tier.


----------



## janice1234

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> As i posted the graphs yesterday, the heat output in terms of pure numbers is identical on Prime X370 Pro, Strix X370, Crosshair, Taichi, Profi gaming.
> Taichi (profi gaming) and Crosshair have bigger heatsinks and more mosfets, so they will run cooler.
> Strix vs Prime is similiar, but the *powerstages on Strix are better (and more expensive) than the NexFETs.*
> I think the Strix is no frills, well enough even for R7 watercooling OC.
> With the crosshair/taichi it comes down to just being the cool kid on the block with 12 phases and heatsink heavier than neutron star.
> The best BIOS safety features are on Crosshairs and Gigabyte K7/Gaming 5 if you are into that but i never had any problems with BIOS bricking


so u mean the vrm on strix (PowIRstage) is better and expensive than taichi / crosshair (NexFET)?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *janice1234*
> 
> so u mean the vrm on strix (PowIRstage) is better and expensive than taichi / crosshair (NexFET)?


Its not better.
Taichi and crosshairs have more parts, that will compensate.
Strix has the best VRM out of the 6phases (G5, K7, Prime X370 Pro)
Ofcourse taichi or crosshair will kill it


----------



## monitorhero

Thanks guys for the advice and help here. I hope the Taichi meets my expectations


----------



## WexleySnoops

Just had a read through the past few pages and I'm glad someone else was feeling as overwhelmed as me about AM4 boards and then came to the same conclusion about going with the Taichi.

I'm waiting until Oct 5th to see how Coffee Lake performs.

At that point I'll either go R7 1700 + Taichi, or 8700K + Z370 board.


----------



## Delphi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Holy moly, so many VRM settings.
> And i thought that the 5 i have on B350-F Strix is premium
> @chew* I did not expect the B350-F to turn out so bad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you recommend a decent thermal pads to upgrade?
> Or should i sell the Strix and get X370-F Strix or Prime or something ?
> I am quite sad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could get used Prime X370 Pro for really cheapo :/


Yes the VRM isn't the strongest but it is a B350 board so it is to be expected. Though I do think it is a top tier B350. It is one of the more efficient ones and runs cooler than the competition. I wouldn't worry about upgrading unless you're wanting to really push a R7 chip. Mine loads out at 47c on IBT 1.425 volts 3.925ghz r5 1600. The lower temp allows us to push a bit harder.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Delphi*
> 
> Yes the VRM isn't the strongest but it is a B350 board so it is to be expected. Though I do think it is a top tier B350. It is one of the more efficient ones and runs cooler than the competition. I wouldn't worry about upgrading unless you're wanting to really push a R7 chip. Mine loads out at 47c on IBT 1.425 volts 3.925ghz r5 1600. The lower temp allows us to push a bit harder.


Yeah it is one of the two best configs on B350, the two other ones have more highside fets but much worse heatsinks than Strix.
I had the B350 Carbon before.
I think i will stick with it and eventually upgrade next year to X470.
In the meantime, i will get two thermal grizzly pads for the VRM and should be fine.


----------



## monitorhero

So I got my Taichi and installed it. When booting without SSD I get a lot of error codes. The bios on board is pretty old 2.20 so I assume it has been lying around for a while. I am afraid to flash to a newer version but its not even AGESA 1.0.0.6a. I don't wanna brick the new board.

chew updates via DOS but I am uncomfortable with it. Is Instant Flash just as good? And can somebody suggest with BIOS version to use for the Taichi? 3.0/3.1/3.2?


----------



## chew*

3.0


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> 3.0


Thanks chew. How did you create a DOS usb stick? I couldn't find a good tutorial and I am a noob when it comes to this. Does it need to be MBR or GPT?

EDIT: So I used Rufus with FreeDos but it looks a lot different. Version 0.84 it says from 2006. Very weird.


----------



## chew*

Rufus works for creating bootable usb iirc.


----------



## VRMfreak

I just decided i will hand out my sicc cash (almost non existent lol) for the X370 Strix.
I can get it from german amazon for 180 euro and thats too good to not be bought.
I will probably wait for black friday cause i want dem powirstages.
Taichi is way too expensive and the Strix has more than i need.
Postcode display would be nice tho.


----------



## VRMfreak

Okay so update, i recieved my X370-F Strix.The VRM is super beefy, it has big amount of vrm control (credits go to IR3555Ms).
Also, dont what is @chew* complaining about. The memory support is same as on B350 Strix if not better.
Recommend the mobo 110%.


----------



## chew*

Read prime pro mem drama.

Then buy a c6h and compare.

You do not know simply because you have not compared.


----------



## LuckyImperial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> I just decided i will hand out my sicc cash (almost non existent lol) for the X370 Strix.
> I can get it from german amazon for 180 euro and thats too good to not be bought.
> I will probably wait for black friday cause i want dem powirstages.
> Taichi is way too expensive and the Strix has more than i need.
> Postcode display would be nice tho.


I want an OLED AM4 board sooooo bad.


----------



## chew*

Expect support to be equivalent to its ranking in pyramid.

Also suggest reading text as E model strix is considered "best" meaning most likely better support.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.techpowerup.com/237490/asus-motherboard-segmentation-explained-prime-series-takes-backseat%3Famp


----------



## AlphaC

AFAIK it's

ROG (at top)

---- product gap ---

STRIX E
STRIX F = STRIX E without wifi
STRIX G = mATX

chipset - "Pro"
chipset - A <--- on AM4 it's pretty horrible

STRIX H = garbage with a silkscreen


----------



## chew*

thx for the clarification.

based on the support I got on prime x370 I was not impressed.

the c6h however no complaints although a lot of bios's....as in every new bios required setting up and retune.

Be nice just to actually use something vs tinker with it every damn week.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Read prime pro mem drama.
> 
> Then buy a c6h and compare.
> 
> You do not know simply because you have not compared.


I heard things from Flank3r, no need to tell me.
Of course it wont match C6H because it is the top model and has 2 phase for memory which could theoretically help with mem oc.
I am just saying that the mem support is same as on B350s but the BIOS has more DOCP profiles preloaded, so it is even easier for not advanced users, B350-F had only the 3200 one, X370-F has 2400, 2666, 2933 and 3200.


----------



## monitorhero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> I heard things from Flank3r, no need to tell me.
> Of course it wont match C6H because it is the top model and has 2 phase for memory which could theoretically help with mem oc.
> I am just saying that the mem support is same as on B350s but the BIOS has more DOCP profiles preloaded, so it is even easier for not advanced users, B350-F had only the 3200 one, X370-F has 2400, 2666, 2933 and 3200.


The b350plus has all the docp profiles too


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *monitorhero*
> 
> The b350plus has all the docp profiles too


Thats interesting


----------



## chew*

Doubt the vrm has anything to do with it tbh.

Willing to bet the bios support coupled with the R&D and trace layout has everything to do with it.


----------



## sakae48

it seems like 1 phase is enough for RAM. 2 could provide cleaner DC voltage but it doesnt seems to be needed in current availability it should be the PCB design and BIOS.
correct me if im wrong


----------



## ozlay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> AFAIK it's
> 
> ROG (at top)
> 
> ---- product gap ---
> 
> STRIX E
> STRIX F = STRIX E without wifi
> STRIX G = mATX
> 
> chipset - "Pro"
> chipset - A <--- on AM4 it's pretty horrible
> 
> STRIX H = garbage with a silkscreen


What i find odd is that the Prime pro has a 6 phase VRM like the Strix X370-F. But the ROG boards only have a 4 phase with doubler. They should have given us a 6 phase with doubler....

Prime pro and ROG Hero have the same fets but prime has 6 and Hero has 4 with doubler.

Strix X370-F and ROG Extreme have the same fets but Strix has 6 and Extreme has 4 with doubler.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ozlay*
> 
> What i find odd is that the Prime pro has a 6 phase VRM like the Strix X370-F. But the ROG boards only have a 4 phase with doubler. They should have given us a 6 phase with doubler....
> 
> Prime pro and ROG Hero have the same fets but prime has 6 and Hero has 4 with doubler.
> 
> Strix X370-F and ROG Extreme have the same fets but Strix has 6 and Extreme has 4 with doubler.


You *wish* they give you 6 phases with doublers like Asrock X370 Taichi









The money was spent elsewhere (ROG marketing , RGB light even on the Debug LED , water tach/sensors, more USB 3.1, some LN2/ voltage reads, & BIOS development mainly as far as CH VI Hero). Anyhow, the X370-F STRIX (6 x IR3555) and the Crosshair VI Extreme (8x IR3555) are plenty capable if all you care about is the VRM , although the CH VI Extreme is pricey.


----------



## VRMfreak

I watched OC3D MSI B350 Tomahawk review and i had to take anti-autism pills to watch the video without epilepsy.
He recommended it to go with R7 1700 and overclock it, he doesn't even seem to realise that 1800X is the same as 1700, just few percent better silicon.
Are there any known Garbage-grade mobos (Bad X370s, B350s) to have a some kind of VRM protection? It is talked about on X299 because the VRMs throttle themselves down (thanks Internation Rectifier for powerstages with sensors) but not on AM4, especially when the dumb reviewers take B350 and break R7 OC records.


----------



## poah

I've got a tomahawk Mobo with VRM temps of 72C while rendering video. cpu is o/c to 3.9 3.125v, is that temp too high or ok?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poah*
> 
> I've got a tomahawk Mobo with VRM temps of 72C while rendering video. cpu is o/c to 3.9 3.125v, is that temp too high or ok?


Sounds fine. I suppose its not an 8 core


----------



## poah

Yeah 1700


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poah*
> 
> Yeah 1700


Then these temps are more than fishy as can be seen in this thread.
Did you use IR thermometer?
I think the sensor is doing cartwheels as i have experienced with bad or non-existent readings on Tomahawk


----------



## poah

How are they fishy? Good, bad not believable?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Then these temps are more than fishy as can be seen in this thread.
> Did you use IR thermometer?
> I think the sensor is doing cartwheels as i have experienced with bad or non-existent readings on Tomahawk


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poah*
> 
> How are they fishy? Good, bad not believable?


They should be at least 20°C higher. What voltage are you running on?


----------



## poah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> They should be at least 20°C higher. What voltage are you running on?


1.325 llc auto


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poah*
> 
> 1.325 llc auto


How did you measure the VRM temps? Using software?


----------



## poah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> How did you measure the VRM temps? Using software?


Yes.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poah*
> 
> Yes.


Which one? Under what sensor was the temp?


----------



## poah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Which one? Under what sensor was the temp?


HWMonitor


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *poah*
> 
> HWMonitor


What sensor?


----------



## poah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> What sensor?


Mainboard


----------



## AlphaC

http://hwcooling.net/en/which-x370-for-175-eur-asus-rog-strix-or-gigabyte-gaming-5-en/6/




STRIX-F on left
Quote:


> In overclocking mode, constant 3.95 GHz was set for all cores, including the active SMT (with C'n'Q off). Although this frequency does not hit the limits of the processor, it will be possible to operate with it also on cheaper boards, which makes it easier to compare models from all categories. The Vcore CPU was tuned to the lowest possible value, which makes the process stable even at high load. Vcore SOC was manually regulated to fixed 1.1 V, other settings (including LLC) were left in "auto" mode.
> 
> We simulated the burn in IntelBurnTest (12 GB) for 15 minutes. In the first chapter, you can find the results from the internal chipset sensor and VRM. The second sensor, however, is not included in all boards, so this value will often be missing in the results. We captured the image of the heat around the socket with the thermal imager Fluke Ti125. Specifically, the maximum surface temperature of the coil casing, the MOSFET heatsink, and also the MOSFET casing (with heatsink removed, but for safety reasons, we did not include these measurements in overclocking mode). Through thermalvision, it is easy to see the temperature of MOSFETs and how efficient their coolers are. We put a strip of a thin paper tape on them before taking the pictures to ensure that the thermal imager reads temperatures from the same surface - eliminating distortions caused by combinations of different materials.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://hwcooling.net/en/which-x370-for-175-eur-asus-rog-strix-or-gigabyte-gaming-5-en/6/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> STRIX-F on left


Hello, AlphaC, which software if any reads this temp and what is the label? Tclt?

Thank you to you, chew, and a others who have been putting out valuable info that help OCN.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://hwcooling.net/en/which-x370-for-175-eur-asus-rog-strix-or-gigabyte-gaming-5-en/6/
> 
> STRIX-F on left


Thank you very much, i needed that. You're amazing.


----------



## sakae48

still kinda impressed that the aluminum brick is actually doing its job..

and how the hell people hits 3.9GHz without a real effort? i cant even get 3.8 stable at 1.312v right now!


----------



## GotYaNoob

Heya! I'm looking for a good motherboard to pair with my 1700. I was looking at the GIGABYTE X370-Gaming K5 or GIGABYTE X370-Gaming 5, is the 30€ for the 5 worth it over K5? Also are there any better MOBO around the sam price range that have better VRMs?


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Heya! I'm looking for a good motherboard to pair with my 1700. I was looking at the GIGABYTE X370-Gaming K5 or GIGABYTE X370-Gaming 5, is the 30€ for the 5 worth it over K5? Also are there any better MOBO around the sam price range that have better VRMs?


K5 - garbage
G5 - OK
X370-F - Best
Try to stretch for X370-F, as you can see from the comparison it is better than G5. I have to confirm it is really good and the OC is easy with ton of VRM settings (G5 lacks)


----------



## GotYaNoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> K5 - garbage
> G5 - OK
> X370-F - Best
> Try to stretch for X370-F, as you can see from the comparison it is better than G5. I have to confirm it is really good and the OC is easy with ton of VRM settings (G5 lacks)


Are you sure? X370-F here is cheaper than Gaming 5.. Hmm ok so after a lil research Gaming 5 has IR3553 while X370-F has IR3555 so first of is this true and is there anything else that is better on X370-F because i really don't like the asthetics of X370-F..


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Are you sure? X370-F here is cheaper than Gaming 5.. Hmm ok so after a lil research Gaming 5 has IR3553 while X370-F has IR3555 so first of is this true and is there anything else that is better on X370-F because i really don't like the asthetics of X370-F..


It has better BIOS and memory support is good (i heard few bad things about G5)
It has BCLK gen if you care.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> still kinda impressed that the aluminum brick is actually doing its job..
> 
> and how the hell people hits 3.9GHz without a real effort? i cant even get 3.8 stable at 1.312v right now!


I maybe know why bricc boi is better than the G5's heatsink.
I read an article recently where they talked about aluminium heatsink's finish and how it affects thermal emisivity (or whatever you call it in EN). One finish has emisivity around 0.05, the other one 0.95


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Hello, AlphaC, which software if any reads this temp and what is the label? Tclt?
> 
> Thank you to you, chew, and a others who have been putting out valuable info that help OCN.


You're welcome.

I actually tested this out on my Gaming 5, the VRM MOS sensor in hwinfo64 is pretty much spot on to what these guys got with their test.

T_Die is the CPU temp
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> K5 - garbage
> G5 - OK
> X370-F - Best
> Try to stretch for X370-F, as you can see from the comparison it is better than G5. I have to confirm it is really good and the OC is easy with ton of VRM settings (G5 lacks)


X370-F is not truly the best, I'd say the Taichi is.

The problem with having so many phases is when it's a normal user that isn't going to max out their CPU all the time, phase shedding needs to be used to cut the phases used (to minimize idle power).


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> X370-F is not truly the best, I'd say the Taichi is.
> 
> The problem with having so many phases is when it's a normal user that isn't going to max out their CPU all the time, phase shedding needs to be used to cut the phases used (to minimize idle power).


Of course, Taichi is better. I don't know his exact prices and price range, the Taichi is has pretty hefty pricetag here.
I mean, the X370-F is pretty good value and i don't quite like the setup on Taichi, bcoz even if you run R7 4GHz 1.4V, you are putting 8.3A on each block and it still doesn't really go to the peak of efficiency graph (normalized TI power loss)
Why would you cut down the amount of used phases when you can buy cheaper board that will have slightly better efficiency and basically the same features.
I mean, yeah, if you're buildzoid and gonna push R7 to 5.4GHz on LN2 and draw 200W+ then fine, you have 12 phases, but i still think the taichi is over-overengineered.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sakae48*
> 
> still kinda impressed that the aluminum brick is actually doing its job..
> 
> and how the hell people hits 3.9GHz without a real effort? i cant even get 3.8 stable at 1.312v right now!


It isnt doing its job. Temps are lower after it is removed.

Misread the subtitle on the bare images.


----------



## stewwy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> K5 - garbage
> G5 - OK
> X370-F - Best
> Try to stretch for X370-F, as you can see from the comparison it is better than G5. I have to confirm it is really good and the OC is easy with ton of VRM settings (G5 lacks)


Second this I swapped my k5 for a biostar x370gt7 3750 stable at 1.32V only 3600 on k5 (1700)

Best VRM's for the price ( UEFI not so much so lol )

It's all there in the 'bios' just all over the place


----------



## AlphaC

I think the Biostar GT7 is really underrated. Part of that is availability.

It's got a solid VRM, dual BIOs, Post Code LED, power/reset, etc.

When the Ryzen refresh rolls around we'll see how well it's supported long-term. For now, it's a very solid board.

It's not without relatively minor drawbacks, for example it has a DVI port instead of more USB ports (similar to Z370 so it's not terrible), has 5K Hour caps instead of 10-12K hour, uses a Realtek LAN (it's a nitpick), lacks BCLK gen, & the audio isn't the best of the best (it still uses ALC1220 but it seems the implementation is not top notch) but it isn't bad.

Aesthetically though, it's definitely polarizing. It would have been a better seller if they had made it "GT7" or the "R" (similar to Z170 GT7) on the IO shield instead of "VIVID LED DJ".They probably should have used a black connector at the bottom right corner of the board instead of a blue USB header too.

Biostar needs new industrial designers. If you look at their Z370 range the aesthetic has been completely overhauled to a dull yellow (they call it "gold") and black. The problem is the "gold" is used too profusely.

Look at anything meant for racing, it's usually minimally gold. For example a Lotus F1 racecar, Ducati Monster, Lamborghini Centenario.


----------



## GotYaNoob

What about ASUS PRIME X370-PRO? This review says that it has the same power delivery as X370-F ( https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7592/7/26-amd-socket-am4-motherboards-review-the-best-boards-for-ryzen-internal-power-supply ). Am i missing something?


----------



## AlphaC

It's not true.

The layout may be similar but the mosfets aren't.

The X370 Prime Pro has TI NexFETs rated for 40A (high+low side mosfets combined), while the X370-F STRIX uses IR3555 which are 60A International Rectifier Powerstages (driver+high+low side).

See the actual spec sheet on their pages
https://us.hardware.info/product/400521/asus-rog-strix-x370-f-gaming/specifications
https://us.hardware.info/product/386634/asus-prime-x370-pro/specifications


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I think the Biostar GT7 is really underrated. Part of that is availability.
> 
> It's got a solid VRM, dual BIOs, Post Code LED, power/reset, etc.
> 
> When the Ryzen refresh rolls around we'll see how well it's supported long-term. For now, it's a very solid board.
> 
> It's not without relatively minor drawbacks, for example it has a DVI port instead of more USB ports (similar to Z370 so it's not terrible), has 5K Hour caps instead of 10-12K hour, uses a Realtek LAN (it's a nitpick), lacks BCLK gen, & the audio isn't the best of the best (it still uses ALC1220 but it seems the implementation is not top notch) but it isn't bad.
> 
> Aesthetically though, it's definitely polarizing. It would have been a better seller if they had made it "GT7" or the "R" (similar to Z170 GT7) on the IO shield instead of "VIVID LED DJ".They probably should have used a black connector at the bottom right corner of the board instead of a blue USB header too.
> 
> Biostar needs new industrial designers. If you look at their Z370 range the aesthetic has been completely overhauled to a dull yellow (they call it "gold") and black. The problem is the "gold" is used too profusely.
> 
> Look at anything meant for racing, it's usually minimally gold. For example a Lotus F1 racecar, Ducati Monster, Lamborghini Centenario.


Damn, the GT7 is basically pure VRM you're paying for.
The availability is awful. Here in europe, it just doesn't exist.


----------



## kd5151

https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7592/26-amd-socket-am4-motherboards-review-the-best-boards-for-ryzen


----------



## cssorkinman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kd5151*
> 
> https://us.hardware.info/reviews/7592/26-amd-socket-am4-motherboards-review-the-best-boards-for-ryzen


Titanium - more power efficient under load than any ASUS board and 10% more efficient than Taichi.


----------



## SuperZan

Would have liked to see the GT7 rather than the GT3...


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> i still think the taichi is over-overengineered.


Nonsense. If a person's budget allows, always go for the over-engineered board, even if you're not planning on using all of its features. Case in point, this is exactly what partially influenced my decision to get my Crosshair VI Hero. You want something that's going to last you a long time.


----------



## chew*

In the engineering world....effecient is often used or the preferred term since the real word cheap....well simply sounds cheap.

Congrats on msi winning in cheap for them but not cheap for you category I guess?

Btw does the msi have bluetooth or wifi? Just curious as last i checked they are not powered by osmosis or solar energy









Captain Obvious out.


----------



## cssorkinman

Hehehe


----------



## chew*

Umm ok.

How about I buy a fatality for $149.99 get a $50 mail in rebate. Total $99.99

$200 saved not using msi. I think I can offset that 10% of peanuts over the course of 3 years


----------



## GotYaNoob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> I think the Biostar GT7 is really underrated. Part of that is availability.
> 
> It's got a solid VRM, dual BIOs, Post Code LED, power/reset, etc.


Is the VRM better than on X370-F from Asus?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> Is the VRM better than on X370-F from Asus?


Yes but no BCLK.

GT7 = 8 x IR3555

X370-F STRIX = 6 x IR3555

You get minor losses from using doublers to go from 4 PWM phases to 8 phases so the X370-F is a better balanced board when you look at the featureset.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Umm ok.
> 
> How about I buy a fatality for $149.99 get a $50 mail in rebate. Total $99.99
> 
> $200 saved not using msi. I think I can offset that 10% of peanuts over the course of 3 years


Does the rebate vendor for Asrock honor rebates for openbox boards?

I see quite a few Gigabyte K7 & G5 openbox too.
The thing with the dual BIOS boards is it is much easier to fix a broken BIOs. I hope Asrock implements the dual BIOS they have on Z370 (Taichi , Fatal1ty Pro , Fatal1ty K6, Extreme4) into the next AM4 chipset boards.

B&H has one used ASUS X370-F STRIX for $120.


----------



## GotYaNoob

So i see a lot of tech channels on YouTube recommending B350 boards for pretty much any Ryzen CPU form R3 to R7 if you don't need SLI. So would i be able to notice the difference between lets say Asus X370-F and MSI B350 Tomahawk on 1700 clocked at 4Ghz? Will I see more instabillity or are there any other long term side effects on using lower end boards?


----------



## AlphaC

The side effect is a garbage ability to upgrade to future Ryzen CPUs if you want to, worse voltage ripple (fewer phases), higher VRM temperatures, and possible thermal shutdowns when you have your components stressed.

The X370-F is a good board, the B350 Tomshawk is far from one. The B350 Tomahawk is running 4 phases of cheap NIKOS PK618+PK632 , with two PK632 mosfets per phase to induce a lower effective resistance (halving it). The PK618 is package limited to 26A (at any temp) so having only 4 is a liability when Ryzen 7 can draw 110A. Overall VRM efficiency is only about 85%. The heatsink on the VRM is also very low fin area. In contrast the X370-F is running 6 phases of top tier IR3555 60A powerstages which have over 92% efficiency and are going to be cooler + more stable at pretty much every sane load. The X370-F board also has a BCLK generator so if you decide to play with BCLK you can do that.

As far as I/O: the B350 Tomahawk doesn't have USB 3.1 Gen 2. The B350 Tomahawk is using an unshielded ALC892 audio codec as well as a Realtek LAN.

The X370-F is using a ALC1220 audio codec shielded , plus it has USB 3.1 Gen 2 with a Type C connector and Intel Gigabit LAN.

So overall, everything is better on the X370-F.

There's a B350 Tomahawk Plus with a clock generator and USB 3.1 gen 2, but with the same garbage VRM.


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> There's a B350 Tomahawk Plus with a clock generator and USB 3.1 gen 2, but with the same garbage VRM.


So, basically, it's still a turd. Only now it's got a couple of added features. Right?

BTW Alpha, how the hell do you know so much about motherboards? It's amazing


----------



## chew*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Yes but no BCLK.
> 
> GT7 = 8 x IR3555
> 
> X370-F STRIX = 6 x IR3555
> 
> You get minor losses from using doublers to go from 4 PWM phases to 8 phases so the X370-F is a better balanced board when you look at the featureset.
> Does the rebate vendor for Asrock honor rebates for openbox boards?
> 
> I see quite a few Gigabyte K7 & G5 openbox too.
> The thing with the dual BIOS boards is it is much easier to fix a broken BIOs. I hope Asrock implements the dual BIOS they have on Z370 (Taichi , Fatal1ty Pro , Fatal1ty K6, Extreme4) into the next AM4 chipset boards.
> 
> B&H has one used ASUS X370-F STRIX for $120.


Rebate form makes no mention of it.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> So i see a lot of tech channels on YouTube recommending B350 boards for pretty much any Ryzen CPU form R3 to R7 if you don't need SLI. So would i be able to notice the difference between lets say Asus X370-F and MSI B350 Tomahawk on 1700 clocked at 4Ghz? Will I see more instabillity or are there any other long term side effects on using lower end boards?


Tomahawk will eventually fail at 4ghz with an R7 (sooner rather than later depending on how high you have to push voltage). B350 or cheap X370 boards fit well with quad or hex core Ryzen CPU's, if you are going R7 and want to hit 4ghz you really should pony up a bit more for the motherboard.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GotYaNoob*
> 
> So i see a lot of tech channels on YouTube recommending B350 boards for pretty much any Ryzen CPU form R3 to R7 if you don't need SLI. So would i be able to notice the difference between lets say Asus X370-F and MSI B350 Tomahawk on 1700 clocked at 4Ghz? Will I see more instabillity or are there any other long term side effects on using lower end boards?


The people recommending such are usually totally dumb, i enjoy commenting under their videos and ranting them.
Strix X370-F has high-end VRM, it is strong and has good voltage control.
Tomahawk is trash and garbage at its finest.
Only 8 (9) boards on AM4 would be considered "good" for 8 core OC.
B350s/Bad X370s are majority of current AM4 boards
Also, B350 Awfulturdhawk would melt with R7 sooner or later


----------



## KarathKasun

I wouldn't say that the Strix X370-F has a high end VRM, though it is at least usable for R7 overclocks.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> I wouldn't say that the Strix X370-F has a high end VRM, though it is at least usable for R7 overclocks.


I think 6* IR3555 is pretty good. Boards in that price range usually use HS+LS (Z370 Strix for example), so i am surprised they used such expensive parts


----------



## chrisjames61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> The people recommending such are usually totally dumb, i enjoy commenting under their videos and ranting them.
> Strix X370-F has high-end VRM, it is strong and has good voltage control.
> Tomahawk is trash and garbage at its finest.
> Only 8 (9) boards on AM4 would be considered "good" for 8 core OC.
> B350s/Bad X370s are majority of current AM4 boards
> Also, B350 Awfulturdhawk would melt with R7 sooner or later


Well, go ahead and name the 8 good AM4 boards for overclocking an 8 core. I'm interested.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chrisjames61*
> 
> Well, go ahead and name the 8 good AM4 boards for overclocking an 8 core. I'm interested.


Other boards would probably handle it too, i just dont usually recommend board that would run at 100 or so.
Stuff like Prime X370 Pro, Strix X370, Crosshairs, Taichi and Pro Gaming.The Gigabyte 5 and K7 have pretty bad heatsinks that make them run pretty toasty, but the VRM is technically good.
I'd say the Sinopower versions of cheaper ASRock X370s are pretty nice too, but there is chance you'll get the Niko trash.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> Other boards would probably handle it too, i just dont usually recommend board that would run at 100 or so.
> Stuff like Prime X370 Pro, Strix X370, Crosshairs, Taichi and Pro Gaming.The Gigabyte 5 and K7 have pretty bad heatsinks that make them run pretty toasty, but the VRM is technically good.
> I'd say the Sinopower versions of cheaper ASRock X370s are pretty nice too, but there is chance you'll get the Niko trash.


The Sinopower X370 boards (Fatal1ty K4 , Killer SLI, Fatal1ty Gaming X) aren't really worth it. Per Steven at tweaktown, they're running in dual driver mode rather than interleaved doublers.
If they were running in doubler mode you'd be looking at ~ 88% efficiency rather than ~85%.

I'd say Prime Pro / Gaming 5 / K7 are roughly on par , with the edge going to the Prime Pro due to heatsink. 6x 40A NexFETs vs 40A powerstages _> 90% efficiency at 25A for IR3553_ vs 92% for NexFET at the same amperage
---> capacitors on the Gaming 5 / K7 are better and inductors likely are as well

Crosshair 8 x 40A NexFETs _> 92% Efficiency at 25A each_
---> memory phases are better than STRIX-F

STRIX-F 6x 60A powerstages , BCLK _> 93% efficient at 35A each_ ... this board + debug LED, voltage read, dual BIOs should be the Gigabyte K7

Crosshair Extreme / Biostar GT7 8x 60A powerstages _> 93% efficient at 35A each_ , Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro 12x40A NexFETs
---> Biostar using 5K hr caps and likely some sort of regular inductor

Keep in mind Ryzen 7 can use about 110-130A easily when overclocked with 1.35-1.4V.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> The Sinopower X370 boards (Fatal1ty K4 , Killer SLI, Fatal1ty Gaming X) aren't really worth it. Per Steven at tweaktown, they're running in dual driver mode rather than interleaved doublers.
> If they were running in doubler mode you'd be looking at ~ 88% efficiency rather than ~85%.
> 
> I'd say Prime Pro / Gaming 5 / K7 are roughly on par , with the edge going to the Prime Pro due to heatsink. 6x 40A NexFETs vs 40A powerstages _> 90% efficiency at 25A for IR3553_ vs 92% for NexFET at the same amperage
> ---> capacitors on the Gaming 5 / K7 are better and inductors likely are as well
> 
> Crosshair 8 x 40A NexFETs _> 92% Efficiency at 25A each_
> ---> memory phases are better than STRIX-F
> 
> STRIX-F 6x 60A powerstages , BCLK _> 93% efficient at 35A each_ ... this board + debug LED, voltage read, dual BIOs should be the Gigabyte K7
> 
> Crosshair Extreme / Biostar GT7 8x 60A powerstages _> 93% efficient at 35A each_ , Taichi / Fatal1ty Pro 12x40A NexFETs
> ---> Biostar using 5K hr caps and likely some sort of regular inductor
> 
> Keep in mind Ryzen 7 can use about 110-130A easily when overclocked with 1.35-1.4V.


110-130A? Are we talking package or cores only? I was always using bz's values (100A R7 core, 70A R5 1600 core)
I am including the ASRock SNPS boards for the people who call me an Asus shill because most AM4 boards i ever recommend are Asus








The Strix has R68 (680nH) inductors and solid 5K 105°C caps, but they are not an issue because that board never touches over 90, even getting it over 80 with watercooler and R7 1800X would be hard.


----------



## bardacuda

My core current peaked at over 120A in IBT with 1.32V. SoC current peaked at over 14A.


----------



## KarathKasun

I was pushing 80A on the cores with an R5 1400 while SoC was pushing 20A. Total power output was ~125W. 120A would be very easy to hit with a R7.


----------



## VRMfreak

That is insane, were you using software or current clamp?
Because my 1600 at 1.4V 3.975GHz peaked at 110A in HWInfo64, i would never trust any software XD
Overclocked 1700 ate 170W, ~30 is taken for SoC and the rest for the core.
I am using buildzoid's current clamp measurments from the EPS12V cable.
120A seems extremely insane to me, more like 8700K at 4.8+ power draw.


----------



## sakae48

mine draws 105A at 3.8 1.38v
i'd like to see what will happen if i use 1.47v at maximum clock possible


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VRMfreak*
> 
> That is insane, were you using software or current clamp?
> Because my 1600 at 1.4V 3.975GHz peaked at 110A in HWInfo64, i would never trust any software XD
> Overclocked 1700 ate 170W, ~30 is taken for SoC and the rest for the core.
> I am using buildzoid's current clamp measurments from the EPS12V cable.
> 120A seems extremely insane to me, more like 8700K at 4.8+ power draw.


Verified with a clamp, 12v EPS connector was reading 10 to 11 amps. If the VRM is ~90% efficient that comes out to ~115w for the CPU.


----------



## chew*

If Karath had ever replied to me he could tell you what 4050 draws.

I offered to trade him a good 1400 for his crap 1.


----------



## KarathKasun

I think I turned it down because I had a crap board that wouldn't do a good chip justice (voltage limited in UEFI primarily).

I still have that build, but its sitting in a corner waiting for its new owner.


----------



## chew*

Ahh. What are you on now?

I obviously from above post picked up a fatality for my daily build. Not sure which chip I will use yet but it will be an 8 core. I am in no rush still collecting parts for the build.


----------



## Nighthog

If gigabyte readings are anything accurate in HWiNFO64 and dividing by 2. My for the moment 3.95Ghz 1.500V(1.488 cpu-z) can eat 110Amps for me. I've had it higher.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *chew**
> 
> Ahh. What are you on now?
> 
> I obviously from above post picked up a fatality for my daily build. Not sure which chip I will use yet but it will be an 8 core. I am in no rush still collecting parts for the build.


I moved to a better laptop because I have zero time for the desktop anymore. Going to college, doing work-study, and so on.

Picked up a Lenovo Y520 Configured as follows; i5-7300HQ, 8gb ram, 256gb SSD, GTX 1050Ti. Gives me 80%-90% of the performance my desktop had for what I do. After selling the desktop it only cost me ~$200.

When i get some free time back in a year or so Ill probably pick up a 6 core Zen 2 and whatever midrange GPU gets me the most for my money.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nighthog*
> 
> If gigabyte readings are anything accurate in HWiNFO64 and dividing by 2. My for the moment 3.95Ghz 1.500V(1.488 cpu-z) can eat 110Amps for me. I've had it higher.


~110A at 1.5V is possible, but most people will run under 1.45V daily, probably max like 1.38-1.4V and that would correspond to ~100A.
btw i am surprised the mobo didn't catch on fire already


----------



## cssorkinman

fwiw daily clocks/voltage since May


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cssorkinman*
> 
> fwiw daily clocks/voltage since May


130A seems high. Mobo is reporting crazy low values while CPU insanely high.


----------



## VRMfreak

Okay, so i just ran some tests. I have two sensors, mobo sensor and CPU sensor for current.
At stock P95 12K, the current was 50-55A on both sensors, at 3.95GHz 1.4V current was between 70-75A on both sensors.
My numbers correspon to the bz's ones, so it think +-100A for R7 4GHz 1.4V is the right value. Ofc it will take another 10 to 20 amps at 1.5V or something.


----------



## AlphaC

http://www.overclock.net/t/1477785/thermalright-true-spirit-140-power/490#post_26187919
I had 130A before in Prime95

http://www.overclock.net/t/1477785/thermalright-true-spirit-140-power/490#post_26187058
and 120A in AIDA64


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1477785/thermalright-true-spirit-140-power/490#post_26187919
> I had 130A before in Prime95
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1477785/thermalright-true-spirit-140-power/490#post_26187058
> and 120A in AIDA64


Interesting.
I have the feeling the sensor massively overshoots when you go to load, my CPU sensor showed 95A which is pretty BS, my VRM would run at like 60°C at that point (it runs 43-45°C).
After a minute or two, it stabilized around 73A, Asus EC was reporting 71A. . .
Didn't you try the graph function in HWInfo64?


----------



## bardacuda

For any fellow canucks out there looking to get a Taichi, it's on sale this week for $280 on newegg with another $50 MIR.

https://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157757


----------



## AlphaC

Also per Ryzen 5 review
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2

20-23W or so under XFR voltage per core
20W for memory controller and such

= ~ 180 - 204W

edit: more VRM testing seen at http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_rog_strix_x370-f_gaming/?s=0
Quote:


> The cooling system consists of three main aluminum radiators. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> the cooling heatsink of the chipset is 34.3 ° C (when overclocked - 35.3 ° C);
> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 39,1 ° C (when overclocked - 43,5 ° C);
> the lower radiator cooling elements of the power subsystem - 43.8 ° C (when overclocked - 49.6 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 54.3 ° C (when overclocked - 68 ° C).


"In manual mode, you can increase its frequency to 3.89 GHz"

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/gigabyte_aorus_ga-ax370-gaming_5/
Quote:


> The cooling system of the board in question consists of three main aluminum radiators. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> the cooling fan of the chipset - 34 ° C (at overclocking - 36 ° C);
> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 35.2 ° C (when overclocked - 42 ° C);
> the bottom radiator of cooling of elements of a subsystem of a power supply - 43,6 ° C (at dispersal - 50,2 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 57 ° C (when overclocked - 71.9 ° C).


3.89 GHz at a voltage of 1.392 V

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_prime_x370-pro/
Quote:


> The ASUS PRIME X370-PRO cooling system consists of three main aluminum radiators. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> the cooling fan of the chipset is 43.5 ° C (when overclocked - 44.7 ° C);
> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 39.8 ° C (when overclocked - 44.5 ° C);
> the lower radiator cooling elements of the power subsystem - 48.7 ° C (when overclocked - 54.6 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 65.2 ° C (when overclocked - 84.6 ° C).


3.89GHz @ 1,428 V

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_prime_x370-a/
Quote:


> The ASUS PRIME X370-A cooling system consists of three main aluminum radiators. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> radiator cooling chipset - 44.7 ° C (when overclocked - 46.2 ° C);
> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 52.2 ° C (when overclocked - 62.6 ° C);
> the lower radiator for cooling the elements of the power subsystem is 61.1 ° C (at acceleration - 83.2 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 62.8 ° C (at overclocking - 88.1 ° C).


3.84 GHz @ 1,439 V

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/msi_x370_sli_plus/
Quote:


> The cooling system of the board in question consists of three main aluminum radiators. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> radiator cooling chipset - 39.9 ° C (when overclocked - 40.9 ° C);
> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power subsystem - 36.6 ° C (when overclocked - 37.4 ° C);
> the lower radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 40.9 ° C (when overclocked - 43.5 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 42.9 ° C (when overclocked - 49.8 ° C).


(Ryzen 5 1600 @ 4GHz with 1.448 -1.464 V , not Ryzen 7...)

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_rog_strix_b350-f_gaming/
Quote:


> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 40.3 ° C (when overclocked - 44.2 ° C);
> the lower radiator for cooling the elements of the power supply subsystem is -45.3 ° C (at overclocking - 61.1 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 57.4 ° C (when overclocked - 83.3 ° C).


38.5x multi , 1,344 V

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/msi_b350m_mortar/
Quote:


> The cooling system consists of two main aluminum radiators. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> radiator cooling chipset - 42.8 ° C (when overclocked - 45.6 ° C);
> the radiator of cooling of elements of a subsystem of a feed - 59,2 ° C (at dispersal - 70,8 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 67.8 ° C (when overclocked - 85 ° C).


3.8GHz @ 1.375 V

http://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_prime_b350m-a/
Quote:


> radiator cooling chipset - 39.4 ° C (when overclocked - 39.8 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 73.2 ° C (when overclocked - 92.1 ° C).


3766 MHz at a voltage of 1.384 V


----------



## poah

so what board for the budget conscious person. my tomahawk is £90 so wouldn't want to spend more than £130-140


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Also per Ryzen 5 review
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11244/the-amd-ryzen-5-1600x-vs-core-i5-review-twelve-threads-vs-four/2
> 
> 20-23W or so under XFR voltage per core
> 20W for memory controller and such
> 
> = ~ 180 - 204W


That lines up almost exactly with what I am seeing on my R5 1400. 3900 @ 1.39v gave me ~10A, about half of their measurements with a 50% cut down chip.


----------



## AlphaC

KarathKasun , that's because my numbers aren't made up.









https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_strix_x370i_gaming_review/2


40x multiplier with 1.417V in CPU-Z


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> KarathKasun , that's because my numbers aren't made up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_strix_x370i_gaming_review/2
> 
> 
> 40x multiplier with 1.417V in CPU-Z


Does this board use 4C86Ns like the Z370 one?


----------



## AlphaC

I don't have an answer for that. If someone can take the heatsinks off (Tom from OC3d didn't, he just slipped a thermal probe under the heatsink) maybe we'll find out.


----------



## br0da

PK612DZ NIKOs on the Biostar B350GTN: https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/biostar_b350gtn/


----------



## AlphaC

visual of the NIKOS on the X370 M7



http://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=114486

The M7 appears to run doubled low side ; IR35201 controller

Nov. 17 update:

power spikes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhtsbOjGO88

CH VI Extreme
Quote:


> The cooling system consists of three main aluminum radiators, two of which are connected by a heat pipe. During the testing, the following temperature indicators were recorded:
> 
> the cooling heatsink of the chipset is 35.3 ° C (when overclocked - 36.4 ° C);
> the upper radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 42 ° C (when overclocked - 42.5 ° C);
> the lower radiator cooling elements of the power subsystem - 42.1 ° C (when overclocked - 42.3 ° C);
> the chokes of the power subsystem are 44.6 ° C (when overclocked - 45.5 ° C).


https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_rog_crosshair_vi_extreme/

AMD Ryzen 7 1700X 3.89GHz / 1.373 V


----------



## VRMfreak

cut - duplicated post


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> Nov. 17 update:
> 
> power spikes
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhtsbOjGO88


You think those are legit or the sensor is being ******ed?
X370-F has decently accurate current sensor (i think directly from pstages cause b350f didn't have it)
Would be worth to try it with an 8core. My 1600 ate 80-85A at 1.4V 3.975GHz, so i'd say the 110-115A for R7 at such vcore/clock would be legit.

Sorry for that, just checked the video


----------



## AlphaC

http://www.hw-journal.de/testberichte/mainboards/3063-biostar-racing-x370gt7-test?showall=&start=10


interesting voltage requirements per board


----------



## SuperZan

Intriguing results indeed. I don't read German, but I'm assuming they used 'Override' voltage settings on the GT7 for as much control as possible. Unfortunately, I've found 'Override' to be nothing but a pain with the GT7. With 'Adaptive' voltage and 'Auto' LLC, I've had two 1700X's (one a segfault offender, the other its replacement) both stable at 4.0GHz, 1.375v measured at the socket. Assuming I got a winner each time in terms of chips, I'd still not expect to do significantly better in terms of voltage on the B350 Pro, for example, but it could very well be the case. It's a pretty cheap board and I've been wanting to put RR into my HTPC anyway; maybe I'll grab the B350 Plus and test my 1700X against these results.


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcqu-9Ejf60

Buildzoid doesn't own a K7 /G5 yet he complains about the Taichi being a worse board...

edit: written article https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3131-the-best-amd-ryzen-motherboards-for-overclocking-x370-b350


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcqu-9Ejf60
> 
> Buildzoid doesn't own a K7 /G5 yet he complains about the Taichi being a worse board...
> 
> edit: written article https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3131-the-best-amd-ryzen-motherboards-for-overclocking-x370-b350


Yeah, i'm going to message him today about that video. K5 should not have a honorable mention same as the ASRock B350 with noLLC and huge Vdrop


----------



## superstition222

So, what's the least-expensive board with the following:

1) Capable of handling R7 at 4 GHz, long-term

2) VRM doesn't overheat with mild airflow

3) clock generator

4) 3200 RAM speed

5) has a VRM temp sensor (for monitoring VRM temp in HWINFO64)

6) has a water pump header

7) no severe unresolved BIOS bugs (like my 970A UD3P 2.0's multiplier boot bug)

8) CMOS clear button

Also,

As above but only R5 at 4 GHz not R7, and the water pump header and CMOS button can be ditched.

I think it's completely unacceptable to not put a VRM temp sensor on a board, whether it's the 990FX Crosshair Z or something cheap like a Tomahawk. It's an invitation for making smores.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> So, what's the least-expensive board with the following:
> 
> 1) Capable of handling R7 at 4 GHz, long-term
> 
> 2) VRM doesn't overheat with mild airflow
> 
> 3) clock generator
> 
> 4) 3200 RAM speed
> 
> 5) has a VRM temp sensor (for monitoring VRM temp in HWINFO64)
> 
> 6) has a water pump header
> 
> 7) no severe unresolved BIOS bugs (like my 970A UD3P 2.0's multiplier boot bug)
> 
> 8) CMOS clear button
> 
> Also,
> 
> As above but only R5 at 4 GHz not R7, and the water pump header and CMOS button can be ditched.
> 
> I think it's completely unacceptable to not put a VRM temp sensor on a board, whether it's the 990FX Crosshair Z or something cheap like a Tomahawk. It's an invitation for making smores.


Once you put the clock gen in there, you are limited to a small number of boards.
Asrock X370 Taichi (& Fatal1ty Pro) --- minor BIOS bug
Asus Crosshair VI Extreme --- should be fine
Asus Crosshair VI Hero --- should be fine
Asus X370-F STRIX --- no clear CMOs
Gigabyte X370 Gaming K7 ---- one older BIOS fried CPUs , VRM runs hotter (~ 85° at ~ 180W) , you would need a monoblock / avoid AVX / or great airflow

http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1035/10354886_4.html
ASUS B350 STRIX

GBT AB350 Gaming 3

Biostar GT3

Asrock B350 K4


R7 1800X @ stock , Prime95
Quote:


> To this end, we will carry eight generations of Core top-level Ryzen 7 1800X so that the CPU is fully loaded for about 30 minutes until the temperature is no longer rising, and the highest temperature is recorded with a thermal imager.


----------



## superstition222

thanks for the info









It looks like the clock generator is not considered a must-have feature for so many Ryzen overclocking boards.


----------



## SuperZan

It's not nearly as useful as it was for Vishera, that's for sure. You don't have much room to work before encountering both PCIe downgrading and memory instability, what with the finicky IMC. For HWBOT overclockers, it's definitely useful, but for day-to-day use it's rather niche and often not worth the (considerable) trouble.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> It's not nearly as useful as it was for Vishera, that's for sure. You don't have much room to work before encountering both PCIe downgrading and memory instability, what with the finicky IMC. For HWBOT overclockers, it's definitely useful, but for day-to-day use it's rather niche and often not worth the (considerable) trouble.


Okay. So, how about inexpensive boards with these criteria?

1) Capable of handling R7 at 4 GHz, long-term

2) VRM doesn't overheat with mild airflow

3) 3200 RAM speed

4) VRM temp sensor

5) water pump header

6) no severe unresolved BIOS bugs

7) CMOS clear button

I'm still waiting for one of those hybrid air/water heatsinks. But, it looks like ASUS and Gigabyte want to just offer jumbo packaging for their standard air VRM sinks on AMD boards, including TR.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> Okay. So, how about inexpensive boards with these criteria?
> 
> 1) Capable of handling R7 at 4 GHz, long-term
> 
> 2) VRM doesn't overheat with mild airflow
> 
> 3) 3200 RAM speed
> 
> 4) VRM temp sensor
> 
> 5) water pump header
> 
> 6) no severe unresolved BIOS bugs
> 
> 7) CMOS clear button
> 
> I'm still waiting for one of those hybrid air/water heatsinks. But, it looks like ASUS and Gigabyte want to just offer jumbo packaging for their standard air VRM sinks on AMD boards, including TR.


Non existent. You get the features you want only on the High-midrange X370 boards and up.


----------



## samgu

That's my last chance of trying to build a PC. I have been gaming in consoles for over 10 years and this year I decided to give a try to PCs again. But man, it's being hard to figure it out this Ryzen thing. I got a R7 1700 for a good deal (160 bucks) and got a sale deal for three mobos: ASRock AB350 Pro4, ASRock X370 Killer SLI (non ac) and MSI X370 SLI Plus. I want to do some OC with the R7 but this VRM stuff is really catchy.

From what I read, Pro4 is not good enough for OCing a R7; Killer SLi has limitations in OCing the RAM memory; MSI SLI Plus has poor VRMs.

Did I get it right? When I start this whole thing I bought a R3 1300X for 80 bucks and apparently hadn't to worry about OCing. Now, with the R7 1700, things are really complicated.

Any help?

Thks!


----------



## ManofGod1000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *samgu*
> 
> That's my last chance of trying to build a PC. I have been gaming in consoles for over 10 years and this year I decided to give a try to PCs again. But man, it's being hard to figure it out this Ryzen thing. I got a R7 1700 for a good deal (160 bucks) and got a sale deal for three mobos: ASRock AB350 Pro4, ASRock X370 Killer SLI (non ac) and MSI X370 SLI Plus. I want to do some OC with the R7 but this VRM stuff is really catchy.
> 
> From what I read, Pro4 is not good enough for OCing a R7; Killer SLi has limitations in OCing the RAM memory; MSI SLI Plus has poor VRMs.
> 
> Did I get it right? When I start this whole thing I bought a R3 1300X for 80 bucks and apparently hadn't to worry about OCing. Now, with the R7 1700, things are really complicated.
> 
> Any help?
> 
> Thks!


You are way over thinking it in my opinion. Besides, you have not told us what board you are using at the moment.


----------



## samgu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManofGod1000*
> 
> You are way over thinking it in my opinion. Besides, you have not told us what board you are using at the moment.


I don't have a board right now, I am still in the process of building it. That's way I am not sure which board should I buy.

And, the idea is to build a gaming rig to play at [email protected]


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *samgu*
> 
> That's my last chance of trying to build a PC. I have been gaming in consoles for over 10 years and this year I decided to give a try to PCs again. But man, it's being hard to figure it out this Ryzen thing. I got a R7 1700 for a good deal (160 bucks) and got a sale deal for three mobos: ASRock AB350 Pro4, ASRock X370 Killer SLI (non ac) and MSI X370 SLI Plus. I want to do some OC with the R7 but this VRM stuff is really catchy.
> 
> From what I read, Pro4 is not good enough for OCing a R7; Killer SLi has limitations in OCing the RAM memory; MSI SLI Plus has poor VRMs.
> 
> Did I get it right? When I start this whole thing I bought a R3 1300X for 80 bucks and apparently hadn't to worry about OCing. Now, with the R7 1700, things are really complicated.
> 
> Any help?
> 
> Thks!


For 8 cores, stick with X370. Im bias toward Asus. Thats the brand i recommend. Ram, i have a very good experience with Gskill FlareX 3200 Cl 14. Recently been oos.

If not oc'ing, then a B350 will work.


----------



## samgu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> For 8 cores, stick with X370. Im bias toward Asus. Thats the brand i recommend. Ram, i have a very good experience with Gskill FlareX 3200 Cl 14. Recently been oos.
> 
> If not oc'ing, then a B350 will work.


Thank you for answering. I didn't find good deal for Asus mobos though... Are these suggestions any good?


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> For 8 cores, stick with X370. Im bias toward Asus. Thats the brand i recommend. Ram, i have a very good experience with Gskill FlareX 3200 Cl 14. Recently been oos.
> 
> If not oc'ing, then a B350 will work.


Incorrect. Ryzen has a Max OC of 4GHz. B350 vrms can support up to 3.8 generally speaking. That's most of the way to Max OC. And chipset for the last time has zero to do with vrm quality. I've had mine at my signature rig specs since launch. And according to some my PC should be melting down. Yet here I am still. Ryzen is the worst OCer in a long time. So needing 12 phases is just dumb package power draw is not nearly as bad as some fear mongers make it. I've certainly seen x370 boards fail and have crappy vrms as well. Chipset is a non sequitur.


----------



## WexleySnoops

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Incorrect. Ryzen has a Max OC of 4GHz. B350 vrms can support up to 3.8 generally speaking. That's most of the way to Max OC. And chipset for the last time has zero to do with vrm quality. I've had mine at my signature rig specs since launch. And according to some my PC should be melting down. Yet here I am still. Ryzen is the worst OCer in a long time. So needing 12 phases is just dumb package power draw is not nearly as bad as some fear mongers make it. I've certainly seen x370 boards fail and have crappy vrms as well. Chipset is a non sequitur.


I've seen a lot of the same. As long as it's a higher-end B350 board they OC well. Better than low-end X370 boards to be totally honest.

I'm not one for "future-proofing", but given the support for this socket until 2020, I figured go big or go home if they decide to up the ante with their next release so went with a Taichi.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *samgu*
> 
> Thank you for answering. I didn't find good deal for Asus mobos though... Are these suggestions any good?


Asus X370 prime pro should be almost as good as the CH6. I have a B350 but just a six core ryzen. It can hanfle 3.9. If you win the lottery you might go higher than 4 on a good X370 board.


----------



## samgu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> I've seen a lot of the same. As long as it's a higher-end B350 board they OC well. Better than low-end X370 boards to be totally honest.
> 
> I'm not one for "future-proofing", but given the support for this socket until 2020, I figured go big or go home if they decide to up the ante with their next release so went with a Taichi.


The problem is my budget, so any high spec board is out of question.

So, Pro4 will provide the same OC capabilities and X370 Killer or MSI SLI Plus?


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WexleySnoops*
> 
> I've seen a lot of the same. As long as it's a higher-end B350 board they OC well. Better than low-end X370 boards to be totally honest.
> 
> I'm not one for "future-proofing", but given the support for this socket until 2020, I figured go big or go home if they decide to up the ante with their next release so went with a Taichi.


Yea thats fine I get what your saying. My problem (and I thought we agreed on the outcome) a few months ago people started pushing this x370 vs b350 nonsense. We are techs and if you know anything you should respect facts and not mis information. The chipset has zero to do with VRM quality, more of a correlation than causation. So whats so hard about speaking in reality and not hyperbole. Research the quality of each VRMs and make your choice. Also a phase count only means cooler temps due to the fact it spreads out the power load. I remember running 200+ watts on some 8 phase VRMS and before that I did it on a 4 phase. Ive never had a single meltdown because im not an idiot. I put a fan directly cooling the sinks on the VRMs always just to be sure im OCing safely. I check temps and move on with my life. Instead of throwing all b350 boards out the window with people who have tight budgets. Grab a b350 like the strix or prime plus or similar tiered board and slap a fan on it.

I still dont understand the call for a 200-300 dollar board for a 200 dollar CPU.....That never gets past 4.0 on anything but the luckiest of chips.

EDIT: For the videos showing people hitting 150c on caps things like switching frequency (that has zero baring on a stable OC that low) are turned to max in that video. Creating a 'worse case scenario' heat up.


----------



## SuperZan

When I can't speak for a person's knowledge or experience, I'm always going to recommend boards with quality components and a high phase count. This prevents my recommendation from holding them back, or worse, damaging parts, if they neglect to do something like placing a fan over the VRM sinks, or on the aft side of the socket, or bad TIM placement/cooler contact, or whatever. The last time this argument was going around, I said that B350's are fine for overclocking to 3.8GHz *if you know what you're doing*. If someone isn't particularly knowledgeable or I'm uncertain as to their knowledge and experience, I'm going to recommend overkill.


----------



## Dimaggio1103

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> When I can't speak for a person's knowledge or experience, I'm always going to recommend boards with quality components and a high phase count. This prevents my recommendation from holding them back, or worse, damaging parts, if they neglect to do something like placing a fan over the VRM sinks, or on the aft side of the socket, or bad TIM placement/cooler contact, or whatever. The last time this argument was going around, I said that B350's are fine for overclocking to 3.8GHz *if you know what you're doing*. If someone isn't particularly knowledgeable or I'm uncertain as to their knowledge and experience, I'm going to recommend overkill.


Yes, yes. I hear this excuse all the time. Assuming others ineptitude is not an excuse to spout false information. Educate them instead on WHY you are recommending this vs that. And IF their budget dictates a b350 with overclocking then educate them on proper ways of cooling them. But stop spreading false information because sooner or later people will regurgitate this incorrect info like its gospel. I wouldn't tell a new programmer not to worry about getters and setters just because hes new and shouldent learn to use them as its vital to OOP. just my two cents.


----------



## samgu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Yea thats fine I get what your saying. My problem (and I thought we agreed on the outcome) a few months ago people started pushing this x370 vs b350 nonsense. We are techs and if you know anything you should respect facts and not mis information. The chipset has zero to do with VRM quality, more of a correlation than causation. So whats so hard about speaking in reality and not hyperbole. Research the quality of each VRMs and make your choice. Also a phase count only means cooler temps due to the fact it spreads out the power load. I remember running 200+ watts on some 8 phase VRMS and before that I did it on a 4 phase. Ive never had a single meltdown because im not an idiot. I put a fan directly cooling the sinks on the VRMs always just to be sure im OCing safely. I check temps and move on with my life. Instead of throwing all b350 boards out the window with people who have tight budgets. Grab a b350 like the strix or prime plus or similar tiered board and slap a fan on it.
> 
> I still dont understand the call for a 200-300 dollar board for a 200 dollar CPU.....That never gets past 4.0 on anything but the luckiest of chips.
> 
> EDIT: For the videos showing people hitting 150c on caps things like switching frequency (that has zero baring on a stable OC that low) are turned to max in that video. Creating a 'worse case scenario' heat up.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> When I can't speak for a person's knowledge or experience, I'm always going to recommend boards with quality components and a high phase count. This prevents my recommendation from holding them back, or worse, damaging parts, if they neglect to do something like placing a fan over the VRM sinks, or on the aft side of the socket, or bad TIM placement/cooler contact, or whatever. The last time this argument was going around, I said that B350's are fine for overclocking to 3.8GHz *if you know what you're doing*. If someone isn't particularly knowledgeable or I'm uncertain as to their knowledge and experience, I'm going to recommend overkill.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Yes, yes. I hear this excuse all the time. Assuming others ineptitude is not an excuse to spout false information. Educate them instead on WHY you are recommending this vs that. And IF their budget dictates a b350 with overclocking then educate them on proper ways of cooling them. But stop spreading false information because sooner or later people will regurgitate this incorrect info like its gospel. I wouldn't tell a new programmer not to worry about getters and setters just because hes new and shouldent learn to use them as its vital to OOP. just my two cents.


So, if I take the Pro4 with a fan over the VRM I will be fine? I got the Pro4 for under 50% of the value of the other two boards. I have the Killer coming but I can return it easy. And MSI apparently has awful VRM components, anyway.

Is this the best deal?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dimaggio1103*
> 
> Yes, yes. I hear this excuse all the time. Assuming others ineptitude is not an excuse to spout false information. Educate them instead on WHY you are recommending this vs that. And IF their budget dictates a b350 with overclocking then educate them on proper ways of cooling them. But stop spreading false information because sooner or later people will regurgitate this incorrect info like its gospel. I wouldn't tell a new programmer not to worry about getters and setters just because hes new and shouldent learn to use them as its vital to OOP. just my two cents.


It's not 'false information', nor is it an excuse. A Taichi, a Prime Pro, a Strix, a GT7, a C6H, have provably superior VRM components and phase designs to any B350 board. That's not 'false information', that's fact. Whether or not you agree with the recommendation is immaterial when you're essentially calling me a liar. Better power delivery and lower temperatures mean superior performance and superior risk management. If a knowledgeable person wants to cheap out on a B350 board and takes the necessary precautions, yes, it'll do the job, but why would I recommend a stick with a rock duct-taped to it when I could recommend a hammer for a minimal outlay? Where's the logic in that, besides your obvious need for purchase validation?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *samgu*
> 
> So, if I take the Pro4 with a fan over the VRM I will be fine? I got the Pro4 for under 50% of the value of the other two boards. I have the Killer coming but I can return it easy. And MSI apparently has awful VRM components, anyway.
> 
> Is this the best deal?


They're all roughly equivalent in practical terms, so sure, go with the deal. Be sure that your case has good airflow, keep a fan moving air over the VRM sinks, and mind how you affix it if you're air cooling. Expect 3.8GHz-ish within sane temperature and voltage limits using any sort of reliable stability test (P95 and Y-Cruncher are my preferred tests for Ryzen).


----------



## Cpt Phasma

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *samgu*
> 
> So, if I take the Pro4 with a fan over the VRM I will be fine? I got the Pro4 for under 50% of the value of the other two boards. I have the Killer coming but I can return it easy. And MSI apparently has awful VRM components, anyway.
> 
> Is this the best deal?


Actually, if I may offer a suggestion or two? You should also consider the Asus B350-F Strix (or even its X370 brother) or the X370 Prime Pro, also from Asus. All 3 are generally made with better components.

In fact, Newegg has the B350 Strix on sale right now for $109 ($89.99 after $20 rebate card if you do rebates) but you better be quick because the sale ends in 3 days, Thursday:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132988

Also on Newegg, the Asus X370 Prime Pro is on sale as well for $129 ($109 after $20 rebate). Like the B350 Strix, this sale also ends on Thursday:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132964

Good luck!


----------



## samgu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cpt Phasma*
> 
> Actually, if I may offer a suggestion or two? You should also consider the Asus B350-F Strix (or even its X370 brother) or the X370 Prime Pro, also from Asus. All 3 are generally made with better components.
> 
> In fact, Newegg has the B350 Strix on sale right now for $109 ($89.99 after $20 rebate card if you do rebates) but you better be quick because the sale ends in 3 days, Thursday:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132988
> 
> Also on Newegg, the Asus X370 Prime Pro is on sale as well for $129 ($109 after $20 rebate). Like the B350 Strix, this sale also ends on Thursday:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132964
> 
> Good luck!


Sure you can. I will take a look and see if I can get those deals. Thanks!!


----------



## Cpt Phasma

No problem. Glad to help


----------



## AlphaC

Dimaggio1103 is still going on about B350 VRM it seems. Let the pictures from the Chinese and japanese website speak for themselves.

Why would anyone want to gimp their ryzen 7?

A X370 Prime Pro has been $110 on many occasions this year ; the X370-F STRIX has been around $150, the Taichi has been $155 even.


----------



## VRMfreak

deleted - bad info


----------



## br0da

You can already find those infos in the list.


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *br0da*
> 
> You can already find those infos in the list.


Oh cool, last time i checked there was nothing.
Thanks for notifying!


----------



## Zhany

Here are some images of the Asus Tuf B350M-Plus Gaming SOC VRM for those interested





And here is the RAM


----------



## AlphaC

http://www.hw-journal.de/testberichte/mainboards/3140-asus-rog-strix-x370-f-gaming-test?showall=&start=10


----------



## VRMfreak

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AlphaC*
> 
> http://www.hw-journal.de/testberichte/mainboards/3140-asus-rog-strix-x370-f-gaming-test?showall=&start=10


Interesting. I had the B350-F Strix (same as Prime B350) and overclocking on that was a pain, comparable to my previous B350 Carbon.
3.9GHz was never stable even though i was running LLC Medium and +0.15V offset (1.237V stock). On X370-F, 3.9GHz runs at 1.375V with LLC 3 Prime95 stable.


----------



## th3m4n

Guys could anyone advise which would be best to go for ...

Asus prime pro or
MSI XPower Gaming titanium

Looking at Overclocking/temps/memory support

I can get them both for 130 as the Titanium is on offer? Any help appreciated.


----------



## Medusa666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *th3m4n*
> 
> Guys could anyone advise which would be best to go for ...
> 
> Asus prime pro or
> MSI XPower Gaming titanium
> 
> Looking at Overclocking/temps/memory support
> 
> I can get them both for 130 as the Titanium is on offer? Any help appreciated.


Get the Titanium,nicer board overall.


----------



## DenimBlack

Hello everyone,i am new here ,i did search this topic little over search option,but i did not find what i need.
So,if anyone is willing to help me out i will appreciate it allot.
Question is about VRM-s on motherboards ,i really have low budget guys ,my old pc is dead ,very old components ,HDD works on 8%,is just not worth upgrading it.I posting this over my laptop btw.
So ,aside other components for my new pc,i stuck at choosing mobo ,coz i just want to pick best one in therms of VRM-s ,who will OC my Ryzen 3 1300x,which i will replace in several months with 5 1600x.
I for now drop eye on 2 motherboards(they also not expensive much,i cant afford much money) ,1 is Asus Strix B350F gaming with ASP1106GGQW (4+2) VRM-s ,and 2nd would be MSI B350 gaming pro carbon with RT8894A (4+2) VRM-s.Infos i got from this site ,i hope is ok to post it here ( https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html )
My question is just which from these 2 mobos have better VRMS for OC those 2 CPU i mention above ?.Which VRM-s have higher quality ,which one of them will provide me more stable V for OC,and by that lower temps on my cpu.I do not seek btw for some extreme OC,i would go under 4ghz.
If u guys know some better motherboard ,with more or less same price as this 2 above,fell free to mention them too,what i care in general is for VRM quality,and BIOS ,is it easy or hard to work with,nothing else.


----------



## AlphaC

If it's a Ryzen quad core then you will be fine with the B350-F STRIX or B350 Pro Carbon. The B350 Pro Carbon is likely better overall since it has a type-C USB connector at the back and the power phases are 4 phases with twice the power delivery components (same as X370 Pro Carbon). The B350F Strix which we had originally thought to be 6 phases for the CPU is actually 4 phases with 2 mosfets for the low side per phase.

If you're looking at possibly upgrading to hexcore (Ryzen 5 1600X or Ryzen 5 1600) and overclocking it I would say it is a bad idea unless you give it quite a bit of airflow.

Where are you located and where can you buy motherboards from?


----------



## DenimBlack

Thank you for answering







,so i guess il go for carbon then.
I am from Serbia ,i buy components at one of few online shops,or i can go directly to their store at city,il pick my parts there,and online i will just order what i want.
Ryzen 1300x for example is here +-115 euro at cheapest shop,this mobos i mention are 125 euro more or less.


----------



## AlphaC

B350-I STRIX is now available

$140 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813119056

X370-I is $190 https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813119055

I'm wondering if the B350 has the same VRM with the 6x 50A Optimos

https://smallformfactor.net/forum/threads/asus-strix-b350i-gaming.3417/page-9#post-75803
Quote:


> Some interesting findings over the weekend:
> 
> 
> The power delivery components (VRM) are identical between the X370-I and B350-I, which eliminates one speculated difference between the two models
> Neither supports bifurcation, but it would be nice if someone could test this to see if it works anyway
> The X370-I allows for BCLK adjustments while the B350-I does not
> For some reason, many of the advanced BIOS settings are hidden but these settings can be enabled with some BIOS modding (please be careful with this)


edit: seems the biggest difference is the 2nd M.2 slot on the B350 is SATA only and not NvMe PCIE 2.0 x4 enabled.


----------



## superstition222

For some reason?

It could be:

a) Some part(s) removed that require the associated settings to be no longer manually controllable. This was the case with the change from the UD3P 1.0 to 2.0 970 board from Gigabyte. Things like northbridge and hypertransport voltages no longer could be manually controlled in the 2.0 board. The Stilt said he thinks some parts were removed to shave costs.

b) Purposeful hobbling of BIOS for product segmentation.


----------



## Curvy Groyper

I am too lazy to read 300 pages,can someone sumarize what is best bang for buck when it comes to VRM?

I have 150e Asrock Extreme4 Z370 becose its cheap with vrm that punches above its price point.I decided to return the Intel and Z370 board and will buy X370 a Ryzen 3 1200,then sell cpu in three months and buy 8 core Ryzen+ in March 2018,I definately want big overclock on that 8 core so I need potent VRM that can whithstand 100% cpu load for hours nonstop becose its rendering & simulation workststion.

There is three boards I currently consider

1. Taichi = 195e Seems like best VRM at great price,my favorite brand,great feature set,my favorite.

2. Asus Crosshair Hero = 215e Dont know how its VRM compares to Taichi,little above budget,I like ROG bios look.

3. Asrock K4 = 145e Great price,is this like X370 brother of Extreme4? Does it have best VRM at its price point? Can it handle 100% loads for hours nonstop on overclocked 8 core Ryzen+?

Any other board with strong & durable VRM that in the mid range price category that I missed? I am really big fan of Taichi,they always seems like best motherboards for given socket,good vrm at good price,or should I buy something else?

I see that Asus Crosshair Hero OC thread is alot bigger than Taichi OC thread,is the Hero much more popular becose its much better? If its better than Taichi I can certainly spend 20e more,but it have less VRM phases,but not all phases are created equal.... I dont know,what should I buy? Is Taichi again best? Should I spend more for Hero? Or is K4 all I need?


----------



## bardacuda

Taichi is best. It has 50% more vcore phases than the C6H (6 doubled vs. 4 doubled TI NexFETs).
The K4 is a 4 phase with crappier FETs.

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html


----------



## Curvy Groyper

Thank you bardacuda,is there some problem with Taichi bios? In Taichi OC thread there seems to be many disspointed Taichi owners becose Asrock is lazy and isnt releasing BIOS update,what is going on? I want to buy that motherboard tommorow,the BIOS issue seems worrysome,what is going on?


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Midnight ***per*
> 
> I am too lazy to read 300 pages,can someone sumarize what is best bang for buck when it comes to VRM?
> 
> I have 150e Asrock Extreme4 Z370 becose its cheap with vrm that punches above its price point.I decided to return the Intel and Z370 board and will buy X370 a Ryzen 3 1200,then sell cpu in three months and buy 8 core Ryzen+ in March 2018,I definately want big overclock on that 8 core so I need potent VRM that can whithstand 100% cpu load for hours nonstop becose its rendering & simulation workststion.
> 
> There is three boards I currently consider
> 
> 1. Taichi = 195e Seems like best VRM at great price,my favorite brand,great feature set,my favorite.
> 
> 2. Asus Crosshair Hero = 215e Dont know how its VRM compares to Taichi,little above budget,I like ROG bios look.
> 
> 3. Asrock K4 = 145e Great price,is this like X370 brother of Extreme4? Does it have best VRM at its price point? Can it handle 100% loads for hours nonstop on overclocked 8 core Ryzen+?
> 
> Any other board with strong & durable VRM that in the mid range price category that I missed? I am really big fan of Taichi,they always seems like best motherboards for given socket,good vrm at good price,or should I buy something else?
> 
> I see that Asus Crosshair Hero OC thread is alot bigger than Taichi OC thread,is the Hero much more popular becose its much better? If its better than Taichi I can certainly spend 20e more,but it have less VRM phases,but not all phases are created equal.... I dont know,what should I buy? Is Taichi again best? Should I spend more for Hero? Or is K4 all I need?


You missed the Asus Prime X370 Pro. I would say that's the price/perf board for Ryzen, at 150 Euros it is affordable but at the $110-120 it often runs in the USA at Newegg there's not much that you can say matches it.


----------



## Curvy Groyper

Is Prime Pro better than Asrock K4


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Midnight ***per*
> 
> Is Prime Pro better than Asrock K4


Yes.


----------



## superstition222

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Midnight ***per*
> 
> becose Asrock is lazy and isnt releasing BIOS update


I'm shocked. Shocked.


----------



## Curvy Groyper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superstition222*
> 
> I'm shocked. Shocked.


You mean this is something Asrock does often?


----------



## bardacuda

Hey look, a real heatsink!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCNKnKGvg4I


----------



## chrisjames61

A pro board like that and wifi? I just don't get it.


----------



## AlphaC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *https://www.computerbase.de/2017-12/cpu-kuehler-test-tower-round-up/4/#diagramm-temperaturdifferenz-cpu-zu-raum-mit-serienluefter-1200-u-min*
> A look at the temperatures of the voltage converter on the motherboard shows what the speed advantage leads: With overclocked CPU reads the motherboard with the Kotetsu Mark II well over 90 ° C on the voltage transformers - under the True Spirit 120 Direct with his compared to the fan small radiator reach the VRMs but only 78 ° C. The comparatively small coolers already act so strongly in the limit range for these measurements that at the end the ventilation of the voltage transformers and the resulting heating of the mainboard influence the results of the CPU temperature.


Quote:


> Although the rather small tower coolers are not designed for use on overclocked processors, but since they can cool the Ryzen in the standard clock easily, they may also show what they can afford in an emergency. The real case is the eight-core CPU at 3.8 GHz and 1.35 volts core voltage, which pulls the system under synthetic CPU load just under 230 watts from the socket.Although the rather small tower coolers are not designed for use on overclocked processors, but since they can cool the Ryzen in the standard clock easily, they may also show what they can afford in an emergency. The real case is the eight-core CPU at 3.8 GHz and 1.35 volts core voltage, which pulls the system under synthetic CPU load just under 230 watts from the socket.


^ Steckdose ziehen is "socket" but actually wall outlet, see http://context.reverso.net/%C3%BCbersetzung/deutsch-englisch/Steckdose+ziehen
Testbed: MSI X370 XPower Gaming Titanium , 2 × 8 GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4-3200 , Asus R9 285 Strix (semipassive) , SanDisk Extreme Pro 480 GB , be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11 850 Watt, Thermaltake F51 Suppressor
Ryzen 7 1700x @ 3.8GHz , 1.35V

PSU efficiency ~90% around 200-250W


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story4&reid=467
https://www.kitguru.net/components/power-supplies/zardon/be-quiet-dark-power-pro-11-850w-psu-review/
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/be-quiet-dark-power-pro-11-850w-power-supply,4140-5.html


230W at wall x 0.9 = 207W
SSD ~3W
CPU fan <2W
RAM < 10W
GPU idle <15W
... I'd say CPU is roughly 180W at socket probably if you assume an optimistic ~88% VRM efficiency


----------



## iNeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Midnight ***per*
> 
> You mean this is something Asrock does often?


I think he ment that why Asrock should bother to update the Taichi to agesa 7 when that bios is for the incoming APUs when the taichi dont have video output ports LOL dont lisent those cry babys xD. Agesa 6 y working great, actually on the Giga K7 i went from Agesa 1.0.7.2 to agesa 1.0.0.6b couse memory group bank its kind of broken on agesa 7









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bardacuda*
> 
> Hey look, a real heatsink!
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCNKnKGvg4I


Great, it seem they listen the **** storm for removing the heatpipe on the Gaming 5 and 7 xD


----------



## Spectre73

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iNeri*
> 
> I think he ment that why Asrock should bother to update the Taichi to agesa 7 when that bios is for the incoming APUs when the taichi dont have video output ports LOL dont lisent those cry babys xD. Agesa 6 y working great, actually on the Giga K7 i went from Agesa 1.0.7.2 to agesa 1.0.0.6b couse memory group bank its kind of broken on agesa 7


The Taichi has video outputs. The Asus C6H does not.


----------



## iNeri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Spectre73*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *iNeri*
> 
> I think he ment that why Asrock should bother to update the Taichi to agesa 7 when that bios is for the incoming APUs when the taichi dont have video output ports LOL dont lisent those cry babys xD. Agesa 6 y working great, actually on the Giga K7 i went from Agesa 1.0.7.2 to agesa 1.0.0.6b couse memory group bank its kind of broken on agesa 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Taichi has video outputs. The Asus C6H does not.
Click to expand...

Where?

Enviado desde mi HTC 10 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## Spectre73

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iNeri*
> 
> Where?


I am really dumb. I do not know how I was under the Impression that the Taichi has video outputs.

The Taichi has no such ports. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.


----------



## AlphaC

Steven achieved a relatively tame result with AVX encoding on the X370 ITX board from asrock
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8487/asrock-x370-gaming-itx-ac-amd-motherboard/index10.html

About 60°C with H110i radiator fans on high (12v) which I believe is 2100RPM or so?


---------------------

Also thermal impact on reliability

https://training.ti.com/engineer-it...e-thermals-touching-soldering-iron?cu=1135313


----------



## noobee

I thought someone posted a mobo vrm chart/diagram for AMD AM4 Ryzen boards but can never find it here.


----------



## Spanners

Do you mean this one from the OP?

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html


----------



## sakae48

is there anybody got an idea about the manual phase control on strix x370 newest BIOS? it's not the usual optimized, extreme, and 1 other thing i forgot (t.probe i guess?). there's manual option now and it comes with a few more options inside from ultra fast, fast, to 2 more options (slow, i guess?). what's the deal with that?

my mind is guessing that feature is about how fast the phase on/off respond to the CPU request?


----------



## The Stilt

I've been bashing MSI for years for using substandard power components (in critical places) on their motherboards. I have the brand new MSI B350I PRO AC board in my hands and I like what I'm seeing.
If MSI keeps up the good job in the future, they might become the number two in the motherboard business. Their bioses have always been rather ok, so if the hardware aspect is now sorted as well... 

MSI B350I PRO AC = IR35201 controller, 6x native IR3555M (60A) for VDDCR_CPU, 2x native IR3555M (60A) for VDDCR_SOC.
Niko-Semi fets (along with Fairchild ones) can be still found in low power VRMs, but that has never been the issue.

The VRM heatsink (separate for CR & SOC) has significantly larger surface area than Gigabyte AB350N ITX board for example, which is obviously a great thing.


----------



## SuperZan

The Stilt said:


> I've been bashing MSI for years for using substandard power components (in critical places) on their motherboards. I have the brand new MSI B350I PRO AC board in my hands and I like what I'm seeing.
> If MSI keeps up the good job in the future, they might become the number two in the motherboard business. Their bioses have always been rather ok, so if the hardware aspect is now sorted as well...
> 
> MSI B350I PRO AC = IR35201 controller, 6x native IR3555M (60A) for VDDCR_CPU, 2x native IR3555M (60A) for VDDCR_SOC.
> Niko-Semi fets (along with Fairchild ones) can be still found in low power VRMs, but that has never been the issue.
> 
> The VRM heatsink (separate for CR & SOC) has significantly larger surface area than Gigabyte AB350N ITX board for example, which is obviously a great thing.


Wow, that's a great setup for a B350. I'm going to take a long look at that board when I build an additional Ryzen system (as soon as the refresh hits). Good behaviour should be incentivised.


----------



## noobee

noobee said:


> I thought someone posted a mobo vrm chart/diagram for AMD AM4 Ryzen boards but can never find it here.


Yes, I have seen it. I thought there was another one?



The Stilt said:


> I've been bashing MSI for years for using substandard power components (in critical places) on their motherboards. I have the brand new MSI B350I PRO AC board in my hands and I like what I'm seeing.
> If MSI keeps up the good job in the future, they might become the number two in the motherboard business. Their bioses have always been rather ok, so if the hardware aspect is now sorted as well...
> 
> MSI B350I PRO AC = IR35201 controller, 6x native IR3555M (60A) for VDDCR_CPU, 2x native IR3555M (60A) for VDDCR_SOC.
> Niko-Semi fets (along with Fairchild ones) can be still found in low power VRMs, but that has never been the issue.
> 
> The VRM heatsink (separate for CR & SOC) has significantly larger surface area than Gigabyte AB350N ITX board for example, which is obviously a great thing.


Who is #1 and #2 now?


----------



## noobee

Which boards have decent VRMs? Gigabyte doesn't? I thought the 'gaming 3' looked okay until I read this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/61xvp1/b350_vrm_temps/


----------



## Lineswithrobfor

Anyone have data on the gigabyte k7 vrm temp at > 120A?

I saw tweaktown review 50+C at stock.


----------



## AlphaC

Lineswithrobfor said:


> Anyone have data on the gigabyte k7 vrm temp at > 120A?
> 
> I saw tweaktown review 50+C at stock.


For Gigabyte X370 G5 : 84°C in Prime95 AVX but around 70ish °C in AIDA64 FPU , this is with around 1000-1200RPM 140mm Thermalright TY-147 from TS140 Power. 

Is absolutely terrible? No. Could it be better given the components used? Definitely the heatsink could use work to bring the temps below 70°C.

----


noobee said:


> Yes, I have seen it. I thought there was another one?
> 
> Who is #1 and #2 now?


Asrock X370 Taichi / Asus ROG Crosshair VI Extreme


MSI is a heatsink company apparently ... their X370 Carbon runs cooler than a X370-F STRIX per hwcooling

https://www.hwcooling.net/en/msi-x370-gaming-pro-carbon-a-convenient-choice-for-ryzen-7-en/6/

Asrock X370 Taichi is still the way to go if you just want cooler temps, unless you can afford to dump money on a ROG Crosshair VI Extreme.

-------------
edit Feb 28:

new review from playwares 
http://playwares.com/pcreview/56284661#
With about 220W from wall in Prime95, the X370-F heats up to about 75 degrees Celsius using Wraith Max cooler.

edit March 12: 
OC RU Asus Prime X370 Pro review: https://overclockers.ru/lab/show/90028_9/obzor-i-testirovanie-materinskoj-platy-asus-prime-x370-pro
^ suggests you need airflow over VRM heatsink or it will get toasty at 1.4V
another reviewer only obtained 3.8Ghz on X370 SLI PLUS https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2018/03/msi-x370-sli-plus-review/

---------------


edit: April 6
https://en.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/8aab86/gigabyte_x470_aorus_gaming_7_wifi_listed_on/


$239.99 X470 AORUS Gaming 7 WIFI
$179.99 X470 AORUS Gaming 5 WIFI
$139.99 X470 AORUS Ultra Gaming


https://videocardz.com/newz/gigabyte-aorus-x470-gaming-7-wifi-leaked

https://videocardz.com/75753/asrock-x470-taichi-taichi-ultimate-leaked
https://videocardz.com/newz/asrock-x470-fatal1ty-gaming-itx-ac-mini-itx-motherboard-leaked

https://videocardz.com/75725/asus-x470-rog-strix-prime-motherboards-leaked

https://videocardz.com/75736/msi-x470-gaming-m7-pro-plus-motherboards-leaked

https://videocardz.com/newz/biostar-x470-racing-gt8-and-gtn-motherboards-pictured


----------



## VRMfreak

X470
Gigabyte Gaming 7(uwu)
http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...2/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-35.html
C7H (even more uwu)
http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...2/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-35.html
MSI M7 (same crap as last year)
http://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac/4

Found these links on HWluxx forums


----------



## elmor

VRMfreak said:


> X470
> Gigabyte Gaming 7(uwu)
> http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...2/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-35.html
> C7H (same as last year)
> http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...2/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-35.html
> MSI M7 (same crap as last year)
> http://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac/4
> 
> Found these links on HWluxx forums



C7H is not the same as C6H.



CSD83750 -> IR3555
8+4 -> 10+2
Re-arranged phase locations for lower temperatures


----------



## VRMfreak

elmor said:


> VRMfreak said:
> 
> 
> 
> X470
> Gigabyte Gaming 7(uwu)
> http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...2/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-35.html
> C7H (same as last year)
> http://www.smartredirect.de/redir/c...2/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-35.html
> MSI M7 (same crap as last year)
> http://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac/4
> 
> Found these links on HWluxx forums
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C7H is not the same as C6H.
> 
> 
> 
> CSD83750 -> IR3555
> 8+4 -> 10+2
> Re-arranged phase locations for lower temperatures
Click to expand...

Oh, they had it specced out with NexFETs, i just ran quickly over the article, i'll edit the original post
sorry
It seemed like IR powerstages to me, i wasnt sure since its not a close up shot.


----------



## Nighthog

Seems MSI, Gigabyte, ASUS all went with 10Phase design for cpu power? 10+2 more specific. 

MSI still on NIKOS, Gigabyte on IR3553 and Asus on IR3555?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

dont believe nothing they said till you see your vrms at 120c by people that knows what they talking about it lol

Asus is in a spiral to hell in my eyes. No vrm diodes on 2 of my mobos like really asus wheres the vrm diodes to check temps? Why take it out?
My strix z370-g no where to be found and my strix b350-i either have vrm sensor probe. oc3d call you out on this.

I got previous maximus boards ITX & M-ATX boards what happen to them>? You give us instead STRIX "stripped out of features X version" brand name ...??


----------



## nycgtr

Never been a fan of the strix line of boards. I don't get how people don't see its a just grey version of a prime/A board with maybe 1 or 2 extras.


----------



## AlphaC

elmor said:


> C7H is not the same as C6H.
> 
> 
> 
> CSD83750 -> IR3555
> 8+4 -> 10+2
> Re-arranged phase locations for lower temperatures


Good info as always elmor!

That's really good but didn't your engineering department have some infighting since it's as strong as the X370 ROG Extreme?

From picture: It's definitely IR powerstages since they don't have the metallic tops like Intersil ISL99227B and they are 6x6mm rather than 5x6mm or 4x6mm

-----


nycgtr said:


> Never been a fan of the strix line of boards. I don't get how people don't see its a just grey version of a prime/A board with maybe 1 or 2 extras.


Well for X370 the Prime Pro has 6x 40A TI NexFETs for CPU while the X370-F STRIX had 6 x IR3555 60A powerstages

-----

From Newegg:

x470-f strix : Tom at OC3d thinks it's 8+2 but it may be 6+4 like the old x370 STRIX? wccftech has it tabulated as 6+2 Phase DIGI+







https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813119099

Prime x470 Pro = ? (wccftech has 10 phases listed so it could be 6+4 or 8+2)

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813119100

x470 Taichi Ultimate , rear has 8 components so it's probably 6+2 doubled again.







They state "Dual-Stack MOSFET (DSM)"
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157834

x470 ITX: looks to be using 6+4 Sinopower SM7341 ("Dual Stack mosfet")
(see https://images10.newegg.com/NeweggImage/ProductImageCompressAll1280/13-157-837-V04.jpg)
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157837

x470 Master SLI/AC : likely 8+2 normal Sinopower as the older Killer SLI , not a strong offering IMO (chokes are cheaper , mosfets likely cheaper , no Dual BIOS , 2 instead of 3 PCie 3 x16)
* 12 phases supposedly per website , so probably 8+4
* Non wireless ac version has ALC892 for whatever reason instead of ALC1220
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157833

Gigabyte x470 Gaming 7 is 10x IR3553 40A powerstages for CPU VCore

X470 Gaming 5: "8+3 Phase IR Digital PWM Design" 
(Low RDS(ON) mosfets rather than Powerstages mentioned on the product page is not encouraging at all so it looks like it is a midrange board with RGB + wifi)
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145059

MSI M7
IR35201 PWM controller with Onsemi 4C029 + 4C024 so likely 12+2
http://www.hw-journal.de/testberichte/mainboards/3360-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-preview?showall=&start=3

MSI Pro Carbon : some sort of design adding to 10
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X470-GAMING-PRO-CARBON-AC/Overview

The Asrock offering isn't as strong this time since it doesn't have Dual BIOs. The Taichi ultimate on Newegg is $300 so it's going to have to contend with the $240 Gaming 7 and the $300 CH VII Hero wifi ($280 non wifi Hero)... Taichi (non-Ultimate) is priced okay at $230. The launchdate is later for the Taichi as well (April 26 rather than 18).

I believe the CH VII Hero will be the board to buy this time around.


---------------

Preliminary Summary :
Overclocking: CH VII Hero , Taichi Ultimate , Taichi , x470 Gaming 7 (the heatsink and backplate alleviate concerns but the mosfets themselves are weaker than CH VII Hero),
Overclocking (tentative): X470-F STRIX
Overclocking - with reservations : MSI M7 (Onsemi fets... fin area seems to be lower too , it isn't an engineering triumph to slap a heatsink on a bad design choice) , Asus x470 Prime Pro probably goes here again , x470 Gaming 5 perhaps here instead of _mainstream_ (heatpiped but not much fin area) 
Mainstream , consider a good x370 board instead: Ultra Gaming (no heatpipe), MSI pro carbon , X470 Master SLI & K4 
Budget / cheapo , probably would be better to buy a X370 board on sale : MSI X470 GAMING PLUS, x470 TUF Plus 

ITX:Asus X470 STRIX ITX (hopefully 6x Infineon 50A dual channel Mosfets as X370 one), Asrock X470 ITX (likely sinopower dual stack mosfet)


----------



## zGunBLADEz

nycgtr said:


> Never been a fan of the strix line of boards. I don't get how people don't see its a just grey version of a prime/A board with maybe 1 or 2 extras.


 theres no other choice if you want an asus board specially itx or matx not that they were lacking before strix. Cough Maximus" variants

How long it took them to release the b350 and x370 strix itx?
The B350 its a great board im not going to lie to you
But no vrm sensor when you needed the most? The board is a very capable board that capable that i have the ch6 in the dark corner lol.

The z370-G its not a cheap mobo either its almost $200 bucks. Feels like @ $99 mobo tho


Im not happy with it, non the z370-G neither the B350 dont have this. I had it with the CH6 board.
you look around i think im one of the top overclockers of ryzen around overclock.net
now you see this people praising the new boards and cpus..

NOOOOO not going to cut it.


----------



## elmor

@AlphaC http://www.overclock.net/forum/27156113-post35156.html


----------



## AlphaC

elmor said:


> @*AlphaC* http://www.overclock.net/forum/27156113-post35156.html


Nice! :thumb:


----------



## helioNz4R

Hi @elmor, is the X470 version of the Gaming-F still using IR3555's? Will we be able to use ZenStates with the new CPU's and motherboards? I'm going to get a 2700x this week and would love to know those things 

If things go well on my X370 Gaming-F i might not swtich to X470 at all but having an extra m.2 slot is nice though...


----------



## Nighthog

Seems most eye the top tiers and I keep looking at the middle tier 

Gigabyte *X470 Gaming 5 Wifi* and *X470 Ultra Gaming* Seems to be mostly the same board with the Gaming 5 with a few extra leds and wifi added (though BIOS options can be different) 
Seems they are born from the K3/K5 though without BLCK this time around on the X370 boards.

It looks like they still use the old 4+3 power design but have now gone 8(2x4)+3. Native 8phase or most likely using doublers(2x4) on these to achieve the 8phase CPU power? 
Seems like a ok all-round board? (price is a question though)
The older 4+3 design does work if you cool it down though it did run hot (110C+ for close to 4.0Ghz clocks if even that)


----------



## Darkomax

Nighthog said:


> Seems most eye the top tiers and I keep looking at the middle tier
> 
> Gigabyte *X470 Gaming 5 Wifi* and *X470 Ultra Gaming* Seems to be mostly the same board with the Gaming 5 with a few extra leds and wifi added (though BIOS options can be different)
> Seems they are born from the K3/K5 though without BLCK this time around on the X370 boards.
> 
> It looks like they still use the old 4+3 power design but have now gone 8(2x4)+3. Native 8phase or most likely using doublers(2x4) on these to achieve the 8phase CPU power?
> Seems like a ok all-round board? (price is a question though)
> The older 4+3 design does work if you cool it down though it did run hot (110C+ for close to 4.0Ghz clocks if even that)


I would bet on a 4 phases with doubled components , 8 phases or doublers at this price is unlikely.


----------



## elmor

helioNz4R said:


> Hi @elmor, is the X470 version of the Gaming-F still using IR3555's? Will we be able to use ZenStates with the new CPU's and motherboards? I'm going to get a 2700x this week and would love to know those things
> 
> If things go well on my X370 Gaming-F i might not swtich to X470 at all but having an extra m.2 slot is nice though...



Sorry don't know, not working with that product. Reviews should be up soon.


----------



## helioNz4R

elmor said:


> Sorry don't know, not working with that product. Reviews should be up soon.


No problem  Do you by any chance know if ZenStates is X470/Ryzen 2 compatible? I've been using it for a year now with my 1700, would be great if it worked with 2700x.


----------



## elmor

helioNz4R said:


> No problem  Do you by any chance know if ZenStates is X470/Ryzen 2 compatible? I've been using it for a year now with my 1700, would be great if it worked with 2700x.



Theoretically yes, but it might not recognize the new CPUs. If not I'll create an updated version.


----------



## helioNz4R

elmor said:


> Theoretically yes, but it might not recognize the new CPUs. If not I'll create an updated version.


That's great to hear, thank you for everything.


----------



## zulex

I heard that X470 Taichi has 16 power phases where as C7H 12 power phases.
Is that mean Taichi has a better and stable power delivery on CPU and SOC??


----------



## 99belle99

zulex said:


> I heard that X470 Taichi has 16 power phases where as C7H 12 power phases.
> Is that mean Taichi has a better and stable power delivery on CPU and SOC??


It depends on the components used. If they both used identical components then yes but they more than likely don't.


----------



## VRMfreak

zulex said:


> I heard that X470 Taichi has 16 power phases where as C7H 12 power phases.
> Is that mean Taichi has a better and stable power delivery on CPU and SOC??


Nope, Taichi uses DualNFets, this means you still need a driver for the fets.
Crosshair uses powerstages, this means they have everything (except the controller) integrated into themselves. Those are more efficient (2-3%) than DualNFets + drivers
The problem is that with massive amount of phases, each phase will get low load and won't reach it's peak efficiency.
In theory, ideal efficiency is with 6/8 phase powerstage VRM for most uses.
Taichi will run cooler though (because it has more area to dissipate the heat).


----------



## AlphaC

Yep still Dual N fets / Dual stack mosfets on X470 Taichi.

https://hk.xfastest.com/6117/xf-asrock-x470-taichi-rgb-review-with-2700x-2700-1800x-compare/

There's little to gain going x370 Taichi to X470 Taichi (non ultimate). It looks better IMO and I believe a USB 3.1 gen 2 header is included. I don't think anyone will buy it for the HDMI port , it's absolute overkill for a APU.

Another overview of Taichi Ultimate:
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152535

NexFETs on Taichi:
https://www.techbang.com/posts/5792...-with-x470-chipset-motherboard-to-play?page=2

-------

Another review of CH VII Hero , using iR3555
https://www.techbang.com/posts/5788...s-equipped-with-the-amd-x470-chipset-measured

IR3555 on CHVII Hero
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152537

IR3555 on CHVII Hero: http://www.hwbattle.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=hottopic&wr_id=9002

GBT X470 Gaming 7 , using IR3553 (note the memory VRM !)
https://news.xfastest.com/review/48314/gigabyte-x470-aorus-gaming-7-wifi/

IR3553 on GBT G7 (2x IR3556 for SOC)
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152534

IR3555 on X470-F STRIX
https://www.techbang.com/posts/5792...-with-x470-chipset-motherboard-to-play?page=3

Onsemi 4C024N+4C029N used on MSI x470 M7 (not impressed)
https://www.techbang.com/posts/5789...-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-motherboard-debut-test
https://nl.hardware.info/product/440695/msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac/specificaties
http://www.hw-journal.de/testberichte/mainboards/3360-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-preview?showall=&start=3


Onsemi 4C06B + 4C10B parts on TUF PLUS , believed to be 4+2 PWM
https://nl.hardware.info/product/441719/asus-tuf-x470-plus-gaming/specificaties

Onsemi 4C10N + 4C06N on the Gigabyte Ultra Gaming (PWM is Intersil ISL95712 4+3)
https://nl.hardware.info/product/440975/gigabyte-x470-aorus-ultra-gaming/specificaties

via PM from asdkj1740


> asrock taichi, 12+4, ir35201 6+2
> 12*csd87350 40a (doubled by 6*ir3598), 4*csd87350 (doubled by 2*ir3598)
> fp12k
> dual phase ddr4
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/57926...to-play?page=2
> 
> 
> asus rog hero, 10+2, asp1405i 5+2
> 10*ir3555 60a (doubled by 5*ir3599), 2*ir3555
> fp10k
> dual phase ddr4
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/57881...ipset-measured
> 
> 
> asus strix f, 6+4, asp1405i 6+2
> 6*ir3555 60a, 4*ir3555 60a (doubled by 2*ir3599)
> mil5k(taiwanese)
> single phase ddr4
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/57926...to-play?page=3
> 
> 
> gigabyte gaming 7, 10+2, ir35201 5+2
> 10*ir3553 40a (doubled by 5*ir3599), 2*ir3556 50a
> fp10k
> single phase ddr4
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/57926...to-play?page=4
> 
> 
> msi m7, 12+2, ir35201 6+2
> 12*(4c029n+4c024n) (doubled by 6*ir3598), 2*(4c029n+4c024n*2)
> (10k?) caps (from jap?)
> single phase ddr4
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/57896...ard-debut-test
> 
> 
> gigabyte ultra gaming (as well as gaming5?) "8+3", isl95712 4+3
> 8*(4c06n+4c09n) with 2*external 5az driver (isl6625a), (isl95712 integrated with 2 vcore drivers)
> 3*(4c06n+4c09n) with 1*external 5az driver (isl6625a), (isl95712 integrated with 1 soc driver)
> 5k cap(taiwanese)
> single phase ddr4


TEMPS:

https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_x470_aorus_gaming_7_wifi_review/17







"The Aorus Gaming 7 is capable of overclocking our Ryzen 7 2700X to a similar level as that we've seen from the Crosshair VII and MSI M7, with all the cores making it up to the 4.2 GHz mark. The Gaming 7 doesn't quite match up to the other X470 motherboards when it comes to memory timings, limited to just 3200 MHz, but the overall overclock - not suitable for 24/7 stability - of 4.45 GHz shows that there is plenty of performance available should you wish to spend the time necessary to extract it."

https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_strix_x470-f_gaming_review/15
"The Strix is an absolute monster when it comes to overclocking, giving the best combination of CPU clock speed and DDR4 timings that we've seen in today's batch of Ryzen 2nd Generation reviews. 4.34 GHz on the Ryzen 7 2700X is hugely impressive and should lead to the Strix putting up a challenge for the top spot in our calculation heavy benchmarks."
"If you want to go all in on overclocking the Ryzen 7 2700X to the absolute limits then the Strix X470-F Gaming should find itself on your shortlist of potential purchases. 4.44 GHz at 1.47v is a great baseline from which to expand your overclocking efforts. Just remember to ensure that you have plenty of cooling on hand"
70°C on the x470-F STRIX Overclocked

-------

Another note: One thing I noticed is the Asrock MASTER SLI uses fewer capacitors than the competition's midrange but those are FP12K Japanese ones instead. I need to get around to tallying up the total output capacitance.

Power limit note:


> The "Precision Boost Override" feature available on 400-series motherboards allows increasing the physical limiters mentioned earlier. On SKUs belonging to the 105W TDP infrastructure group, the default limiters are following: PPT 141.75W, TDC 95A, EDC 140A and tJMax of 85°C (absolute, excl. offset).
> 
> When "Precision Boost Override" mode is enabled (AGESA default), PPT becomes essentially unrestricted (1000W), TDC is set to 114A and EDC to 168A. These limits can be customized by the ODM so that the new limits will comply with the electrical characteristics of the motherboard design in question.
> 
> Essentially this means that the entry-level or the tiny ITX boards with more limited VRM should use much more conservative limits than the high-end enthusiast-oriented motherboards. If (or rather how exactly) AMD will enforce these good configuration practices remains to be seen thou.


https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72#post-39391302

(ABBREVIATIONS: Package Power Tracking= PPT, Thermal Design Current= TDC, Electrical Design Current= EDC)


----------



## helioNz4R

Wow, i'll get my 2700x anytime now, will see how X370-F compares to the X470-F.


----------



## Despoiler

helioNz4R said:


> Wow, i'll get my 2700x anytime now, will see how X370-F compares to the X470-F.


Let us know. I have a X370-F. I'd love to be able to drop in a 2700x with minimal differences.

EDIT: Here's the answer. Almost no difference.


----------



## AlphaC

X470 Crosshair VII Hero and X470 Gaming 7 http://www.4gamer.net/games/300/G030061/20180411118/

CH VII Hero:








Gaming 7:








X470 Taichi: https://www.hkepc.com/16554/極豪華_16相數位供電_ASROCK_X470_TAICHI_主機板/page/1#view



Anyhow since Pinnacle Ridge has the memory controller inside the CPU as long as you have a decent motherboard the only thing I anticipate you lose is StoreMi, Precision Boost Overdrive, and perhaps USB 3.1 gen 2 front panel header if the new x470 version has that.


----------



## asdkj1740

i dont know why it is not 100% jap caps on such a high end top flashship mobo.


----------



## asdkj1740

its not fair to compare mobos' vrm temps based on software readings, as different mobo may use different method / place of senor to monitor the vrm temp. as the elmor's enthusiast highligths on c7h pdf states that c7h and c6h have different design on monitoing the vrm temp so it should not be compared them directly without using ir gun(external method).


however the gigabtye g7 temp is really not impressive at all. 
i dont understand the whole design of that real giant heasink with fins design.
the bottom aluminum block is too thick, while the heatpipe is transferring the vrm heat to another side of bottom thick aluminum block rather than into the upper fins directly. 
https://youtu.be/C4181WT3imo?t=58

i guess this tpye of design can keep vrm below certain target temp, but not significantly lower them.
giant block helps extending the time before "overheating/throttling".

some design like evga classified sr-2's vrm heatsink should be much better?


----------



## AlphaC

While I would say that a Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7's VRM design is better it does come at a substantial cost to manufacture. The IR3553 probably costs them less to use since they likely have a massive amount of them stockpiled since Z77 / Z87 days. From an engineering standpoint it is every bit as capable as a X370 CH VI Hero or Taichi (X370/X470) as far as V_Core. Tom over at OC3D confirmed this by comparing it to the CH VII Hero and MSI M7 (which unlike the prior version, has 12 high side mosfets and from Onsemi instead of NIKOS). Both those boards cost more to acquire too.

As far as the capacitor circled, it looks to be for SOC side

Nearly every motherboard heatsink design with a heatpipe (including ones for notebook PCs) has the heatpipe oriented parallel to the motherboard , much like a vapor chamber so that is not a surprise. I feel it (the fin orientation) isn't going to be as effective for a top mount AIO but the fin contribution is likely less compared to TIM / base conduction. I would have preferred a pin fin design similar to Enzotech design but it costs more and would cause DFM (design for manufacturing) to be difficult if a heatpipe is added. The base thickness is likely to accommodate for the heatpipe or to reduce heatsink bending and torsional shear stress (the mounting points are diagonal).

I am unsure of the actual dimensions of the fins but unlike a CPU heatsink, a heatpipe vertical to the board surface would provide minimal benefit without an additional fin stack (that would interfere with CPU coolers). Also they're using a backplate (_Team Up , Fight on_ is tacky though you won't see the backplate) which makes use of the IR3553's thermal conductivity to the PCB. See the Thermalright HR-09 for what I mean if they were to have a top performing extruded heatpipe heatsink : http://thermalright.com/product/hr-09-type-1/

Refer to the NASA guide on heatpipes: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150018080.pdf

& other sources https://www.electronics-cooling.com/2016/08/design-considerations-when-using-heat-pipes/

http://semi-therm.org/wp-content/up...-Design-Guidelines-Thermal-Live-2016.pptx.pdf


Spoiler














It's easy to critique, but unless there's a MAJOR design flaw then I don't think it deserves that level of nitpicking.

------
edit: see also Tom's hardware review https://www.tomshardware.com/review...gaming-7-wifi-amd-atx-motherboard,5576-4.html


----------



## asdkj1740

judging from the msrp (way cheaper than c7h and slighly cheaper than m7) and the actual oc performance shown on reviews all over the world, of course gigabyte aorus gaming 7 is a solid mobo that is sure overkilled for ryzen at air/custom water cooling.

a functional heatsink on vrm has been waiting for so long, the absolute vrm temp reported on gaming 7 is still very good, while i just expect more (relatively) on this giant heatsink with lots fins.

that backplate has no thermal pad included(?) so i think gigabyte uses this to prevent pcb bending too much.

dont know whats going on with that heatsink, would like to test it out by myself later, especially given the gigabyte z370 experiences...i just feel not great

that taiwanese caps, as well as that ddr4 vrm, are still all fine to handle ryzen and ddr4 ram. it is not bad at all but for sure it could be better.

as a (current) flagship, a high standard should be involved to examine it.


----------



## br0da

Thanks to @asdkj1740 and @AlphaC for collecting infos, they've been added to the list.
Here are some Prime X470-Pro shots: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-37.html#post26274842
They've replaced the TI NexFETs with IR3553 powIRstages.


----------



## AlphaC

So ASUS thinks the IR3553 is better eh? Efficiency is only gained from the inclusion of drivers , but unless revised to 8+2 it likely isn't a huge difference based on the efficiency curve. appears to be 6+4 due to two IR3599 used at SOC side. Not really worth the $185 they're asking though because it's missing some things you would have gotten on a X370 G5 / K7 for example.


----------



## br0da

Indeed it's 6+4 phases. Overall it'll perform pretty similar to it's X370 variant I'd guess.
With 160€ in Germany pricing is quite decent if you just mind X470 boards IMO.


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3289-gigabyte-x470-gaming-7-vrm-thermal-benchmarks

X470 Gaming 7


----------



## kd5151

GN expects 10c-12c ryzen later down the road. I think so also?


----------



## 99belle99

kd5151 said:


> GN expects 10c-12c ryzen later down the road. I think so also?


I believe that also. That is why there is 8 + 4 pin sockets on the motherboards even though they do not need it all for future proofing.


----------



## elmor

AlphaC said:


> While I would say that a Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7's VRM design is better it does come at a substantial cost to manufacture. The IR3553 probably costs them less to use since they likely have a massive amount of them stockpiled since Z77 / Z87 days. From an engineering standpoint it is every bit as capable as a X370 CH VI Hero or Taichi (X370/X470) as far as V_Core. Tom over at OC3D confirmed this by comparing it to the CH VII Hero and MSI M7 (which unlike the prior version, has 12 high side mosfets and from Onsemi instead of NIKOS). Both those boards cost more to acquire too.
> 
> As far as the capacitor circled, it looks to be for SOC side
> 
> Nearly every motherboard heatsink design with a heatpipe (including ones for notebook PCs) has the heatpipe oriented parallel to the motherboard , much like a vapor chamber so that is not a surprise. I feel it (the fin orientation) isn't going to be as effective for a top mount AIO but the fin contribution is likely less compared to TIM / base conduction. I would have preferred a pin fin design similar to Enzotech design but it costs more and would cause DFM (design for manufacturing) to be difficult if a heatpipe is added. The base thickness is likely to accommodate for the heatpipe or to reduce heatsink bending and torsional shear stress (the mounting points are diagonal).
> 
> I am unsure of the actual dimensions of the fins but unlike a CPU heatsink, a heatpipe vertical to the board surface would provide minimal benefit without an additional fin stack (that would interfere with CPU coolers). Also they're using a backplate (_Team Up , Fight on_ is tacky though you won't see the backplate) which makes use of the IR3553's thermal conductivity to the PCB. See the Thermalright HR-09 for what I mean if they were to have a top performing extruded heatpipe heatsink : http://thermalright.com/product/hr-09-type-1/
> 
> Refer to the NASA guide on heatpipes: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150018080.pdf
> 
> & other sources https://www.electronics-cooling.com/2016/08/design-considerations-when-using-heat-pipes/
> 
> http://semi-therm.org/wp-content/up...-Design-Guidelines-Thermal-Live-2016.pptx.pdf
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 157465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's easy to critique, but unless there's a MAJOR design flaw then I don't think it deserves that level of nitpicking.
> 
> ------
> edit: see also Tom's hardware review https://www.tomshardware.com/review...gaming-7-wifi-amd-atx-motherboard,5576-4.html



More than 6-phase 40A rating is really overkill on this platform. Overclocked running Prime 95 Small FFTs you'll see max 130A output current on these CPUs. Anything else is primarily to achieve lower VRM temperatures or future proofing in case there's another Bulldozer coming, or for LN2 use.


----------



## asdkj1740

rip z370, lol.


----------



## br0da

CoolPC TW Reviews:

ASUS Prime X470-Pro
ASUS ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
ASUS ROG Crosshair VII Hero
MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC
Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 WiFi


----------



## AlphaC

http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1110/11100406_2.html

Gaming 7 ~ 64°C under load







3200CL14 = 66.6ns latency


----------------

Gaming 5 confirmations
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=154098
http://www.hkepc.com/16625/抵玩_X470_Gaming_大板_GIGABYTE_X470_AORUS_Gaming_5_WiFi


----------------

Crosshair VII Hero 

http://playwares.com/pcreview/56454654#

----------------


Other: No response from Asrock yet on the K4 mosfet variant.


----------



## Fanu

any reviews of the x470 taichi board?

MSI and ASUS seem to be the only ones with full stock of their x470 motherboards
others are either all sold out or still not launched

btw whats with the underwhelming 802.11ac intel module on taichi boards:

- Intel 802.11ac WiFi Module
- Supports IEEE 802.11a / b / g / n / ac
- Supports Dual-Band (2.4 / 5 GHz)
- Supports high speed wireless connections up to 433Mbps
- Supports Bluetooth 4.2 / 3.0 + High speed class II

while gigabytes gaming 7 has this:

Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n/ac, supporting 2.4/5 GHz Dual-Band
BLUETOOTH 5
Support for 11ac 160MHz wireless standard and up to 1.73 Gbps data rate


----------



## netman

so is there already any conclusion what is the board to go with regarding the best vrm solution and its cooling ? 

Asrock Taichi X470 or Asus Crosshair 7 


or ar both of them on par and one can choose on personal likes ?


----------



## AlphaC

FYI:
Asrock K4 uses same design as X370 K4 more or less.

I'm not going to bother contacting MSI as they're more pricey than the competition, feel free to do the legwork on that if you love MSI. 









Fanu said:


> any reviews of the x470 taichi board?
> 
> MSI and ASUS seem to be the only ones with full stock of their x470 motherboards
> others are either all sold out or still not launched
> 
> btw whats with the underwhelming 802.11ac intel module on taichi boards:
> 
> - Intel 802.11ac WiFi Module
> - Supports IEEE 802.11a / b / g / n / ac
> - Supports Dual-Band (2.4 / 5 GHz)
> - Supports high speed wireless connections up to 433Mbps
> - Supports Bluetooth 4.2 / 3.0 + High speed class II
> 
> while gigabytes gaming 7 has this:
> 
> Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n/ac, supporting 2.4/5 GHz Dual-Band
> BLUETOOTH 5
> Support for 11ac 160MHz wireless standard and up to 1.73 Gbps data rate


Because the GBT Gaming 7 is a flagship fully redesigned and marketed for gaming. GBT is also releasing many boards with WIFI so they likely get a discount on bulk buying. I theorize because we complained enough about its competitiveness on X370 that GBT actually made it better (a good thing).

The X470 Taichi is a copy-paste job from X370 more or less (minor changes such as USB 3.1 gen 2 front panel header , rear HDMI port). It sold very well, was a good board, and the price never dipped below $180 or so until X470 boards came out. I mean the lowest I have seen it is ~ $130 used and ~$160 after MIR from Newegg. It still has the issue of fewer USB ports as well. The X470 version lists 4000MHz RAM support for Ryzen 7 2700X (Pinnacle Ridge) https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/X470 Taichi/index.asp#MemoryPR.

I suspect the Fatal1ty Professional sold extremely poorly which is why it is labeled "Taichi Ultimate" now for the board with power/reset + 10GBps LAN. I wouldn't pay more than $200 for a X470 Taichi since it's a copy-paste job: X370 Taichi seems to be getting the PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) updates.

If the wifi really bothers you , just buy a new wifi module. Most won't have over 100Mbps internet so the 433Mbps is already more than enough for the average user.

In summary, Gaming 7 is a better overall board if you want RGB (everywhere lol), dual BIOS, audio, wifi, or just about any non-overclocking feature. If you have the DDR4 3600MHz kit on the memory QVL it might be able to hit 3600. Taichi is a better board for memory overclocking probably, since it uses 2 phase TI NexFETs for DRAM and has 4000MHz QVL. Note due to memory overclocking being more important than core overclocking on Ryzen 2nd gen (PBO invalidates most manual overclocking & most chips won't reach over 4.3GHz on ambient) , extra importance is given to memory overclocking if you have Samsung B-Die memory.


----------



## kd5151

Yeah. +1 Gigabyte. I like the Gaming 5! Very competitive!


----------



## AlphaC

@*Fanu* , regarding wifi: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...-gaming-7-wifi-motherboard-review/index3.html



> One thing GIGABYTE also really didn't market to the extreme is that they are using Intel's brand new 1.733Gb/s Wireless-AC controller that supports current bands but also the new 160MHz band that delivers the Gbit WIFI speeds. The Wireless AC 9260NGW was used as a standalone WIFI controller.


X470 vs X370 Taichi 






Crosshair VII Hero PCB review :


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> Yep still Dual N fets / Dual stack mosfets on X470 Taichi.
> 
> https://hk.xfastest.com/6117/xf-asrock-x470-taichi-rgb-review-with-2700x-2700-1800x-compare/
> 
> There's little to gain going x370 Taichi to X470 Taichi (non ultimate). It looks better IMO and I believe a USB 3.1 gen 2 header is included. I don't think anyone will buy it for the HDMI port , it's absolute overkill for a APU.
> 
> Another overview of Taichi Ultimate:
> https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152535
> 
> NexFETs on Taichi:
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/5792...-with-x470-chipset-motherboard-to-play?page=2
> 
> -------
> 
> Another review of CH VII Hero , using iR3555
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/5788...s-equipped-with-the-amd-x470-chipset-measured
> 
> IR3555 on CHVII Hero
> https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152537
> 
> IR3555 on CHVII Hero: http://www.hwbattle.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=hottopic&wr_id=9002
> 
> GBT X470 Gaming 7 , using IR3553 (note the memory VRM !)
> https://news.xfastest.com/review/48314/gigabyte-x470-aorus-gaming-7-wifi/
> 
> IR3553 on GBT G7 (2x IR3556 for SOC)
> https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=152534
> 
> IR3555 on X470-F STRIX
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/5792...-with-x470-chipset-motherboard-to-play?page=3
> 
> Onsemi 4C024N+4C029N used on MSI x470 M7 (not impressed)
> https://www.techbang.com/posts/5789...-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-motherboard-debut-test
> https://nl.hardware.info/product/440695/msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac/specificaties
> http://www.hw-journal.de/testberichte/mainboards/3360-msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-preview?showall=&start=3
> 
> 
> Onsemi 4C06B + 4C10B parts on TUF PLUS , believed to be 4+2 PWM
> https://nl.hardware.info/product/441719/asus-tuf-x470-plus-gaming/specificaties
> 
> Onsemi 4C10N + 4C06N on the Gigabyte Ultra Gaming (PWM is Intersil ISL95712 4+3)
> https://nl.hardware.info/product/440975/gigabyte-x470-aorus-ultra-gaming/specificaties
> 
> via PM from asdkj1740
> TEMPS:
> 
> https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_x470_aorus_gaming_7_wifi_review/17
> View attachment 155049
> 
> "The Aorus Gaming 7 is capable of overclocking our Ryzen 7 2700X to a similar level as that we've seen from the Crosshair VII and MSI M7, with all the cores making it up to the 4.2 GHz mark. The Gaming 7 doesn't quite match up to the other X470 motherboards when it comes to memory timings, limited to just 3200 MHz, but the overall overclock - not suitable for 24/7 stability - of 4.45 GHz shows that there is plenty of performance available should you wish to spend the time necessary to extract it."
> 
> https://overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_strix_x470-f_gaming_review/15
> "The Strix is an absolute monster when it comes to overclocking, giving the best combination of CPU clock speed and DDR4 timings that we've seen in today's batch of Ryzen 2nd Generation reviews. 4.34 GHz on the Ryzen 7 2700X is hugely impressive and should lead to the Strix putting up a challenge for the top spot in our calculation heavy benchmarks."
> "If you want to go all in on overclocking the Ryzen 7 2700X to the absolute limits then the Strix X470-F Gaming should find itself on your shortlist of potential purchases. 4.44 GHz at 1.47v is a great baseline from which to expand your overclocking efforts. Just remember to ensure that you have plenty of cooling on hand"
> 70°C on the x470-F STRIX Overclocked
> 
> -------
> 
> Another note: One thing I noticed is the Asrock MASTER SLI uses fewer capacitors than the competition's midrange but those are FP12K Japanese ones instead. I need to get around to tallying up the total output capacitance.
> 
> Power limit note:
> https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/ryzen-strictly-technical.2500572/page-72#post-39391302
> 
> (ABBREVIATIONS: Package Power Tracking= PPT, Thermal Design Current= TDC, Electrical Design Current= EDC)


WWhy are you not impressed with MSI X470 Gaming M7 vrm???? I think it one of the top 3 boards as far as vrm support and overall engineering construction and design.


----------



## SuperZan

os2wiz said:


> WWhy are you not impressed with MSI X470 Gaming M7 vrm???? I think it one of the top 3 boards as far as vrm support and overall engineering construction and design.


Probably because they once again have a motherboard in the top tier of pricing using cheaper components than the competition. The Crosshair VII using IR3555, Taichi on NexFETs again, Gigabyte with IR3553, all properly doubled with quality components. Kudos to MSI for stepping away from NIKOs for their M7 and for a nice phase design, but responding to criticism over bargain parts on a $300 dollar X370 board by half-heartedly picking some On Semi parts instead of going back to the NIKOs spare-parts drawer doesn't scream "we heard you". Not when you can get a Strix for $50 less that has six real phases of IR3555.


----------



## Shiftstealth

SuperZan said:


> Probably because they once again have a motherboard in the top tier of pricing using cheaper components than the competition. The Crosshair VII using IR3555, Taichi on NexFETs again, Gigabyte with IR3553, all properly doubled with quality components. Kudos to MSI for stepping away from NIKOs for their M7 and for a nice phase design, but responding to criticism over bargain parts on a $300 dollar X370 board by half-heartedly picking some On Semi parts instead of going back to the NIKOs spare-parts drawer doesn't scream "we heard you". Not when you can get a Strix for $50 less that has six real phases of IR3555.


I guess their business model is one about higher margins, rather than higher volume. /shrug


----------



## AlphaC

It's "just" Onsemi Powerpaks. It's overbuilt purely through _quantity_ but the parts themselves aren't that great & there's no heatpipe for whatever reason. It's not a triumph of engineering IMO. It's along the lines of what you would get on midrange, just 4 more sets of them. You know back when Asrock used to put a ton of phases but used all DPAKs when ASUS / Gigabyte used to use Powerpaks? It's like that , sort of.

The PCB itself also has some oversights such as use of a Killer LAN exclusively & fewer USB ports / fan headers (x470 Taichi has this concern too). Killer ethernet has horrible support in Linux , only recently in Linux 4.8 did E2500 actually get support and it may require package installers. The wifi solution is an Intel 8265 , nothing to write home about. Unlike the ASUS / GBT solutions it also lacks voltage read points.

While it's certainly an upgrade over the X370 variants with 6 high side fets and 12 low side fets , I just don't see a technical advantage to using 12 high side fets with 20+ ns rise time. I've seen several reviews where to achieve the same clockspeed the M7 required some more voltage (Optimum tech I think). Mosfets + chokes are what we saw on the MSI Z370 M5 but that was in 8 phase format.

X470 Gaming m7 is using 12 (i.e. 12 high and 12 low) of these each set of 2 via an IR3598 doubler:
4C029 (high side) https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C029N-D.PDF 
----> HTML link http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/product.do?id=NTMFS4C029N
4C024 (low side) https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C024N-D.PDF
----> HTML link http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/product.do?id=NTMFS4C024N
* its RDS(on) is respectable only at V_GS = 10V vs other Powerpaks , otherwise it's not amazing (4 milliohms is more than double that of a TI NexFET which has 1.2 milliohms RDS(on) at 4.5 V_GS)

Obviously I would prefer 12x Texas Instruments NexFETs via doublers as the Taichi uses , let alone 10x IR Powerstages (ASUS / GBT) with proper doubling. _It seems ASUS felt the IR3553 is better than the NexFETs since they upgraded the Prime X470 Pro in that fashion._ The only major gripe I have with Asrock's AM4 boards is PCB thickness. When I held the X370 Taichi I remember it was thinner.

As an example of one performance metric: the TI NexFETs have an optimized V_GS of 5V so it takes less voltage to have them turn on/off. The IR Powerstages have more granularity of adjustment , better transient response, and accuracy in readings via current sense.

If you want to look at an advancement in engineering, the Crosshair VII Hero is that. It exceeds Crosshair VI *Extreme*. IR3555 have full thermal protection, overcurrent, overvoltage, etc. and to use 10 of them driven by 5 doublers for V_Core means your CPU will always be the limiting factor. On ambient , 6 of them is already plenty. This was a massive upgrade from the 8 x TI NexFET solution. There's the usual extreme overclocking features such as slow mode, voltage read points, memory retry (only useful for semi-stable memory clocks), and PS/2 port was re-added for X470. In addition to that, you get superb support from elmor here and the Stilt's memory presets are in the BIOS already.The GBT x470 Gaming 7 , on the other hand, is an impressive board because it brings Gigabyte past the "get all the RGB buyers" stage and back into the "serious" performance bracket (the X370 K7 wasn't that amazing & felt midrange). It has one of the highest wireless solutions, Dual BIOS with switches and a replaceable chip, revised audio on par with the Intel lineup, "server grade chokes" from Cooper Bussman / Coiltronics (now acquired by Eaton) rated for 70A, an actual heatsink that allows it to perform thermally on par with the CH VII Hero although using 10x 40A IR3553 instead of 10x 60A IR3555 , an ALC1220-V audio codec, etc. There's an incredible amount of R&D fixes for the X370 K7 that made it look unfavorable after the X370-F STRIX launched at a cheaper pricepoint. I'm not as confident on the BIOS team given GBT's X370 record (layout could use work too), but Gigabyte Matthew has been quite active here on OCN and quick to relay information. The Intel Z370 G7 shows Gigabyte is willing to offer top end parts at a reasonable board cost, but they likely weren't making enough money selling a low-volume board that uses powerstages that cost ~$7 each (Intersil ISL99227B) instead of $2-$3 ones from IR.

As far as the M7's performance (vs quality of life / features matters), I know "Lucky n00b" over at Jagatreview has a M7 alongside a CHVII Hero: http://oc.jagatreview.com/2018/04/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-overclocking-review-analysiss/7/ 
OC3D also seems to have had one.

In summary, I personally don't feel M7 is worthy of top-end board status. If you recall the M7 name is typically lower than Xpower but higher than M5. Feature-wise it's a bit above midrange , sort of like how a 6x IR35555 packing X470-F STRIX with BCLK (clock gen) was straddling that mid-range and high-end line (especially due to lack of a Debug LED for troubleshooting + overclocking).


----------



## netman

@AlphaC

so if i get your point right - you think the crosshair vii is the board to go with if one wants the best x470 Board ? 

i am still undecided between X470 Taichi and Crosshair vii


----------



## AlphaC

It comes at a cost just like most other ROG (non-STRIX) products. Whether it is worth the price premium is a debatable aspect but right now in terms of CPU power delivery it (CH VII hero) is the most overkill. As most people would be more than fine with a Gaming 7, Taichi, or STRIX X470-F (no debug LED or clear CMOS button...) you have to consider whether the BIOS "hand-holding", niche LN2 mode and memory retry are helpful to you. There was supposedly a non-wifi version coming at $230 MSRP but Amazon & Newegg have it at $280. In Europe, Asus is more price competitive since the CH VII Hero is about 270-280 Euro (wifi version) vs around 230-240 Euro for the Gaming 7 or Taichi. As their own STRIX X470-F is priced around 200 Euro and 160 Euro for Prime X470 Pro, that's the nature of their lineup.

---

Officially AMD's Robert Hallock states all Ryzen boards should supply 128.8W to CPU: (https://youtu.be/vZgpHTaQ10k?t=16m44s) , which means any AVX workload isn't going to be a good idea if you overclock on a cheap 4 phase B350 board. His recommended stress test regime is Prime95 + LinX (AVX) ironically.

In my ambient testing I've not seen more than 130 amps / 180ish watts at any given time on Ryzen 1st gen while below 1.45V. This should still be within peak efficiency band for a 6 phase IR Powerstage or TI NexFET solution.

The Stilt finds that package power is ~140W for second gen Ryzen without PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) which suggests it is more power hungry out of the box. GamersNexus cites just over 16A with current clamp at +12V (~200W to CPU) when at ~4.2GHz_. I've seen it run ~ 130W with XFR2 so it's probably x370 board limited currently as I can get ~ 4.325GHz @1.45V on 4 best cores but ~ 4.175GHz on 8 cores with XFR2 + PBO seemingly pushing it to ~4.2 to 4.225GHz all core when it isn't fully loaded._

Being able to provide 260W is a safety factor of two vs AMD 1st gen parameters; x370/x470 Taichi suggests "300W EX OC" which is around 18-25A load on each of 12 NeXFETs (peak efficiency > 92% occurs between ~8 to 25A). Using the Asrock metric of > 92% peak efficiency the x370 CH VI Hero would be ~ 200W+ (same PWM and doubler as Taichi by the way), X370-F STRIX ~ 240W+ (92% efficient at ~40A each for 60A powerstage but 1.4V output V_Core incurs ~1.08x the losses vs ~1.03x on NexFET not counting the mosfet drivers) _where STRIX X470-F is the same_, Prime x370 Pro ~150W+, & x370 K7 ~ 150W+ (IR3553) _where Prime X470 Pro is the same_. 

The x470 CH VII Hero by this metric would handle ~ 400W without efficiency dropping (8 phases of IR3555 would have been more than enough); ~ 250W on the x470 Gaming 7. As both use IR powerstages rather than TI NexFET powerblocks they're going to be more accurate & granular.

For ambient, those three boards (CH VII Hero, x470 Taichi, x470 Gaming 7) are more than sufficient, even the ~$200 STRIX X470-F with IR3555 Powerstages should be prudent if you can put up with quality-of-Life features missing and the Prime x470 Pro might have a redeeming quality for the Euro-zone (it's nearly $190 in USA). OC3D's VRM temp results suggest the STRIX X470-F is only a few degrees off from CH VII Hero & G7 at ambient overclock. The caveat is that those 6 phase solutions will have more ripple.
All the Asrock/GBT/MSI x470 mid-range stuff is going to be run past the most efficient operating range of the respective board if you truly push Ryzen 2nd gen. They're inherently more lossy regardless , I doubt they're over 88 - 89% efficient even under stock load once the mosfet drivers and doublers are factored in. That may not seem large, but the more power you input the bigger the difference as it has about 50% more power loss vs powerstages (88% vs 92%) and at peak efficiency the IR3555 is ~ 94% efficient. Temperature-wise the mid-range boards should be decent provided they don't push over ~ 15A per mosfet which incidentally is ~120A for 8 of them. The x470 TUF PLUS is unforgivable (I have seen at least one note TUF is now 3 year warranty which means zero reason to buy it) because it has no redeeming non-overclocking features to justify a 4 phase VRM for x470.

(see https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3553.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd94ee1767 , https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3550.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd7c831761 (as a stand-in for IR3555), http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/datasheet/specifications#SLPS4897490)

P.S. If you read Newegg / Amazon reviews this early for any board it is kind of comical. I've seen a review where someone doesn't have a CPU yet and gives the board 5 stars "because it's an ASUS". I've seen people complain about XMP Profile not working and then give 1 star to a different board when it might be because they didn't set ProcODT or memory voltage. You have the "Asrock rebate program" reviews that are heavily skewed. Then you get some people complaining XFR shoots voltage to about 1.5V, which is by design.


----------



## netman

thanks a lot for your very detailed answer. I am not so deep into the VRM but i know where to ask  - in addition to that i read a lot of reviews but not the ones on newegg or amazon (too much wanabees that don't really know what they speak off 

since i build my computers i always choose a mainboard of the top range not because i am an extreme overclocker but mainly because 50 euros more ore less do not really bother me and its nice to have the quality of life features - like you call it. Gigabyte is no option for me as they still seem to have trouble with their bios/uefi - some reviews speak of problems with the loadline calibration and the fan controll seems nowhere as good as the ones from asrock and asus. 

I personally like asrock best as i got some good experience also with their warranty (6 Year Old Z77 Extreme 6 that got a broken Lan was changed to a refurbished one only for the fee of the Shipping costs) so i will wait for the taichi which is still not available here in Europe.


----------



## br0da

MSI X470 Gaming Pro listed: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-37.html#post26286028
Richtek RT8894A running 4+2, On Sem. FETs 4C024 and 4C029, doubled lowside and highside FETs for SoC. Eight phases for CPU VCC, doubled with 0° phase shift.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> FYI:
> Asrock K4 uses same design as X370 K4 more or less.
> 
> I'm not going to bother contacting MSI as they're more pricey than the competition, feel free to do the legwork on that if you love MSI.
> View attachment 163041
> 
> 
> 
> Because the GBT Gaming 7 is a flagship fully redesigned and marketed for gaming. GBT is also releasing many boards with WIFI so they likely get a discount on bulk buying. I theorize because we complained enough about its competitiveness on X370 that GBT actually made it better (a good thing).
> 
> The X470 Taichi is a copy-paste job from X370 more or less (minor changes such as USB 3.1 gen 2 front panel header , rear HDMI port). It sold very well, was a good board, and the price never dipped below $180 or so until X470 boards came out. I mean the lowest I have seen it is ~ $130 used and ~$160 after MIR from Newegg. It still has the issue of fewer USB ports as well. The X470 version lists 4000MHz RAM support for Ryzen 7 2700X (Pinnacle Ridge) https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/X470 Taichi/index.asp#MemoryPR.
> 
> I suspect the Fatal1ty Professional sold extremely poorly which is why it is labeled "Taichi Ultimate" now for the board with power/reset + 10GBps LAN. I wouldn't pay more than $200 for a X470 Taichi since it's a copy-paste job: X370 Taichi seems to be getting the PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) updates.
> 
> If the wifi really bothers you , just buy a new wifi module. Most won't have over 100Mbps internet so the 433Mbps is already more than enough for the average user.
> 
> In summary, Gaming 7 is a better overall board if you want RGB (everywhere lol), dual BIOS, audio, wifi, or just about any non-overclocking feature. If you have the DDR4 3600MHz kit on the memory QVL it might be able to hit 3600. Taichi is a better board for memory overclocking probably, since it uses 2 phase TI NexFETs for DRAM and has 4000MHz QVL. Note due to memory overclocking being more important than core overclocking on Ryzen 2nd gen (PBO invalidates most manual overclocking & most chips won't reach over 4.3GHz on ambient) , extra importance is given to memory overclocking if you have Samsung B-Die memory.



That is pretty arrogant of you to decide for us that you won't present MSI data" because they are too pricey" . You should let the users decide on that. If you claim to be objective that decision is not worthy of you.


----------



## asdkj1740

br0da said:


> MSI X470 Gaming Pro listed: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-37.html#post26286028
> Richtek RT8894A running 4+2, On Sem. FETs 4C024 and 4C029, doubled lowside and highside FETs for SoC. Eight phases for CPU VCC, doubled with 0° phase shift.


sadly i cant see the pics without logining in.


----------



## os2wiz

By the way have you personally done a test to put your theory of MSI X470 Gaming M7 power phase inadequacy to the test. Have you documented a review done by someone else that prove it through a comparative stress test???




AlphaC said:


> It comes at a cost just like most other ROG (non-STRIX) products. Whether it is worth the price premium is a debatable aspect but right now in terms of CPU power delivery it (CH VII hero) is the most overkill. As most people would be more than fine with a Gaming 7, Taichi, or STRIX X470-F (no debug LED or clear CMOS button...) you have to consider whether the BIOS "hand-holding", niche LN2 mode and memory retry are helpful to you. There was supposedly a non-wifi version coming at $230 MSRP but Amazon & Newegg have it at $280. In Europe, Asus is more price competitive since the CH VII Hero is about 270-280 Euro (wifi version) vs around 230-240 Euro for the Gaming 7 or Taichi. As their own STRIX X470-F is priced around 200 Euro and 160 Euro for Prime X470 Pro, that's the nature of their lineup.
> 
> ---
> 
> Officially AMD's Robert Hallock states all Ryzen boards should supply 128.8W to CPU: (https://youtu.be/vZgpHTaQ10k?t=16m44s) , which means any AVX workload isn't going to be a good idea if you overclock on a cheap 4 phase B350 board. His recommended stress test regime is Prime95 + LinX (AVX) ironically.
> 
> In my ambient testing I've not seen more than 130 amps / 180ish watts at any given time on Ryzen 1st gen while below 1.45V. This should still be within peak efficiency band for a 6 phase IR Powerstage or TI NexFET solution.
> 
> The Stilt finds that package power is ~140W for second gen Ryzen without PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) which suggests it is more power hungry out of the box. GamersNexus cites just over 16A with current clamp at +12V (~200W to CPU) when at ~4.2GHz_. I've seen it run ~ 130W with XFR2 so it's probably x370 board limited currently as I can get ~ 4.325GHz @1.45V on 4 best cores but ~ 4.175GHz on 8 cores with XFR2 + PBO seemingly pushing it to ~4.2 to 4.225GHz all core when it isn't fully loaded._
> 
> Being able to provide 260W is a safety factor of two vs AMD 1st gen parameters; x370/x470 Taichi suggests "300W EX OC" which is around 18-25A load on each of 12 NeXFETs (peak efficiency > 92% occurs between ~8 to 25A). Using the Asrock metric of > 92% peak efficiency the x370 CH VI Hero would be ~ 200W+ (same PWM and doubler as Taichi by the way), X370-F STRIX ~ 240W+ (92% efficient at ~40A each for 60A powerstage but 1.4V output V_Core incurs ~1.08x the losses vs ~1.03x on NexFET not counting the mosfet drivers) _where STRIX X470-F is the same_, Prime x370 Pro ~150W+, & x370 K7 ~ 150W+ (IR3553) _where Prime X470 Pro is the same_.
> 
> The x470 CH VII Hero by this metric would handle ~ 400W without efficiency dropping (8 phases of IR3555 would have been more than enough); ~ 250W on the x470 Gaming 7. As both use IR powerstages rather than TI NexFET powerblocks they're going to be more accurate & granular.
> 
> For ambient, those three boards (CH VII Hero, x470 Taichi, x470 Gaming 7) are more than sufficient, even the ~$200 STRIX X470-F with IR3555 Powerstages should be prudent if you can put up with quality-of-Life features missing and the Prime x470 Pro might have a redeeming quality for the Euro-zone (it's nearly $190 in USA). OC3D's VRM temp results suggest the STRIX X470-F is only a few degrees off from CH VII Hero & G7 at ambient overclock. The caveat is that those 6 phase solutions will have more ripple.
> All the Asrock/GBT/MSI x470 mid-range stuff is going to be run past the most efficient operating range of the respective board if you truly push Ryzen 2nd gen. They're inherently more lossy regardless , I doubt they're over 88 - 89% efficient even under stock load once the mosfet drivers and doublers are factored in. That may not seem large, but the more power you input the bigger the difference as it has about 50% more power loss vs powerstages (88% vs 92%) and at peak efficiency the IR3555 is ~ 94% efficient. Temperature-wise the mid-range boards should be decent provided they don't push over ~ 15A per mosfet which incidentally is ~120A for 8 of them. The x470 TUF PLUS is unforgivable (I have seen at least one note TUF is now 3 year warranty which means zero reason to buy it) because it has no redeeming non-overclocking features to justify a 4 phase VRM for x470.
> 
> (see https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3553.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd94ee1767 , https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3550.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd7c831761 (as a stand-in for IR3555), http://www.ti.com/product/CSD87350Q5D/datasheet/specifications#SLPS4897490)
> 
> P.S. If you read Newegg / Amazon reviews this early for any board it is kind of comical. I've seen a review where someone doesn't have a CPU yet and gives the board 5 stars "because it's an ASUS". I've seen people complain about XMP Profile not working and then give 1 star to a different board when it might be because they didn't set ProcODT or memory voltage. You have the "Asrock rebate program" reviews that are heavily skewed. Then you get some people complaining XFR shoots voltage to about 1.5V, which is by design.


----------



## SuperZan

os2wiz said:


> By the way have you personally done a test to put your theory of MSI X470 Gaming M7 power phase inadequacy to the test. Have you documented a review done by someone else that prove it through a comparative stress test???


It's not that their VRM design won't work as intended. It's that, given their pricing scheme on AM4, they're paying less for parts and passing the savings onto themselves.


----------



## warpuck

So us Low Budget are faced with, should we go with a 2600X and the old budget B350 at stock speeds?
Or the 1600 @3950Mhz, 6 phase 470 and and a bigger cooler?
Asrock makes one without WiFi. The WiFi density where I am at has me using Cat 5 anyway.
Pretty much the same in price. I am thinking going for the 470 board and see what AMD has for next years AM4 CPU.
Then there is that 20 watt increase for the 2700X. Maybe next year MOAR CORES, more watts too? Why not? i9 move over there is another 12 core in town.
Never know.
Maybe they put more than 11 GPU cores on the next gen APU or whatever they decide to call it.
Then I will stop waiting for RX 580 prices to drop back to my budget category. If by some miracle 580s drop to with 20-30 bucks of original MSRP? The 470 board will have to wait for next years board offering.
As it is 3650 CPU Mhz will keep the R9 or a 580 happy.
Really to me a RX 580 at $360 is not 360 bucks better and faster than the current 1075 Mhz R9 285. Neither is the GTX 1060 3GB at it's price.
One last far fetched what if. AMD sells GPU designs and cooperates with intel to compete with Nvidia? This spat is not about GPUs. It is about server computing.
I am willing to bet intel CPU sales have taken off and is doing just as well as AMD in the increase department
M$ bailed Apple out


----------



## AlphaC

The MSI M7 has been shown to use more voltage and get marginally hotter , yet it commands the same price as the G7 and more than a before-rebate Taichi. That's not opinion, that's fact.

Unless MSI overhauled their entire lineup there isn't much to discuss. Powerpaks cost about $0.30 to $0.40, TI NexFETs demand about $1.50-2 now, while Powerstages are around $2-3 , with ISL99227B around $6-7. I posted a matrix near launch day where I gave MSI the benefit of the doubt , placing Pro Carbon up vs the Asrock x470 K4 & GBT x470 Gaming 5 which use ISL95712 PWM. 

See the pricing for yourself ...
Onsemi ----> https://octopart.com/ntmfs4c024nt1g-on+semiconductor-75571103 , https://octopart.com/ntmfs4c029nt1g-on+semiconductor-75571110
NexFET ----> https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993
IR3553 ----> https://octopart.com/ir3553mtrpbf-infineon-65873046
IR3555 ----> https://octopart.com/ir3555mtrpbf-infineon-65873048

The only MSI board that seems to have changed drastically is the M7 , with some other ones switching NIKOS out for Onsemi of the same type with higher power limit. By drastically I mean they added doublers on the M7 to make 6 phases into 12 and then slapped on 6 high side fets. In both the USA and Europe, it just isn't price or feature competitive. Seems only the M7 has IR35201 PWM. The Realtek PWM isn't great either which br0da suggests still exists on the lower boards. In addition, MSI has had a poor track record with BIOS updates on x370 & Z370. A board can have a mediocre but not garbage VRM (x470 TUF lol) if the feature-set justifies the price. If it can handle XFR2 and PB2 then it ought to be good enough for most users.

If you want to see comparative reviews of the x470 M7 you can look at OC3D or Optimum-tech as I stated before. 

The only MSI board on AM4 worthy of note (IMO) is the B350I in which they put six IR3555 and possibly the B350 Pro Carbon (as it is the only ATX sized B350 board with 8 high & low side fets for V_core).

For example on the MSI gaming Pro & Gaming Plus : instead of making a massively better board they made the CPU power connector 8+4 and market this (this is the problem). Instead of giving people Intel LAN , ALC1220, or an audio EMI cover they wrote "2x Power connector". Misdirecting marketing at its finest. Asrock did the same design decision on their X470 K4 & Master SLI/ac , which is disappointing but they don't lull people into false confidence that you can pump 300W into the CPU. Speaking of which, I need to pester Asrock that their page is wrong and people found the ISL95712 instead of IR35201 controller (https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/X470 Master SLI/index.asp , https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp). 

MSI has basically zero contact on OCN and their own forum, so I don't think they'll provide any information freely. 

To be fair I called the Asrock / Asus midrange lineup a lazy copy-paste job too. The difference is Asrock's boards are pretty inexpensive for what they contain , except the Taichi Ultimate.

Also due to Asus' inclusion of PBO on some older boards such as their CH VI Hero, x370-F STRIX and Prime X370 Pro I find it hard to say whether x470 in general is worth it unless you pick up the new CH VII Hero or G7 (both utilize 10+2 Powerstage designs) , which Tweaktown has reviewed first. Asrock has PBO on x370 Taichi (best decision for most) & Gigabyte has PBO as well on the x370 K7 + G5.

Unless there is a justification for it I don't see any reason to recommend MSI boards on AM4 currently.



warpuck said:


> So us Low Budget are faced with, should we go with a 2600X and the old budget B350 at stock speeds?
> Or the 1600 @3950Mhz, 6 phase 470 and and a bigger cooler?
> Asrock makes one without WiFi. The WiFi density where I am at has me using Cat 5 anyway.
> Pretty much the same in price. I am thinking going for the 470 board and see what AMD has for next years AM4 CPU.
> Then there is that 20 watt increase for the 2700X. Maybe next year MOAR CORES, more watts too? Why not? i9 move over there is another 12 core in town.
> Never know.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe they put more than 11 GPU cores on the next gen APU or whatever they decide to call it.
> Then I will stop waiting for RX 580 prices to drop back to my budget category. If by some miracle 580s drop to with 20-30 bucks of original MSRP? The 470 board will have to wait for next years board offering.
> As it is 3650 CPU Mhz will keep the R9 or a 580 happy.
> Really to me a RX 580 at $360 is not 360 bucks better and faster than the current 1075 Mhz R9 285. Neither is the GTX 1060 3GB at it's price.
> One last far fetched what if. AMD sells GPU designs and cooperates with intel to compete with Nvidia? This spat is not about GPUs. It is about server computing.
> I am willing to bet intel CPU sales have taken off and is doing just as well as AMD in the increase department
> M$ bailed Apple out


If you're low budget you don't buy at launch, you wait 3 months (1 fiscal quarter) or use a credit card with price protection of 90 days.
IMO there's the consideration of x470 vs 370 with patched BIOS. Currently there's no 6 phase x470 other than ASUS STRIX x470F and Prime pro , there's only the garbage x470 TUF and then everything else using 4 phase fake-doubled / dual driver, 5 phase doubled, or 6 phase doubled.

I've seen Prime x370 Pro (no BCLK), x370 K7 , x370 Taichi all hover around $130-150 on the open market. The CH VI Hero from x370 was $160 after rebate last week.

The higher wattage is only relevant if pushing Ryzen 7 2700X. The R5 2600X won't have an issue unless you are pushing unsafe voltages.


----------



## virpz

os2wiz said:


> By the way have you personally done a test to put your theory of MSI X470 Gaming M7 power phase inadequacy to the test. Have you documented a review done by someone else that prove it through a comparative stress test???


It is not theory, there is no way this M7 thing can compete with the other boards feature and VRM wise at it's price tag. And it is not like AlphaC is pulling MSI legs, it is MSI selling expensive **** that is not worth the money to uninformed consumers.

Ask AlphaC what he thinks about the Z170 Titanium and he will be honest about it the same way he's being real about the X370 Ti and X470 M7.

Instead of denying everything he says what about you write down the key points that make you think the M7 is worth the money against the C7H os G7 ?


----------



## cssorkinman

virpz said:


> It is not theory, there is no way this M7 thing can compete with the other boards feature and VRM wise at it's price tag. And it is not like AlphaC is pulling MSI legs, it is MSI selling expensive **** that is not worth the money to uninformed consumers.
> 
> Ask AlphaC what he thinks about the Z170 Titanium and he will be honest about it the same way he's being real about the X370 Ti and X470 M7.
> 
> Instead of denying everything he says what about you write down the key points that make you think the M7 is worth the money against the C7H os G7 ?


It performs better.


----------



## Spectre73

cssorkinman said:


> It performs better.


In which areas?


----------



## br0da

asdkj1740 said:


> sadly i cant see the pics without logining in.


Damn, forgot about that. Here you go: 
https://img.tweakpc.de/image/dY6
https://img.tweakpc.de/image/dY0

Edit: Sorry, it's the Plus. Pro should be same anyways.


----------



## cssorkinman

Spectre73 said:


> In which areas?


----------



## asdkj1740

br0da said:


> Damn, forgot about that. Here you go:
> https://img.tweakpc.de/image/dY6
> https://img.tweakpc.de/image/dY0
> 
> Edit: Sorry, it's the Plus. Pro should be same anyways.


thank you.
the rt8894a is 4+2 and integrated 3 drivers on the vcore side in the original design.
there are two external drivers located on the back of the pcb behind the 2 soc phases. and your provided pics show there is one external driver on the vcore side on the front of the pcb.
so it is clear that msi gaming plus is running 4+2 mode with dual inductor design on vcores.
sadly we dont have a clear pic showing the markings on the surface of those external drivers. i guess it is just some single phase driver.



https://youtu.be/JFapNnwQ2Cc?t=73
https://www.richtek.com/~/media/AN PDF/SG009_EN.pdf


----------



## villason

I am hesitating about getting an Asus Prime X470-Pro vs Asus Strix X470 F. Any thougts? I will use a R7 2700X with 2X16GB DDR4 3200Mhz CL14 with the default settings besides XMP RAM OC.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> It's "just" Onsemi Powerpaks. It's overbuilt purely through _quantity_ but the parts themselves aren't that great & there's no heatpipe for whatever reason. It's not a triumph of engineering IMO. It's along the lines of what you would get on midrange, just 4 more sets of them. You know back when Asrock used to put a ton of phases but used all DPAKs when ASUS / Gigabyte used to use Powerpaks? It's like that , sort of.
> 
> The PCB itself also has some oversights such as use of a Killer LAN exclusively & fewer USB ports / fan headers (x470 Taichi has this concern too). Killer ethernet has horrible support in Linux , only recently in Linux 4.8 did E2500 actually get support and it may require package installers. The wifi solution is an Intel 8265 , nothing to write home about. Unlike the ASUS / GBT solutions it also lacks voltage read points.
> 
> While it's certainly an upgrade over the X370 variants with 6 high side fets and 12 low side fets , I just don't see a technical advantage to using 12 high side fets with 20+ ns rise time. I've seen several reviews where to achieve the same clockspeed the M7 required some more voltage (Optimum tech I think). Mosfets + chokes are what we saw on the MSI Z370 M5 but that was in 8 phase format.
> 
> X470 Gaming m7 is using 12 (i.e. 12 high and 12 low) of these each set of 2 via an IR3598 doubler:
> 4C029 (high side) https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C029N-D.PDF
> ----> HTML link http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/product.do?id=NTMFS4C029N
> 4C024 (low side) https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C024N-D.PDF
> ----> HTML link http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/product.do?id=NTMFS4C024N
> * its RDS(on) is respectable only at V_GS = 10V vs other Powerpaks , otherwise it's not amazing (4 milliohms is more than double that of a TI NexFET which has 1.2 milliohms RDS(on) at 4.5 V_GS)
> 
> Obviously I would prefer 12x Texas Instruments NexFETs via doublers as the Taichi uses , let alone 10x IR Powerstages (ASUS / GBT) with proper doubling. _It seems ASUS felt the IR3553 is better than the NexFETs since they upgraded the Prime X470 Pro in that fashion._ The only major gripe I have with Asrock's AM4 boards is PCB thickness. When I held the X370 Taichi I remember it was thinner.
> 
> As an example of one performance metric: the TI NexFETs have an optimized V_GS of 5V so it takes less voltage to have them turn on/off. The IR Powerstages have more granularity of adjustment , better transient response, and accuracy in readings via current sense.
> 
> If you want to look at an advancement in engineering, the Crosshair VII Hero is that. It exceeds Crosshair VI *Extreme*. IR3555 have full thermal protection, overcurrent, overvoltage, etc. and to use 10 of them driven by 5 doublers for V_Core means your CPU will always be the limiting factor. On ambient , 6 of them is already plenty. This was a massive upgrade from the 8 x TI NexFET solution. There's the usual extreme overclocking features such as slow mode, voltage read points, memory retry (only useful for semi-stable memory clocks), and PS/2 port was re-added for X470. In addition to that, you get superb support from elmor here and the Stilt's memory presets are in the BIOS already.The GBT x470 Gaming 7 , on the other hand, is an impressive board because it brings Gigabyte past the "get all the RGB buyers" stage and back into the "serious" performance bracket (the X370 K7 wasn't that amazing & felt midrange). It has one of the highest wireless solutions, Dual BIOS with switches and a replaceable chip, revised audio on par with the Intel lineup, "server grade chokes" from Cooper Bussman / Coiltronics (now acquired by Eaton) rated for 70A, an actual heatsink that allows it to perform thermally on par with the CH VII Hero although using 10x 40A IR3553 instead of 10x 60A IR3555 , an ALC1220-V audio codec, etc. There's an incredible amount of R&D fixes for the X370 K7 that made it look unfavorable after the X370-F STRIX launched at a cheaper pricepoint. I'm not as confident on the BIOS team given GBT's X370 record (layout could use work too), but Gigabyte Matthew has been quite active here on OCN and quick to relay information. The Intel Z370 G7 shows Gigabyte is willing to offer top end parts at a reasonable board cost, but they likely weren't making enough money selling a low-volume board that uses powerstages that cost ~$7 each (Intersil ISL99227B) instead of $2-$3 ones from IR.
> 
> As far as the M7's performance (vs quality of life / features matters), I know "Lucky n00b" over at Jagatreview has a M7 alongside a CHVII Hero: http://oc.jagatreview.com/2018/04/amd-ryzen-7-2700x-overclocking-review-analysiss/7/
> OC3D also seems to have had one.
> 
> In summary, I personally don't feel M7 is worthy of top-end board status. If you recall the M7 name is typically lower than Xpower but higher than M5. Feature-wise it's a bit above midrange , sort of like how a 6x IR35555 packing X470-F STRIX with BCLK (clock gen) was straddling that mid-range and high-end line (especially due to lack of a Debug LED for troubleshooting + overclocking).


 Yes and you conveniently ignored their m.2 slot cooling which is the best design and performance of all the x470 motherboards and the steel reinforced memory slots which Crosshair VII does NOT have. You are one subjective reviewer. While the parts are not top of the line in some aspects of the power phase and vrm support they are NOT garbage and the design they employed maximizes their performance so that there is VERY Little difference from that of the Asus Crosshair VII. Elmor , who is an Asus employee was impressed with MSI X470 M7 design. I have one. I am getting top-notch performance and exceptional reliability. The temps for cpu are NOT higher than CrosshairVII so much for your hot air.


----------



## elmor

os2wiz said:


> Yes and you conveniently ignored their m.2 slot cooling which is the best design and performance of all the x470 motherboards and the steel reinforced memory slots which Crosshair VII does NOT have. You are one subjective reviewer. While the parts are not top of the line in some aspects of the power phase and vrm support they are NOT garbage and the design they employed maximizes their performance so that there is VERY Little difference from that of the Asus Crosshair VII. Elmor , who is an Asus employee was impressed with MSI X470 M7 design. I have one. I am getting top-notch performance and exceptional reliability. The temps for cpu are NOT higher than CrosshairVII so much for your hot air.



Eh, when/where did I ever state that?


----------



## AlphaC

The better question is, why would elmor ever even state that?

Because A. it's not true. B. he has no reason to.

To convince yourself into thinking M7 is better than the CH VII Hero is really ridiculous : I think anyone that knows about power delivery will tell you that. If the Gaming 7 didn't have a ~ 130g VRM heatsink with over 100 fins, it wouldn't be so close in temperature to the CH VII Hero in ambient OC-ing either (each IR3553 mosfet has a narrower efficiency range and is 4x6mm rather than 6x6mm of the IR3555) , let's not kid ourselves.

Besides you can buy a M.2 heatsink (with real fins, no less) that is proven to lower temps from EK or Aquacomputer for $10. To base your decision on M.2 heatsinks is rather foolish.



villason said:


> I am hesitating about getting an Asus Prime X470-Pro vs Asus Strix X470 F. Any thoughts? I will use a R7 2700X with 2X16GB DDR4 3200Mhz CL14 with the default settings besides XMP RAM OC.


Get the STRIX if the monetary difference is minimal, Ryzen 7 2700X will respond better to BCLK overclocking which the X470 Pro doesn't seem to have. Even the STRIX X370-F should suffice since it seems to be getting the _Precision Boost Overdrive_ feature & it is outright cheaper despite being more or less the same. Aesthetically the X470-F seems really gaudy to me due to the RGB grafitti, but that is just my opinion : I'd rather get the X370-F STRIX and pocket the savings for something else (3600 CL15 / CL16 RAM for example).

There's only a handful of boards with BCLK and the STRIX X370-F is a solid contender , since the STRIX X470-F is more or less the same. 

Unless you have a truly golden chip capable of over 4.2GHz all core (Silicon Lottery top bin) then you're better off with BCLK overclock. My chip currently tops out around 41.75x multiplier on X370 and normally with auto settings I see it hover around 4.1GHz all core; whereas isolating the 4 best cores I can get 43.25x multiplier with reasonable voltage < 1.45V.

Much like the X370 offerings there's only a handful of boards with BCLK right now, such as the Asrock Taichi, Asus STRIX X470-F , ASUS CH VII Hero, Gigabyte X470 Gaming 7, MSI M7.

That said the X470 Pro seems to do fine , albeit this test was with R5 2600 @ 4GHz:

https://www.purepc.pl/plyty_glowne/...ro_dobra_plyta_glowna_dla_amd_ryzen?page=0,18


----------



## os2wiz

SuperZan said:


> Probably because they once again have a motherboard in the top tier of pricing using cheaper components than the competition. The Crosshair VII using IR3555, Taichi on NexFETs again, Gigabyte with IR3553, all properly doubled with quality components. Kudos to MSI for stepping away from NIKOs for their M7 and for a nice phase design, but responding to criticism over bargain parts on a $300 dollar X370 board by half-heartedly picking some On Semi parts instead of going back to the NIKOs spare-parts drawer doesn't scream "we heard you". Not when you can get a Strix for $50 less that has six real phases of IR3555.


The MSI X470 M7 is not a $300 board , it is a $259 board which is appropriately priced for the overall quality and feature set it provides.


----------



## SuperZan

os2wiz said:


> The MSI X470 M7 is not a $300 board , it is a $259 board which is appropriately priced for the overall quality and feature set it provides.


Yes, the Titanium's components were even more incongruous. I don't agree that the M7 is worth the asking price when it is matched in feature-set by boards in the same price tier when those boards are using better components, whilst the M7 is using cheaper components than boards that cost $60 less. As I said, it doesn't mean that the board won't work as intended. It does mean that some people, myself included, prefer not to reward a company for pocketing the savings on a product by using cheaper components than their competitors. Obviously it makes business sense for MSI, but that's not my concern. I'm just a consumer, and if the M7 isn't provably superior in reproducible testing, the use of cheaper components for the premier product in the range is not something I'm going to celebrate.


----------



## asdkj1740

elmor said:


> Eh, when/where did I ever state that?


lmao


----------



## AlphaC

Taichi Ultimate (basically same as x370) http://spc.com.vn/tin-tuc/review-sa-n-pha-m/350-asrock-x470-taichi-ultimate-sa-la-t-xa-c-ta-ma-ng-a

(yet another x370 taichi shot: http://blog.cubot.net/2017/06/7319.html )

MSI M7: http://www.expreview.com/60757-2.html


----------



## villason

AlphaC said:


> Get the STRIX if the monetary difference is minimal, Ryzen 7 2700X will respond better to BCLK overclocking which the X470 Pro doesn't seem to have. Even the STRIX X370-F should suffice since it seems to be getting the _Precision Boost Overdrive_ feature & it is outright cheaper despite being more or less the same. Aesthetically the X470-F seems really gaudy to me due to the RGB grafitti, but that is just my opinion : I'd rather get the X370-F STRIX and pocket the savings for something else (3600 CL15 / CL16 RAM for example).
> 
> There's only a handful of boards with BCLK and the STRIX X370-F is a solid contender , since the STRIX X470-F is more or less the same.
> 
> Unless you have a truly golden chip capable of over 4.2GHz all core (Silicon Lottery top bin) then you're better off with BCLK overclock. My chip currently tops out around 41.75x multiplier on X370 and normally with auto settings I see it hover around 4.1GHz all core; whereas isolating the 4 best cores I can get 43.25x multiplier with reasonable voltage < 1.45V.
> 
> Much like the X370 offerings there's only a handful of boards with BCLK right now, such as the Asrock Taichi, Asus STRIX X470-F , ASUS CH VII Hero, Gigabyte X470 Gaming 7, MSI M7.
> 
> That said the X470 Pro seems to do fine , albeit this test was with R5 2600 @ 4GHz:
> 
> https://www.purepc.pl/plyty_glowne/...ro_dobra_plyta_glowna_dla_amd_ryzen?page=0,18
> View attachment 170433


Thanks for your comment. I checked both and they appear to have exactly the same features except for VRMs, the BIOS, and the RGB thing. Probably better to be safe for only 20 bucks.


----------



## AlphaC

*MSI X470-GAMING PRO CARBON AC*

https://forum.gamer.com.tw/C.php?bsn=60030&snA=492823

Seems to use IR35201 PWM

Onsemi 4c029n and Onsemi 4c024n mosfets

drivers on back (CHL 8510? https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3537.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd6c46175c)

R42 inductor

https://i.imgur.com/YFDjp3d.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Ml3PfFA.jpg

A Nuvoton NCT6795D-M SuperIO is used.

I don't see any ICS clock gen chip for BCLK.

http://news.mydrivers.com/1/574/574547.htm , http://tech.ifeng.com/a/20180425/44969145_0.shtml (no removal of VRM heatsink)

edit: It's very similar to the Asrock K4 and Gigabyte Gaming 5 design as far as I can tell, with the exception that it uses an IR35201 PWM.


----------



## br0da

Interesting design.
The IC driving the SoC phases should be a IR3598, but definitely those five drivers for CPU VCC are different. Due to thier pinout they can't run with 180° phaseshift for those two phases they are driving each so it's just doubling without interleaving.


----------



## AlphaC

http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1114/11142313_1.html


> Let's take a look at the control of the power supply temperature. We use the Prime 95 pager for 20 minutes. The maximum temperature of the MSI X470 GAMING M7 AC during standby is 55.4°, and the maximum temperature of the power supply module after the pager is 74.4°. The temperature is controlled at full load. The performance is fairly good. The deficiency is that the temperature of the main board power supply module is as high as 55° even during idle time. In addition, the highest temperature point appears on the main board itself. In general, the temperature control of the motherboard power supply module is also among the better of the X470 motherboards. However, one writer harshly said that although this motherboard has a flagship price in all X470 motherboards, there is no flagship performance in power module temperature control, which is regrettable.


----------



## Fanu

any info on this board regarding VRM

https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp

?

its cheap and full of features (without looking like trash) but I don't know anything about its VRM (whether its good or not) 
I plan on buying 2700x and upgrading to zen2 next year


----------



## VRMfreak

Fanu said:


> any info on this board regarding VRM
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp
> 
> ?
> 
> its cheap and full of features (without looking like trash) but I don't know anything about its VRM (whether its good or not)
> I plan on buying 2700x and upgrading to zen2 next year


Its supposed to be the same as last year


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1114/11142313_1.html


I have monitored motherboard temperatures they run in the low to mid 40's Celsius with a very occasional spike to above 50 Celcius. The spikes are are of such short duration as to be inconsequential. Under full load the board is as good as any on the market.Another b's criticism. Keep dredging maybe you will find something serious by the time the board goes into obsolescence.


----------



## os2wiz

cssorkinman said:


> It performs better.


You are so right. These fanatics are bad mouthing a board for the vrms. Maybe the parts are not top of the line. But MSI found a way to get them to work every bit as well as the Crosshair VII. Plus at the same price of the Crosshair VII base model you are getting AC and Bluetooth if you need it getting steel reinforced memory slots that Crosshair VII does NOT have and getting the best m.2 drive heat sink and heat pipe combo in its class. The M7 board is built for reliability and performance and it delivers both in spite of all naysayers here. Spend your time arguing about issues you can win on. The sum is not equal to its parts it is equal to its parts plus ingenuity. The Vietnamese shot down US jets with unsophisticated weaponry. They used INGENUITY to do it. The Soviets defeated the Nazis at Stalingrad not with technical superiority but with ingenuity and tenaciousness that overcame the Nazi technical advantage. Engineering is a lot more than putting the best technolgy in a product. it is getting those parts to work together in an optimal way.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> The MSI M7 has been shown to use more voltage and get marginally hotter , yet it commands the same price as the G7 and more than a before-rebate Taichi. That's not opinion, that's fact.
> 
> Unless MSI overhauled their entire lineup there isn't much to discuss. Powerpaks cost about $0.30 to $0.40, TI NexFETs demand about $1.50-2 now, while Powerstages are around $2-3 , with ISL99227B around $6-7. I posted a matrix near launch day where I gave MSI the benefit of the doubt , placing Pro Carbon up vs the Asrock x470 K4 & GBT x470 Gaming 5 which use ISL95712 PWM.
> 
> See the pricing for yourself ...
> Onsemi ----> https://octopart.com/ntmfs4c024nt1g-on+semiconductor-75571103 , https://octopart.com/ntmfs4c029nt1g-on+semiconductor-75571110
> NexFET ----> https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993
> IR3553 ----> https://octopart.com/ir3553mtrpbf-infineon-65873046
> IR3555 ----> https://octopart.com/ir3555mtrpbf-infineon-65873048
> 
> The only MSI board that seems to have changed drastically is the M7 , with some other ones switching NIKOS out for Onsemi of the same type with higher power limit. By drastically I mean they added doublers on the M7 to make 6 phases into 12 and then slapped on 6 high side fets. In both the USA and Europe, it just isn't price or feature competitive. Seems only the M7 has IR35201 PWM. The Realtek PWM isn't great either which br0da suggests still exists on the lower boards. In addition, MSI has had a poor track record with BIOS updates on x370 & Z370. A board can have a mediocre but not garbage VRM (x470 TUF lol) if the feature-set justifies the price. If it can handle XFR2 and PB2 then it ought to be good enough for most users.
> 
> If you want to see comparative reviews of the x470 M7 you can look at OC3D or Optimum-tech as I stated before.
> 
> The only MSI board on AM4 worthy of note (IMO) is the B350I in which they put six IR3555 and possibly the B350 Pro Carbon (as it is the only ATX sized B350 board with 8 high & low side fets for V_core).
> 
> For example on the MSI gaming Pro & Gaming Plus : instead of making a massively better board they made the CPU power connector 8+4 and market this (this is the problem). Instead of giving people Intel LAN , ALC1220, or an audio EMI cover they wrote "2x Power connector". Misdirecting marketing at its finest. Asrock did the same design decision on their X470 K4 & Master SLI/ac , which is disappointing but they don't lull people into false confidence that you can pump 300W into the CPU. Speaking of which, I need to pester Asrock that their page is wrong and people found the ISL95712 instead of IR35201 controller (https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/X470 Master SLI/index.asp , https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp).
> 
> MSI has basically zero contact on OCN and their own forum, so I don't think they'll provide any information freely.
> 
> To be fair I called the Asrock / Asus midrange lineup a lazy copy-paste job too. The difference is Asrock's boards are pretty inexpensive for what they contain , except the Taichi Ultimate.
> 
> Also due to Asus' inclusion of PBO on some older boards such as their CH VI Hero, x370-F STRIX and Prime X370 Pro I find it hard to say whether x470 in general is worth it unless you pick up the new CH VII Hero or G7 (both utilize 10+2 Powerstage designs) , which Tweaktown has reviewed first. Asrock has PBO on x370 Taichi (best decision for most) & Gigabyte has PBO as well on the x370 K7 + G5.
> 
> Unless there is a justification for it I don't see any reason to recommend MSI boards on AM4 currently.
> 
> 
> 
> If you're low budget you don't buy at launch, you wait 3 months (1 fiscal quarter) or use a credit card with price protection of 90 days.
> IMO there's the consideration of x470 vs 370 with patched BIOS. Currently there's no 6 phase x470 other than ASUS STRIX x470F and Prime pro , there's only the garbage x470 TUF and then everything else using 4 phase fake-doubled / dual driver, 5 phase doubled, or 6 phase doubled.
> 
> I've seen Prime x370 Pro (no BCLK), x370 K7 , x370 Taichi all hover around $130-150 on the open market. The CH VI Hero from x370 was $160 after rebate last week.
> 
> The higher wattage is only relevant if pushing Ryzen 7 2700X. The R5 2600X won't have an issue unless you are pushing unsafe voltages.


 Your whole methodology is WRONG! Parts alone do NOT make a quality motherboard. Engineering the parts to work in harmony is extremely important. it is obvious MSI got their cheaper parts to work about as well as the best of Asus and Gigabyte. Plus they have other areas of superiority that you continue to ignore. Only the ignorant can afford to ignore.


----------



## SuperZan

But why would I reward a company that I have no emotional attachment towards for providing a product that, at best, performs on par with the competition using cheaper, less efficient components? That's what you're missing here. It's not 'naysaying'. It's an honest question. The X470 Taichi has a massively superior VRM, it has Bluetooth, it has Intel LAN (M7 uses Killer LAN), it has Wifi (to MSI's credit, the M7's wireless card is superior to the WiFi module on the Taichi, though it does take up an m.2 slot). If I'm not an MSI fan, I'm just not seeing the incentive. Now, if the M7 were $190, I'd praise it for providing very good features at that price and for making use of the savings from cheaper components like Killer LAN and On Semi parts.

Gigabyte's Gaming 7 is also about the same price, uses better VRM components, has Wifi and Bluetooth, Dual BIOS, and has a great heatsink design.

I'm not trying to dump on MSI - I think some of their choices are questionable, just like I thought most of Gigabyte's were on X370, or Asrock's were for 990FX and 970, etc. As enthusiasts we should be discussing these things, not fighting brand wars.


----------



## os2wiz

Spectre73 said:


> In which areas?


Best Cooling of m.2 slots, steel reinforcement of the memory slots, lowest price for any X470 board with equivalent features, better engineered.


----------



## os2wiz

SuperZan said:


> But why would I reward a company that I have no emotional attachment towards for providing a product that, at best, performs on par with the competition using cheaper, less efficient components? That's what you're missing here. It's not 'naysaying'. It's an honest question. The X470 Taichi has a massively superior VRM, it has Bluetooth, it has Intel LAN (M7 uses Killer LAN), it has Wifi (to MSI's credit, the M7's wireless card is superior to the WiFi module on the Taichi, though it does take up an m.2 slot). If I'm not an MSI fan, I'm just not seeing the incentive. Now, if the M7 were $190, I'd praise it for providing very good features at that price and for making use of the savings from cheaper components like Killer LAN and On Semi parts.
> 
> Gigabyte's Gaming 7 is also about the same price, uses better VRM components, has Wifi and Bluetooth, Dual BIOS, and has a great heatsink design.
> 
> I'm not trying to dump on MSI - I think some of their choices are questionable, just like I thought most of Gigabyte's were on X370, or Asrock's were for 990FX and 970, etc. As enthusiasts we should be discussing these things, not fighting brand wars.


There is zero superiority of Intel lan over the current iteration of Killer lan. As long as you don't install anything but the drivers the efficiency is equivalent. The Asrock X470 Taichi vrm is better than the Crosshair VII if it is better than MSI X470 M7. Since both perform about as well in temps under full load. Any difference is statistically insignificant. Your arguments are specious and without merit . You can verbally vomit all the bilge you want. There is no statistically soignificant performance difference of the vrms. Perhaps better work by MSI engineers to piece their "junk" together was superior to that of the Asus engineers. Like I said elsewhere technical superiority of the parts is only one component of engineering. The brute T34 tank won over the technically superior Tiger tanks of the Nazis at Kursk. The Soviet soldiers defeated "superior" Nazi armies at Stalingrad through tenacity and ingenuity. Maybe that is where MSI excels.


----------



## SuperZan

os2wiz said:


> There is zero superiority of Intel lan over the current iteration of Killer lan. As long as you don't install anything but the drivers the efficiency is equivalent. The Asrock X470 Taichi vrm is better than the Crosshair VII if it is better than MSI X470 M7. Since both perform about as well in temps under full load. Any difference is statistically insignificant. *Your arguments are specious and without merit . You can verbally vomit all the bilge you want. There is no statistically soignificant performance difference of the vrms.* Perhaps better work by MSI engineers to piece their "junk" together was superior to that of the Asus engineers. Like I said elsewhere technical superiority of the parts is only one component of engineering. The brute T34 tank wone over the ttechnically superior Tiger tanks of the Nazis at Kursk. The Soviet soldiers defeated "superior" Nazi armies at Stalingrad through tencaity and ingenuity. Maybe that is where MSI excels.


Ah, I now remember why I'd had you on ignore. Until you can learn to debate the actual points people are making without resorting to name-calling or bizarre tantrums, that's where you'll stay. Cheers.


----------



## os2wiz

SuperZan said:


> But why would I reward a company that I have no emotional attachment towards for providing a product that, at best, performs on par with the competition using cheaper, less efficient components? That's what you're missing here. It's not 'naysaying'. It's an honest question. The X470 Taichi has a massively superior VRM, it has Bluetooth, it has Intel LAN (M7 uses Killer LAN), it has Wifi (to MSI's credit, the M7's wireless card is superior to the WiFi module on the Taichi, though it does take up an m.2 slot). If I'm not an MSI fan, I'm just not seeing the incentive. Now, if the M7 were $190, I'd praise it for providing very good features at that price and for making use of the savings from cheaper components like Killer LAN and On Semi parts.
> 
> Gigabyte's Gaming 7 is also about the same price, uses better VRM components, has Wifi and Bluetooth, Dual BIOS, and has a great heatsink design.
> 
> I'm not trying to dump on MSI - I think some of their choices are questionable, just like I thought most of Gigabyte's were on X370, or Asrock's were for 990FX and 970, etc. As enthusiasts we should be discussing these things, not fighting brand wars.


There is zero superiority of Intel lan over the current iteration of Killer lan. As long as you don't install anything but the drivers the efficiency is equivalent. The Asrock X470 Taichi vrm is better than the Crosshair VII if it is better than MSI X470 M7. Since both perform about as well in temps under full load. Any difference is statistically insignificant. Your arguments are specious and without merit . You can verbally vomit all the bilge you want. There is no statistically soignificant performance difference of the vrms. Perhaps better work by MSI engineers to piece their "junk" together was superior to that of the Asus engineers. Like I said elsewhere technical superiority of the parts is only one component of engineering. The brute T34 tank wone over the ttechnically superior Tiger tanks of the Nazis at Kursk. The Soviet soldiers defeated "superior" Nazi armies at Stalingrad through tencaity and ingenuity. Maybe that is where MSI excels.

But you are trying to dump on MSI by failing to acknowledge the areas of the M7 board that are SUPERIOR to the competition and overplaying your hand on the vrm issue. I am doing overclocks every bit as good as the Crosshair VII at very similar temps and voltage. Explain that away?????


----------



## chakku

You probably should have stopped when you got caught claiming elmor said something he didn't. Nobody can take you seriously anymore.


----------



## AlphaC

Fanu said:


> any info on this board regarding VRM
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp
> 
> ?
> 
> its cheap and full of features (without looking like trash) but I don't know anything about its VRM (whether its good or not)
> I plan on buying 2700x and upgrading to zen2 next year


BIOS video (German) 





Working on getting a more accurate answer for you. I wouldn't expect it to be superb as it is a low / midrange board, it's just competing offerings are just as barren with fewer features. _The old K4 had two variants, one with Sinopower SM4337+SM4336 and another with NIKOS + Sinopower._ If you want RGB, then the GBT Ultra Gaming is an option but it's a known complaint that the ISL95712 doesn't have all the voltage control features of IR35201.

The marketing page (not spec sheet) on the Asrock website says IR Digital PWM but the Asrock rep replied that it uses the same thing as the Fatal1ty X. The x370 Fatal1ty X uses ISL95712 while the X370 K4 used a IR35201. It isn't a top end board , the Debug Code LED is the only standout feature besides the audio section which has a TI amp on it. Granted the Debug LED is a very useful feature.

My suggestion stands though: if you're buying X470 this early PLEASE use your credit card price protection (typical 60 or 90 days). The prices on all boards are inflated right now by at least $20-30 , maybe more. 

In addition to that, unless you plan on using 2 NvMe drives (one of which is usually relegated at PCIE 2.0 x4 or unless you drop money on a CH VII Hero) the CHVI Hero (BCLK), X370-F STRIX (BCLK), or even a Prime X370 Pro or Gaming K7 (BCLK) would work. Those several boards are known to be getting PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive). The Taichi is still the best pick though since with its BLCK it fulfills just about every need you may have on X470 without spending Crosshair VI Extreme money. If you were looking at CH VI Extreme, you would be better off with the X470 Crosshair VII Hero I think. Asus deserves some praise for the CH VII Hero, it raises the bar.

Of those boards I know the K7 will work since I frequented the AM4 section of Gigabyte support this past week and tested G5 running R7 2700X myself. Runs a bit warm though as expected and Gigabyte BIOS is jumbled as far as AMD CBS options. The Prime Pro I've seen some people use on hardwareluxx and hardocp : should also run warm since it's a 6x NexFET solution. X370-F STRIX I think I saw people use successfully on youtube or some other site: as X470-F STRIX is almost the same board with a 2nd M.2 _I don't know if it's worth the premium over X370 unless you plan on a 2nd M.2 , specifically one that will not use more than PCE 3.0 x2_. For the CH VI Hero there's a thread on OCN about it. The Taichi is a copy paste job over to X470 as far as I can tell so unless you truly hate the silkscreen on X370 there's no incentive to spend more money and also wait 2 weeks for the X470.

The biggest change for X470 as far as I can tell besides the StoreMi ($20 Enmotus Fuzedrive license) and supposed PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive), is the inclusion of 2 M.2 drive slots on every board (one of which isn't PCIE 3.0 x4) which is a niche use case.


----

Kitguru X470 Taichi overview (video) 





Leo thinks it is 16 phases for V_Core... "that makes no sense" - Leo 

----

https://www.overclockers.ua/motherboard/asus-rog-strix-x470-f-gaming/all/

----

As this is the VRM thread and not the RGB thread, I don't know why anyone should pander to arguments about _anything but the VRM_. Next thing we know a Gigabyte fanatic will be arguing the Gaming K7 is a better board because it has LEDs on the RAM slots. I had this disagreement (respectfully of course) with Gigabyte's Matt before, by the way.


----------



## os2wiz

SuperZan said:


> Ah, I now remember why I'd had you on ignore. Until you can learn to debate the actual points people are making without resorting to name-calling or bizarre tantrums, that's where you'll stay. Cheers.



That is complete hogwash. I did debate ALL the issues you raised plus pointed out your failure to admit MSI superiority on a host of features. I am not going to cower in a corner when your criticisms just do not hold up to the light of day. The MSI X470 M7 AC is a superior board not drek as you imply. You ignore where it shines and overstate the weaknesses in the vrm and power phase. They made the vrm-power phase work and work well with whatever parts they used and that is what gets you in the craw. This is a Quality board that delivers and delivers well on a host of fronts. I will not give you credit for your hatchet job when credit is NOT due.


----------



## virpz

MSI X470 M7 has *sub-par * VRM if compared to other boards at it's price range, get over it. You are talking about $ 10 m.2 cooling on a thread dedicated to VRM analysis . 
2k posts later and you still sound the same.


----------



## Fanu

AlphaC said:


> Working on getting a more accurate answer for you. I wouldn't expect it to be superb as it is a low / midrange board, it's just competing offerings are just as barren with fewer features. _The old K4 had two variants, one with Sinopower SM4337+SM4336 and another with NIKOS + Sinopower._ If you want RGB, then the GBT Ultra Gaming is an option but it's a known complaint that the ISL95712 doesn't have all the voltage control features of IR35201.
> 
> The marketing page (not spec sheet) on the Asrock website says IR Digital PWM but the Asrock rep replied that it uses the same thing as the Fatal1ty X. The x370 Fatal1ty X uses ISL95712 while the X370 K4 used a IR35201. It isn't a top end board , the Debug Code LED is the only standout feature besides the audio section which has a TI amp on it. Granted the Debug LED is a very useful feature.
> 
> My suggestion stands though: if you're buying X470 this early PLEASE use your credit card price protection (typical 60 or 90 days). The prices on all boards are inflated right now by at least $20-30 , maybe more.
> 
> In addition to that, unless you plan on using 2 NvMe drives (one of which is usually relegated at PCIE 2.0 x4 or unless you drop money on a CH VII Hero) the CHVI Hero (BCLK), X370-F STRIX (BCLK), or even a Prime X370 Pro or Gaming K7 (BCLK) would work. Those several boards are known to be getting PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive). The Taichi is still the best pick though since with its BLCK it fulfills just about every need you may have on X470 without spending Crosshair VI Extreme money. If you were looking at CH VI Extreme, you would be better off with the X470 Crosshair VII Hero I think. Asus deserves some praise for the CH VII Hero, it raises the bar.



tnx for the provided info

yeah so far I'm leaning the most towards taichi (x370 if x470 is too expensive) and plan on using 2 nvme drives (evo 960 256&512gb) - x370 taichi has dropped in price, in my country, by about 30% since its launch last year
and I'm planning on buying a new PC in august once these launch CPU/mobo prices subside a little (and BIOSes get updated some more)


----------



## VeritronX

So I should be fine running a 4.2Ghz binned 2700X from SL with my AX370 Gaming K7 with the monoblock? I bought the block ages ago but have yet to use it lol. I want to use the PB Overclocking feature and it sounds like that works?


----------



## os2wiz

chakku said:


> You probably should have stopped when you got caught claiming elmor said something he didn't. Nobody can take you seriously anymore.


Elmor listed two or three of the high end boards in a remark. The MSI board was among them. That is no lie. I made the error wording it almost like an endorsement which it was not. You never made a statement that you thought was accurate only to realize later it was unintentionally wrong??? Get off your high horse none of you have been intellectually honest in this discussion. Engineering is not just throwing the best parts into the equation. I have given several examples where that formula has failed in real life. I go by performance results and reliability results under stress testing. The rest is bs for the most part. Now as far as real innovation is concerned the Taichi Ultimate has 5GB lan. Of course we won't have that available for consumer use in the US for another 10 years most likely, so it is an expensive waste of money to include and charge basically an extra $50 fo $60 for it and the AC feature. Nobody criticizes the Taichi for using doublers yet it does. There is a prejudice here against MSI not fully explained by the parts issue. The total silence on features the X470 M7 has which are clearly superior to the competition and are significant in nature. That is why I do not Take the 3 or 4 of you seriously . I can see right through your hollow attempt to claim objectivity. I have shown that your fixation simply on parts can lead to an incorrect assessment of performance. Technocrats tend to do that all the time. They pay no attention on that aspect of engineering that concentrates on building harmony or putting these components in sync. All theory and no attention to the practical aspect of things.


----------



## os2wiz

VeritronX said:


> So I should be fine running a 4.2Ghz binned 2700X from SL with my AX370 Gaming K7 with the monoblock? I bought the block ages ago but have yet to use it lol. I want to use the PB Overclocking feature and it sounds like that works?


Most 2700X's can do 4.2 GHZ with proper liquid cooling, so why pay extra to Silicon Lottery for that????????


----------



## cssorkinman

virpz said:


> MSI X470 M7 has *sub-par * VRM if compared to other boards at it's price range, get over it. You are talking about $ 10 m.2 cooling on a thread dedicated to VRM analysis .
> 2k posts later and you still sound the same.



The pot never seems to realize the similarity of pigmentation relative to the kettle.


----------



## os2wiz

SuperZan said:


> Ah, I now remember why I'd had you on ignore. Until you can learn to debate the actual points people are making without resorting to name-calling or bizarre tantrums, that's where you'll stay. Cheers.


What name calling??? Tantrums?? You have a vivid imagination.


----------



## VRMfreak

os2wiz said:


> Spectre73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> In which areas?
> 
> 
> 
> Best Cooling of m.2 slots, steel reinforcement of the memory slots, lowest price for any X470 board with equivalent features, better engineered.
Click to expand...

M.2 Cooling is the last thing you care about on a motherboard since things like this exist https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-m-2-nvme-heatsink-black

also, while yes, MSI made a working bios (applause) and somewhat working board, it's still not worth it.


----------



## delerious

VRMfreak said:


> M.2 Cooling is the last thing you care about on a motherboard since things like this exist https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-m-2-nvme-heatsink-black
> 
> also, while yes, MSI made a working bios (applause) and somewhat working board, it's still not worth it.


I'm trying to figure out why I should care about reinforced memory slots. I can see it on PCIe with 2.5 slot GPUs, but what function does it perform for memory beyond some buzz word. Sounds kind of like "military grade".


----------



## os2wiz

delerious said:


> I'm trying to figure out why I should care about reinforced memory slots. I can see it on PCIe with 2.5 slot GPUs, but what function does it perform for memory beyond some buzz word. Sounds kind of like "military grade".


Well whiz kid I have memory slots break on me in the past. Steel reinforcement prevents that cheap plastic from breaking under pressure. Got it???


----------



## os2wiz

Here is a screen capture of HWinfo64 done at 6 pm today in my sunroom where my computer is kept. Thermostat temperature read 83 degrees Farenheit. 
Look at the both cpu and motherboard temp maximums. It was taken at idle at 4.2GHZ. Nothing near 50 Celcius. Of course I did a bios update yesterday to official 1.1 bios maybe that has something to do with it. I think this may be a step towards reason returning to this forum concerning temps on the MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC motherboard. It sure feels good to be vindicated after all the crap that has been thrown at me and my motherboard.


----------



## delerious

os2wiz said:


> Well whiz kid I have memory slots break on me in the past. Steel reinforcement prevents that cheap plastic from breaking under pressure. Got it???


I can't help it if you have butter fingers. In over 30 years, I've never broken a memory slot. Maybe if you'd buy a motherboard from a vendor that doesn't use cheap plastic, you wouldn't have that problem?


----------



## AlphaC

X470 Pro Carbon







http://www.ghatreh.com/news/nn42443763/بررسی-مادربرد-Gaming-Carbon-کارآزموده-شایسته

X470 Taichi
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.p...ute-technik-und-niedriger-stromverbrauch.html

Prime X470 Pro
http://betanews.heraldcorp.com:8080/article/847477.html









Crosshair VII Hero (cut off sort of)
http://www.pcpop.com/article/4522064.shtml

Crosshair VII Hero 
http://www.shahrsakhtafzar.com/fa/review/motherboard/16773-asus-crosshair-vii-hero-review

TUF: seems like doubled low side







http://www.bodnara.co.kr/bbs/article.html?num=146373


----------



## VeritronX

os2wiz said:


> Most 2700X's can do 4.2 GHZ with proper liquid cooling, so why pay extra to Silicon Lottery for that????????


Because they test at higher than that with a large variety of tests.. their chips have headroom over what they rate them for and guarantee, and it is still binning and you are getting a chip that's in the top 10-20% of the samples they have. It's also a fairly reasonable amount of money, and I want to support both them and AMD. The 4Ghz rated R7 1700 I got from them was advertised at something like 1.42v, but it's actually stable at 1.35v and only needs 1.13v to run at 3.7Ghz.

At the end of the day binning is still useful and you are getting a better quality chip.I find that tweaking is more fun when it gets you near the top, rather than to the average for that chip from poor luck with the silicon lottery.


----------



## br0da

AlphaC said:


> TUF: seems like doubled low side
> [...]
> http://www.bodnara.co.kr/bbs/article.html?num=146373


Now I got what nl.hardware.info was talking about when they stated '3+4' FETs per phase for this board.
Should be correct now, thanks!

Also cooltek TW confirmed the nl.hardware.info stuff about the Gigabyte Ultra Gaming:


Spoiler


----------



## AlphaC

_Sort of ramble_: Ultra Gaming isn't great for OCing but it's still better than the X370 K5 which launched around $160 (I expressed my displeasure about it already so I'm not going to dwell on generation old hardware). This time it's a lot closer to other vendors' mainstream. It's a mainstream / budget board with RGB and dual BIOS _without switch _or Post Code. Unlike the Gaming 5, it doesn't seem to have the pricey wifi , extra RGB, or the heatsink with a heatpipe. The main selling point looks to be the audio. With a ISL95712 PWM, I don't believe manual voltage works per x470 ultra reviews I've watched and prior Gigabyte boards with the PWM. *I do see an ICS chip in the middle* so I think it might have BCLK. Everyone with the board is using offset or auto volts. That's the difference between a good value and cheap.



Spoiler














That means that you're largely better off with an older X370 K7 if you absolutely need Dual BIOS, unless you happen to need a 2nd M.2 slot. I've seen the K7 as low as $150. People have gotten bricked boards from the main BIOs flashing over the backup, so having a physical switch to isolate the two via "single BIOS" mode is essential. I'd imagine most people on budget boards aren't using 2 M.2 slots. It's just a selling point for X470 as every board I've seen has 2 M.2 slots. Actually now that I think about it I should just release my schematic for a K7 aftermarket VRM heatsink for Ryzen 7 users (Ryzen 5 users don't need to fret about it , full 4GHz 6 core load is only around 60°C VRM temp). With a proper VRM heatsink I have little doubt it would perform at a decent Prime X470 Pro level at least which is a $160-180 board, without the K7 having Taiwan caps (the two K7 variants are Japanese: FP and Nippon Chemicon).

edit: Then again given that Gigabyte is doing a giveaway of K83 mechanical keyboards with purchase of the X470 Gaming 7 and Gaming 5 from Newegg / Amazon this month, I suspect there are plans for a price reduction in the next quarter or two. By inference, the product lineup will tighten in price-point. The Ultra Gaming in contrast is not an advisable board at this point in time when X370 offerings are more competitive and X470 as a whole is overtly hyped up and price-inflated. I suspect it will end up like the Ultra Gaming 1.0 did on Z370 : relegated to the sub $120 bracket when on sale due to lack of demand at MSRP.

----

On the Asrock X470 K4 concern, I still haven't gotten a proper response in 3 business days so I don't know if HQ is working on BIOS or just busy. I informed Asrock that if they are using an ISL95712 as the x370 Fatal1ty X it's _misleading_ when the product page for K4 and Master SLI are listing "IR digital PWM". 

I've previously seen the marketing team correct the ALC1220 listed on Master SLI/ac to ALC892 as well but that wasn't on a front page image for a board and it was before people could buy them (key point). Given the ~$130 price it wouldn't be a dealbreaker for some people since it has wifi.

recorded for posterity:


Spoiler











https://web.archive.org/web/2018042....com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4/index.asp








https://web.archive.org/web/2018042...m/mb/AMD/X470 Master SLIac/index.asp#Overview


----------



## Nighthog

AlphaC said:


> _Sort of ramble_: Ultra Gaming isn't great for OCing but it's still better than the X370 K5 which launched around $160 (I expressed my displeasure about it already so I'm not going to dwell on generation old hardware). This time it's a lot closer to other vendors' mainstream. It's a mainstream / budget board with RGB and dual BIOS _without switch _or Post Code. Unlike the Gaming 5, it doesn't seem to have the pricey wifi , extra RGB, or the heatsink with a heatpipe. The main selling point looks to be the audio. With a ISL95712 PWM, I don't believe manual voltage works per x470 ultra reviews I've watched and prior Gigabyte boards with the PWM. *I do see an ICS chip in the middle* so I think it might have BCLK. Everyone with the board is using offset or auto volts. That's the difference between a good value and cheap.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 174961
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That means that you're largely better off with an older X370 K7 if you absolutely need Dual BIOS, unless you happen to need a 2nd M.2 slot. I've seen the K7 as low as $150. People have gotten bricked boards from the main BIOs flashing over the backup, so having a physical switch to isolate the two via "single BIOS" mode is essential. I'd imagine most people on budget boards aren't using 2 M.2 slots. It's just a selling point for X470 as every board I've seen has 2 M.2 slots. Actually now that I think about it I should just release my schematic for a K7 aftermarket VRM heatsink for Ryzen 7 users (Ryzen 5 users don't need to fret about it , full 4GHz 6 core load is only around 60°C VRM temp). With a proper VRM heatsink I have little doubt it would perform at a decent Prime X470 Pro level at least which is a $160-180 board, without the K7 having Taiwan caps (the two K7 variants are Japanese: FP and Nippon Chemicon).


I could add a little info from experience on the lower tier Gigabyte boards.

Dual BIOS doesn't flash the other BIOS. They are separate and stay separate, they don't flash over the other BIOS. The cases of bricks I've read are when people get flipped to the backup_bios without realizing it and repeating their folly and bricking their backup the same way they did the Main_BIOS. My view. Most don't notice they are even running the Backup at times thinking it's their MAIN, etc, etc.
Newer BIOS on Gaming 3 like "F23d" add support for Pstate overclocking, you can now add whatever voltage you want to your OC without the need to use offset like you needed before. You can specify with "VID" HEX-value the voltage you want. Be it stock "3A"(R7 1700 = 1.1875V) or "18" for 1.400V.
I set it successfully to 1.450V hex="10" (didn't try higher) with a clocks in 3.9-4.0Ghz. You can then ADD on-top a offset in Normal Voltage control to tweak it further. 
"0/1" being 1.500/1.550V(not sure which it was)

On a side-note I noticed quite dramatic vdroop for CPU Core Voltage (SVI2 TFN) in HWinfo that otherwise was not detected under load. Vcore @ 1.450V could be as low as 1.387Volts under load. Offset doesn't reflect/change this but the other core_voltage read entries which only increase. A little complicated to take note which reading one should use and in which combo depending on usage of Pstate VID and/or offset voltage together.


----------



## AlphaC

Taichi review: http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070591008.html#jump8







4.2GHz @ 1.35V , ~ 220W power out per Corsair Link 

no airflow situation with Corsair H150i
----

STRIX X470-I 
6X IR3553







https://www.hardwareinside.de/preview-asus-rog-strix-x470-i-gaming-im-test-33382/4/

----

another TUF review
https://www.hkepc.com/16635/TUF系列X470大板_ASUS_TUF_X470-PLUS_Gaming


----------



## os2wiz

Nighthog said:


> I could add a little info from experience on the lower tier Gigabyte boards.
> 
> It is nice when one introduces content that contradicts your conventional wisdom that you duck and run. I uploaded the Hwinfo64 temps on my MSI X470 Gaming M7 motherboard yesterday. It fully contradicts the temp that you claimed were reported during idle being 55 Celcius. Do you have the intellectual honesty to explain that contradiction or is it too much of a humiliation to your ego???? A man of science would swallow his pride and acknowledge the data and just maybe state he might have been incorrect. A cultist on the other hand would build a wall around the truth and continue their fantasy.
> 
> Now these readings were taken after I had installed official bios 1.1 from the MSI website. There is a possibility that bios 1.0 may have had some inaccuracies concerning sensor readings, though I did not see this in the release notes.


----------



## AlphaC

I was just reporting other people's experiences with it. 

Also I didn't bother to respond to you because your screenshot isn't a full load and your fans are running 2500RPM.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> I was just reporting other people's experiences with it.
> 
> Also I didn't bother to respond to you because your screenshot isn't a full load and your fans are running 2500RPM.


But you clearly stated there was a report of a reading of 55 Celcius at idle. Why would I send a screen shot at full load when the issue you raised was a report of motherboard temp of 55 Celcius at idle? Clearly that report that you parrotted was incorrect, unless somebody had a faulty motherboard sensor. Now if you want a temp at full load I will provide it as well. here is the hwinfo64 with prime95 blend running in backgtround. Motherboard temp is at 34plus centigrade. Look at the VRt1 and VRt2 temps as well. 50 Celcius and 57 Celcius. Now what do you have to say?????


----------



## AlphaC

I actually had to scroll through the thread to find where I obtained the result because I never actually wrote anything about that.

I'm assuming you're not Chinese (maybe I'm wrong). It was a direct Google translation (which is why it was in quotes, complete with QUOTE tags) from the review in China (http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1114/11142313_1.html). If you don't like their test method why don't you complain to PCOnline CN about it. Notice I never wrote that in plain text.









Also even if you're getting less than 55°C idle that's not amazing if you have 2500RPM fans running , it's not even impressive if fans were 1000RPM assuming you have Cool n Quiet and Core parking functioning.

Hardware numb3rs also expressed their dislike for the M7 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0e6DXN4K2k&t=9m19s) but I didn't put anything from them here since it's not directly VRM related because that's offtopic.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> I actually had to scroll through the thread to find where I obtained the result because I never actually wrote anything about that.
> 
> I'm assuming you're not Chinese (maybe I'm wrong). It was a direct Google translation (which is why it was in quotes, complete with QUOTE tags) from the review in China (http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1114/11142313_1.html). If you don't like their test method why don't you complain to PCOnline CN about it. Notice I never wrote that in plain text.
> 
> View attachment 175121
> 
> 
> Also even if you're getting less than 55°C idle that's not amazing if you have 2500RPM fans running , it's not even impressive if fans were 1000RPM assuming you have Cool n Quiet and Core parking functioning.
> 
> Hardware numb3rs also expressed their dislike for the M7 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0e6DXN4K2k&t=9m19s) but I didn't put anything from them here since it's not directly VRM related because that's offtopic.


here is another screen shot under full load while the cpu temp is high under load the vrms are cool , the motherboard temp is cool. Cool and quiet is disabled in bios.


----------



## delerious

os2wiz said:


> here is another screen shot under full load while the cpu temp is high under load the vrms are cool , the motherboard temp is cool. Cool and quiet is disabled in bios.


I see current and min temps, where's max temps and screenshot showing Prime95 running longer than a few seconds with HWinfo?


----------



## cssorkinman

All core 4200 with ram at 3466 cl 15 with decent volts to cpu and soc. Pretty nice OS2.

My Titanium is coming up on a year at 1.5 v+ @ 4175 mhz all core no C&Q on the 1800x .


----------



## os2wiz

cssorkinman said:


> All core 4200 with ram at 3466 cl 15 with decent volts to cpu and soc. Pretty nice OS2.
> 
> My Titanium is coming up on a year at 1.5 v+ @ 4175 mhz all core no C&Q on the 1800x .


Thanks for the compliment. That is the only one I got here in spite of multiple screen shots showing temps are good at both idle and full load. Now they say maybe I only ran prime 95 for a few seconds. Why would I pay $259 for this motherboard and defend it if I could not get ssutainable temps? I would return the board as defective and Be on MSI's case. These guys are so paranoid and such MSI haters that I really do not see much further to be gained by going through all this stress for them to open their eyes and be a little objective. I tried to reason and they keep on demanding more proof. They need to prove I am wrong. Innocent til proven guilty , no??? Show me screen shots with elevated temps on this motherboard both vrms and motherboard temps. They can not because they do NOT exist.


----------



## jpm888

I can get the following for roughly the same price to go with a 2700x:

Asus X370-F Strix
Gigabyte X470 Gaming 5
MSI X470 M7

What would be best for ocing with 4x8gb 3200?


----------



## os2wiz

jpm888 said:


> I can get the following for roughly the same price to go with a 2700x:
> 
> Asus X370-F Strix
> Gigabyte X470 Gaming 5
> MSI X470 M7
> 
> What would be best for ocing with 4x8gb 3200?


The MSI X470 M7 allows for 3600MHZ support through XMP profiles. I myself only reached 3466MHZ with tight timings of15-15-15-15-32-64 currently. Stability tested with YCrunch. All around an excellent board with multiple features to improve temps in your rig.


----------



## os2wiz

Here is another prime95 run with HWinfo64. This time the maximum and average temperatures are displayed to quell the never ending criticism. Prime 95 was running longer than 10 minutes when the screen shot was taken.


----------



## virpz

laughable.


----------



## os2wiz

virpz said:


> laughable.


I am warning you for the final time to cease and desist with your arrogant remarks. What you circled had nothing at all to do with the temperature readings on the VRM's which were perfectly acceptable. Stop your arrogant remarks once and for all. There is no place on these forums for behavior like this.


----------



## gupsterg

os2wiz and I have had our differences. But I would like to point out the VID section in HWINFO is CPU SMU VID requests, this same swing can be seen on C6H, ZE and probably C7H (will check in a mo).


----------



## os2wiz

Thanks for your clarification on this issue Gupsterg. I am perfectly willing to debate on issues but in the final analysis it is results that prove or disprove theory, not speculation. Until someone can present hard evidence that this motherboard does NOT maintain proper temps due to vrm power phasing inadequacy they should shut their snouts. I have presented evidence that supports my viewpoint that the temps are more than adequate under full load and that the temperature spike reported by Alphacool from another site at idle can NOT be verified. Until and unless hard evidence that is verifiable come in to the contrary we should hold our tongues.


----------



## virpz

os2wiz said:


> I am warning you for the final time to cease and desist with your arrogant remarks. What you circled had nothing at all to do with the temperature readings on the VRM's which were perfectly acceptable. Stop your arrogant remarks once and for all. There is no place on these forums for behavior like this.


Oh, you warning me ? 
It has everything to with the temperature readings on your boards VRM;

1- FIY your boards sensors are telling us your VRM is actually drawing 193W just for the CPU
2- Also your board sensors are also telling us it is generating energy out of nowhere.
3- You are a MSI fanboy. 
4- Your 7 minutes test, so called by you "10 minutes" is placebo.

@|Gusterburguer

It is the same across all the figures, as anyburguer that cares to post can/should see.



Spoiler


----------



## VeritronX

The readings are just fluctuating, if you look at the average power input and output values you see ~160W input and ~140W output, so there's ~20W of loss from the VRM solution.. along with the 44mv swing in vcore that does point to a budget VRM, but if you can make it work then it's not the end of the world. It just makes your cpu degrade faster because of higher than necessary voltage when not under full load.

It does make sense to criticize that in this thread given the quality of VRM solutions on the board is the topic of discussion, and all quality and value recommendations here are based on that above most else.


----------



## Blameless

VeritronX said:


> It just makes your cpu degrade faster because of higher than necessary voltage when not under full load.


At lower loads current draw and temperatures are going to be correspondingly modest. An extra ~50mv idle isn't likely to reduce the lifespan of a CPU by any meaningful degree.

A poor VRM can cause all sorts of stability and reliability issues, but voltage drooping more under load/higher idle voltages, in and of itself, isn't really one of them. Excessive ripple and slow response to load demands resulting in spikes/overshoots (usually of too short a duration to be readily without a high frequency scope) are what will harm a CPU.

Designs that don't activate phases quickly enough in response to increased current draw can also cause damage to the VRM itself as too few phases can be left shouldering more current than they were meant for. If there is any question as to whether or not a board is properly adjusting the number of active phases, I prefer to use settings that leave all of them enabled all the time...bad for idle power consumption, but it's usually a trivial difference.


----------



## VeritronX

I was thinking more about gaming or rendering loads, where it will sit 15-30mv higher than necessary but still be doing actual work. I don't know enough about the actual VRM used to comment on the transition performance, I was just commenting on that screenshot provided.


----------



## Nighthog

The gigabyte gaming 3 can have have ~80mV vdroop I've noted thanks to Using PstateVID to set voltage and have a correct* VID reading on cpu. (offset is crap for accurate readings, vDroop can't be seen at all)

*within reason to a ballpark correct, not completely bonkers crazy. (I can set 1.500V cpu voltage and get delivered ~1.4xx)


----------



## VeritronX

The Gigabyte AX370 Gaming K7 I have shows 16mv difference between max voltage and prime95 AVX load min voltage, and that at release was $70 AUD cheaper than what the MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC is here right now.


----------



## os2wiz

The test was not a seven minute test. It was well over 10 minutes. I am no ones fan boy. I just disagree with the dissing of a board that run with good stability. I am still looking at the discrepancy you noted. As soon as I am convinced what the issue is I will decide what path of action to take. The ridiculous arrogance remarks I have to deal with here are NOT helpful. Laughing at me is childish not the behavior of someone being properly critical. You won't stop me from expressing myself by bullying me or ridiculing me. If you truly want to make a valid point you don't use terms like "laughable". So you can take your snotty self out of here, as far as I am concerned, because I am going nowhere.


----------



## Raephen

os2wiz said:


> You are so right. These fanatics are bad mouthing a board for the vrms. Maybe the parts are not top of the line. But MSI found a way to get them to work every bit as well as the Crosshair VII. Plus at the same price of the Crosshair VII base model you are getting AC and Bluetooth if you need it getting steel reinforced memory slots that Crosshair VII does NOT have and getting the best m.2 drive heat sink and heat pipe combo in its class. The M7 board is built for reliability and performance and it delivers both in spite of all naysayers here. Spend your time arguing about issues you can win on. The sum is not equal to its parts it is equal to its parts plus ingenuity. The Vietnamese shot down US jets with unsophisticated weaponry. They used INGENUITY to do it. The Soviets defeated the Nazis at Stalingrad not with technical superiority but with ingenuity and tenaciousness that overcame the Nazi technical advantage. Engineering is a lot more than putting the best technolgy in a product. it is getting those parts to work together in an optimal way.


I've been watching this thread for a long time, and yes: I even own a MSI mobo. But please, for the love of anything you hold dear, admit that for the pricing, that MSI board you seem to love so much you'd marry it if you could uses inferior parts to similary priced motherboards.

From what I've seen, THAT is the arguement, not if it's a good board or not -- it's just way overpriced considering it's components.


----------



## Raephen

os2wiz said:


> Well whiz kid I have memory slots break on me in the past. Steel reinforcement prevents that cheap plastic from breaking under pressure. Got it???


Breaking RAM slots? How the feck did you manage that?


----------



## Elrick

Raephen said:


> From what I've seen, THAT is the arguement, not if it's a good board or not -- it's just way overpriced considering it's components.


The unfortunate thing for the X470 chipset is that ALL the manufacturers let down the enthusiasts, by using inferior cost-power delivery.

The only good level of decent VRMs are in the highest priced category, currently occupied by Asus and Asrock but this time MSI, has dropped the ball. I even have an MSI X370 Titanium and I admit I got fleeced by this company, so my future purchase will be either an Asus or Asrock product.

We here in the AMD camp keep getting stiffed by most manufacturers compared to the Intel camp, that have far reaching products in every size category, offering far more features for your dollar.

Just hate this constant let down by AMD's partners, who still treat us as desperate idiots willing to put up with the current status-quo.


----------



## Samekas

I have been reading the posts and it seems the X470 Taichi has better vrm and sound right? At the moment here the x470 taichi it's at 249€ and the Asus CH7 at 259€, so which one to buy for better vrm and sound? I'm leaning towards the taichi but for more 10€ I would get the Asus if it's better.


----------



## AlphaC

Huh where did you read the Taichi having better sound than the CH VII Hero , let alone for VRM? I believe the Taichi is missing ESS Sabre DAC and maybe the high precision clock source and there's just outright fewer audio filtering capacitors and components in general.

This is the X470 Taichi Ultimate's audio section per xfastest:







https://hk.xfastest.com/6117/xf-asrock-x470-taichi-rgb-review-with-2700x-2700-1800x-compare/

Supposedly it's a ALC1220 with an unseen TI NE5532 amp for front panel audio.

Contrast this to X370 Taichi:







https://hk.xfastest.com/241/asrock-x370-taichi/

The CH VII Hero is the best board for VRM components, there is little doubt on this. Whether its VRM is needed for a daily user is debatable , but it's so-called "future-proofing" in case you don't buy a Z490 board.

Usually the price differential is far greater than 10 Euro. In your situation I'd buy the CH VII Hero. It's a huge upgrade over the prior gen CH VI Hero , I don't think this can be stated enough. In terms of VRM, in terms of usability and layout, and in terms of overall feature-set it brings _a lot _to the table where the CH VI Hero was just an overclocking board with less to offer people that don't intend to play with LN2. For example, the CH VII Hero gives users a PS/2 port (useful because PS/2 has priority over USB), better voltage/temp/current reporting (due to Powerstages & also due to the AS324M-E1 Op Amp near the CPU socket), a newer ASM3142 USB controller, 2nd M.2 slot as all X470 boards do (many X370 boards did not have 2nd M.2 with PCIE lanes) , and there's a version with wifi if you need it. It's bringing Crosshair VI _Extreme_ levels of performance to the mainstream essentially.

For people that aren't overclocking, these minor details make a difference too (I/O , stability, USB signal, more M.2 , PS/2 capability for non Windows 10). That's where the money went for improvements and why a CH VI Hero is only fetching marginally more than X370 midrange boards now as there was little rationale for it to be more than a Taichi cost-wise. If a board is expensive and it has the parts to show for it, there's no reason to complain about it as they still need to make a profit making them : it's when the manufacture / R&D cost savings aren't passed to the consumer that we ought to be deeply concerned.

If the X370 Taichi is available in your area it is essentially the same as the X470 version (almost verbatim) except the USB 3.1 gen 2 header is missing , an extra 4 pin CPU power that you won't likely use on ambient, some aesthetic changes + M.2 heatsinks that are just flat plates, and you need to pay $20 to buy Enmotus Fuzedrive instead of StoreMi. If you're using a Ryzen CPU that isn't an APU the HDMI port they added is pointless. So no, I don't think the X470 Taichi is a worthwhile purchase if it's over +30% or 50% the price of a X370 Taichi (anything more than the price of a Fuzedrive license).

----------

In other news I saw a X470 Pro Carbon review:
http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070592566.html







Don't use an AIO on that without airflow, people. 

This is with airflow invoked from a 1200rpm ML120 fan directed over it








There appears to be a heat concentration at the inductors.


----------



## Samekas

AlphaC said:


> Huh where did you read the Taichi having better sound than the CH VII Hero , let alone for VRM? I believe the Taichi is missing ESS Sabre DAC and maybe the high precision clock source and there's just outright fewer audio filtering capacitors and components in general.
> 
> This is the X470 Taichi Ultimate's audio section per xfastest:
> View attachment 184049
> 
> https://hk.xfastest.com/6117/xf-asrock-x470-taichi-rgb-review-with-2700x-2700-1800x-compare/
> 
> Supposedly it's a ALC1220 with an unseen TI NE5532 amp for front panel audio.
> 
> Contrast this to X370 Taichi:
> View attachment 184073
> 
> https://hk.xfastest.com/241/asrock-x370-taichi/
> 
> The CH VII Hero is the best board for VRM components, there is little doubt on this. Whether its VRM is needed for a daily user is debatable , but it's so-called "future-proofing" in case you don't buy a Z490 board.
> 
> Usually the price differential is far greater than 10 Euro. In your situation I'd buy the CH VII Hero. It's a huge upgrade over the prior gen CH VI Hero , I don't think this can be stated enough. In terms of VRM, in terms of usability and layout, and in terms of overall feature-set it brings _a lot _to the table where the CH VI Hero was just an overclocking board with less to offer people that don't intend to play with LN2. For example, the CH VII Hero gives users a PS/2 port (useful because PS/2 has priority over USB), better voltage/temp/current reporting (due to Powerstages & also due to the AS324M-E1 Op Amp near the CPU socket), a newer ASM3142 USB controller, 2nd M.2 slot as all X470 boards do (many X370 boards did not have 2nd M.2 with PCIE lanes) , and there's a version with wifi if you need it. It's bringing Crosshair VI _Extreme_ levels of performance to the mainstream essentially.
> 
> For people that aren't overclocking, these minor details make a difference too (I/O , stability, USB signal, more M.2 , PS/2 capability for non Windows 10). That's where the money went for improvements and why a CH VI Hero is only fetching marginally more than X370 midrange boards now as there was little rationale for it to be more than a Taichi cost-wise. If a board is expensive and it has the parts to show for it, there's no reason to complain about it as they still need to make a profit making them : it's when the manufacture / R&D cost savings aren't passed to the consumer that we ought to be deeply concerned.
> 
> If the X370 Taichi is available in your area it is essentially the same as the X470 version (almost verbatim) except the USB 3.1 gen 2 header is missing , an extra 4 pin CPU power that you won't likely use on ambient, some aesthetic changes + M.2 heatsinks that are just flat plates, and you need to pay $20 to buy Enmotus Fuzedrive instead of StoreMi. If you're using a Ryzen CPU that isn't an APU the HDMI port they added is pointless. So no, I don't think the X470 Taichi is a worthwhile purchase if it's over +30% or 50% the price of a X370 Taichi (anything more than the price of a Fuzedrive license).
> 
> ----------
> 
> In other news I saw a X470 Pro Carbon review:
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070592566.html
> View attachment 183849
> 
> Don't use an AIO on that without airflow, people.
> 
> This is with airflow invoked from a 1200rpm ML120 fan directed over it
> View attachment 183857
> 
> 
> There appears to be a heat concentration at the inductors.


Thanks, I thought I read on the thread that the x470 taichi was better, I guess I'm gonna go with the CH7 then, if the X470 drops to 220€ in the next week I'm gonna go with it since its 40€ more cheap than the CH7 but currently it's just 10€ more expensive. I really like the design of the taichi but that's subjective, thanks again for the explanation 🙂


----------



## jpm888

-whoops this was an intel board


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty X470 Gaming-ITXac/index.asp
asrock x470 gaming itx is out.

sm mosfet shown in official pic... seems asrock has already run out of fairchild mosfets??
with respect to motherboard layout, no big changes, just got upgrades on parts eg from usb3.1 gen1 to gen2.
the new wifi module is surprising: 1733Mbps and Bluetooth5.0!


----------



## josephimports

Biostar X470GT8 has released. Looks to be mostly a copy and paste from X370. Visual changes include pci-e reinforcements, different inductors, and possibly the addition of a clock generator. I'd expect it to have the same 8+4 VRM using the IR3555 60A power stages. 

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138462


----------



## os2wiz

Here are most of the images from OCCT 4.51 16 minute run with Linpack (AVX) enabled. This is for Ryzen 2700X on an MSI X470 gaming M7 AC. Draw your own conclusions.


----------



## kd5151




----------



## josephimports

Buildzoid providing some interesting findings in his AM4 board tests.


----------



## AlphaC

Temp:







Perf:


Spoiler



































(I don't think his CH VII Hero is properly tuned.)

---

Tech Yes City's VRM temps (from kd5151 's post)








---

As far as buildzoid's video, it was what I noticed straight away on R7 2700X : over 140A is easily surpassed on 4.15GHz or so. Which means manually overclocking with fixed volts is generally a bad idea on midrange.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObqMOQW-dRg
> 
> Temp:
> View attachment 188297
> 
> Perf:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 188289
> 
> View attachment 188305
> 
> View attachment 188313
> 
> View attachment 188321
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I don't think his CH VII Hero is properly tuned.)
> 
> ---
> 
> Tech Yes City's VRM temps (from kd5151 's post)
> View attachment 188329
> 
> 
> ---
> 
> As far as buildzoid's video, it was what I noticed straight away on R7 2700X : over 140A is easily surpassed on 4.15GHz or so. Which means manually overclocking with fixed volts is generally a bad idea on midrange.


Asus snuck a $20 price increase on their Crosshair VII and and Crosshair VII WIFI boards AFTER the prices at release. They certainly are NOT worth $279 and $299 respectively. OVERPRICED. No major improvements were made in the Crosshair VII other than redistributing the vrm phasing. OVERPRICED for the features included. The X470 Taicihi and MSI X470 M7 are far better values for the money at $229 !!!!!


----------



## AlphaC

Octopart disagrees just from VRM alone:

10x IR3555 + 2X IR3555: total = 12 Powerstages

Price per 1000 = ~$2 each

https://octopart.com/ir3555mtrpbf-infineon-65873048

+
Voltage monitoring op amp: https://octopart.com/as324amtr-e1-diodes+inc.-30954717
~$0.27

*Versus *

8+4 TI NexFET CSD87350 = 12 NexFETs

Price per 1000 = less than $1

https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993



-------
* reworked memory topology , reduced trace length
* capacitance revised to use more MLCC capacitors

Non VRM: 
* NVMe slot added with PCIE 3.0 x4
* ASM3142 USB controller added
* PS/2 port circuitry & traces
* M.2 heatsink (minimal cost)
* StoreMI license = $20 via Enmotus Fuzedrive
* integrated pre-installed IO shield for lazy people


Do ASUS engineers work for free? R & D costs money.


----------



## cssorkinman

AlphaC said:


> Octopart disagrees just from VRM alone:
> 
> 10x IR3555 + 2X IR3555: total = 12 Powerstages
> 
> Price per 1000 = ~$2 each
> 
> https://octopart.com/ir3555mtrpbf-infineon-65873048
> 
> +
> Voltage monitoring op amp: https://octopart.com/as324amtr-e1-diodes+inc.-30954717
> ~$0.27
> 
> *Versus *
> 
> 8+4 TI NexFET CSD87350 = 12 NexFETs
> 
> Price per 1000 = less than $1
> 
> https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993
> 
> 
> 
> -------
> * reworked memory topology , reduced trace length
> * capacitance revised to use more MLCC capacitors
> 
> Non VRM:
> * NVMe slot added with PCIE 3.0 x4
> * ASM3142 USB controller added
> * PS/2 port circuitry & traces
> * M.2 heatsink (minimal cost)
> * StoreMI license = $20 via Enmotus Fuzedrive
> 
> 
> Do ASUS engineers work for free? R & D costs money.


Kinda funny that the $129 msi X470 Gaming seems to beat the hero in single thread performance.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> Octopart disagrees just from VRM alone:
> 
> 10x IR3555 + 2X IR3555: total = 12 Powerstages
> 
> Price per 1000 = ~$2 each
> 
> https://octopart.com/ir3555mtrpbf-infineon-65873048
> 
> +
> Voltage monitoring op amp: https://octopart.com/as324amtr-e1-diodes+inc.-30954717
> ~$0.27
> 
> *Versus *
> 
> 8+4 TI NexFET CSD87350 = 12 NexFETs
> 
> Price per 1000 = less than $1
> 
> https://octopart.com/csd87350q5d-texas+instruments-19874993
> 
> 
> 
> -------
> * reworked memory topology , reduced trace length
> * capacitance revised to use more MLCC capacitors
> 
> Non VRM:
> * NVMe slot added with PCIE 3.0 x4
> * ASM3142 USB controller added
> * PS/2 port circuitry & traces
> * M.2 heatsink (minimal cost)
> * StoreMI license = $20 via Enmotus Fuzedrive
> * integrated pre-installed IO shield for lazy people
> 
> 
> Do ASUS engineers work for free? R & D costs money.


No but the $20 increase was snuck in by Asus AFTER the X470 boards were introduced at $259 and $279. I guess you can't be honest about that gouging. 

The extra m.2 NVME slot at x4 is no innovation . If you use it at x4 it is taken away from the PCIe graphics slot. There are no additional lanes for pciE with X470, just the conversion of 2.0 lanes in the chipset to 3.0 lanes. Therefore that extra m.2 x4 slot is taken away from a pciE video slot.Nothing that other boards are not offering as well for less money.MSI repositioned the gaming M7 at the basic x470 Taichi price point of $229 making it a very attractive offering.


----------



## AlphaC

It's $260 at B & H and Newegg for the non wifi version...

Anyway, DIY PConline CN posted their CH VII Hero review,

https://diy.pconline.com.cn/1118/11184544_1.html


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> It's $260 at B & H and Newegg for the non wifi version...
> 
> Anyway, DIY PConline CN posted their CH VII Hero review,
> 
> https://diy.pconline.com.cn/1118/11184544_1.html
> 
> View attachment 190113


Here are Cinebench 15 results on the MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC at 4.25 GHZ with its "crippled" vrms. Not much difference compared to any other top board at that speed unless somebody has pictures to show differently. The 4.225 GHZ speed is the wsweetspot for Cinebench 15 on this board. I have fully stability tested at this speed and at 4.25 GHZ and passed. I will not do so higher than that 4.25 GHZ as performance degradation certainly occurrs at 4.275 and 4.3 GHZ. I do not believe it will be significantly different on other boards at 4.3 GHZ as well. That is pushing the thernal limits of the 2700X up at that range and even if stable the results would be less than desirable.


----------



## josephimports

os2wiz said:


> Here are Cinebench 15 results on the MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC at 4.25 GHZ with its "crippled" vrms. Not much difference compared to any other top board at that speed unless somebody has pictures to show differently. The 4.225 GHZ speed is the wsweetspot for Cinebench 15 on this board. I have fully stability tested at this speed and at 4.25 GHZ and passed. I will not do so higher than that 4.25 GHZ as performance degradation certainly occurrs at 4.275 and 4.3 GHZ. I do not believe it will be significantly different on other boards at 4.3 GHZ as well. That is pushing the thernal limits of the 2700X up at that range and even if stable the results would be less than desirable.


Thanks for sharing all your results. Looks to be a solid board. Enjoy!


----------



## AlphaC

https://hk.xfastest.com/7062/asrock-x470-master-sli-motherboard/

Looks like an Intersil PWM on the master SLI.

----

More X470-F coverage

https://overclockers.ru/lab/show/91...-gaming-amd-x470-pinnacle-ridge-i-raven-ridge
https://www.ixbt.com/platform/asus-rog-strix-x470-f-gaming-review.html


----------



## harkinsteven

AlphaC said:


> https://hk.xfastest.com/7062/asrock-x470-master-sli-motherboard/
> 
> Looks like an Intersil PWM on the master SLI.
> 
> ----
> 
> More X470-F coverage
> 
> https://overclockers.ru/lab/show/91...-gaming-amd-x470-pinnacle-ridge-i-raven-ridge
> https://www.ixbt.com/platform/asus-rog-strix-x470-f-gaming-review.html


I have the wifi version of this board. Is the VRM any good?


----------



## AlphaC

harkinsteven said:


> I have the wifi version of this board. Is the VRM any good?


It's not great but the board is cheap , just like if you were to buy a board from Gigabyte/MSI at that price point which also are using similar setups. Basically what has ended up happening due to AMD's aggressive power constraints with R7 2700X (i.e. ~ 140W out of the box) is that the most garbage VRM on X470 needs to be at least 10% better than a B350/midrange X370 which are specced up to 128.8W (source:


Spoiler













) with an unknown VRM temperature limit.

The Master SLI is akin to the older Fatal1ty X370 Gaming X , a midrange board.

It's not until you hit ~$180-200 that you get a IR Digital PWM although in Europe I think the Asus Prime x470 Pro is around 160 Euros.

edit: seems HKEpc did an overview of the Master SLI today but theirs seems to use NIKOS instead of the often common Sinopower http://www.hkepc.com/16706/抵玩__同級無得輸_ASROCK_X470_Master_SLI主機板

-----

edit2: X470-I STRIX has been reviewed http://www.xfastest.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=219664&cp=3


----------



## josephimports

Changes/Modifications on the Biostar X470GT8 vs X370GT7

Added clock generator
Added clear cmos button 
CPU socket changed from Lotes to Foxconn.
Memory/CPU traces altered
PCB layer increased from 4 to 6. 
AM3 mounting bracket support
Different (upgraded?) CPU VRM chokes
Relocated debug LED
LAN changed from Realtek to Intel
Improved fan control in bios


----------



## Fanu

buildzoids video on Load Line Calibration settings on the Crosshair 7 Hero


----------



## SuperZan

josephimports said:


> Changes/Modifications on the Biostar X470GT8 vs X370GT7
> 
> Added clock generator
> Added clear cmos button
> CPU socket changed from Lotes to Foxconn.
> Memory/CPU traces altered
> PCB layer increased from 4 to 6.
> AM3 mounting bracket support
> Different (upgraded?) CPU VRM chokes
> Relocated debug LED


I'm glad to see Biostar building on the GT7 as I thought it was a very good board at the price for which it was usually on offer. I was waiting around with my backup Taichi to see if the GT8 would be a good fit and it looks like it'll suit me just fine.


----------



## SavantStrike

Now if someone (I don't care who) would just produce a mini itx x470 board with more than 4 sata ports.

AM4 is screaming for a mini itx board that meets those requirements for a small NAS build. Intel has killed ECC support for so long that the only alternatives are xeons or atom chips.


----------



## Clownious

Guys, i can't decide between x470 Taichi and Asus Gaming F with regards to Zen 2. 

I'm planing on running a 2600 and switch it to a 8 core processor when Zen 2 releases. 

Basically I'm thinking about getting the Gaming F, because I like the Bios and the RAM oc more. 

On the other side, Zen 2 could possibly run like 4.6 to 4.8 Ghz. Not sure if the Strix F can handle this...

So would it be better to go on the safe side and just get the Taichi?

Thans in advande


----------



## AlphaC

X470-F STRIX performance with R7 2700X manually overclocked to 4.2GHz
http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070678971.html


With airflow (1200RPM ML120 from Corsair) ~80°C








Without airflow ~100°C











---


Taichi ~75°C no airflow : http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070591008.html


----------



## Clownious

Thanks!

Well, that defenitely speaks for the Taichi. Unfortunately it's ready for delivery in 8-10 working days - The CH7 is not known when to be delivered. 

The Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 has come to my consideration too, since it's available. What let's me hesitate here, is the IR3553 mosfet controller. While the Heatsink seems to be relatively good. Still it has 1 CPU Phase less than the Taichi and probably much worse mosfets. Also, it's Gigabyte 

Guess I have to wait then (until Taichi or CH7 is available).


----------



## AlphaC

10X IR3553 is pretty much going to handle 180A much like a 6x IR3553 solution handles ~110A

The IR3553 starts to become less efficient (<90%) at ~ 25A although ideally kept below 20A each if you want to only have to dissipate ~2W each. Gigabyte has increased the thermal conductivity massively versus x370 K7 such that it facilitates the use of IR3553 (40A powerstages) instead of IR3555 (60A). If you look at boards where the mosfets are separate instead of combined in a powerstage , 2W is more or less the limit you can dissipate on them without going into the > 100°C zone provided your total thermal resistance at the VRM heatsink is kept around 35°C/W *§*. 150nH Cooper Bussman chokes labeled FP1007R3 are used http://www1.cooperbussmann.com/pdf/79793630-1b1e-49f8-a6d0-ea9b2be9f2e4.pdf

(IR3553 data: https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3553.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd94ee1767)

*§ *For example, the Onsemi parts being used on some boards list ~50°C/W thermal resistance when they are not heatsinked. Absolute maximum power dissipation (for the Onsemi mosfets) figures at 25°C are cited to be around 2W as well when given a 1 inch square pad while only ~ 0.8W when using minimum pad size.

The main advantages to a IR3555 used on the CH VII Hero are that it has a larger footprint which translates to more thermal conductivity along with a wider efficiency band > 90% (it is up to around 45A). Gigabyte's approach to the problem was different: they used a heatsink with massively more fin area and a direct contact heatpipe to utilize the full area of the heatsink more effectively. R40 chokes are used on the CH VII Hero, which suggest steady state performance was preferred over transients (chokes / inductors resist changes in current). Per IR3553/IR3550 datasheets for power loss vs output inductance, anything over 150nH has less than 5% normalization difference (i.e. if you lose 2W per powerstage with a R15 inductor you lose ~1.9W with a R40 one).

Where the TI NexFET powerblocks on the Taichi stand: the driver losses aren't accounted for on their solution , however 12X NexFETs have to deal with less current than 10X IR3553/IR3555 powerstages. The package size is 5x6mm versus the 4x6mm of the IR3553 and 6x6mm of the IR3555 ; thermally it is similar to the IR3553. While the efficiency curve on a CSD87350 NexFET suggests over 90% efficiency at 40A , it isn't a full picture of the situation. If you look at power loss at 15A without accounting for an increase in voltage (which would be around +3% losses at 1.4V , so if you lose 1W it would be more like 1.03W at 1.4V) it's already at 2W of power loss each. Their "typical" design point is 25A (3W power dissipation). A heatpipe is utilized at the board to increase effective surface area as on the CH VII Hero and GBT Gaming 7 , which allows it to compete. The Taichi's R22 chokes are suspected to be the 0.22µH Coiltronics ones http://www.cooperindustries.com/con...roduct-datasheets/bus-elx-ds-10427-fp110v.pdf
(see http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf)

If you give your board some good airflow even a 6x IR3553 board can handle ~ 4.2GHz on the R7 2700X manually overclocked. If it wasn't possible then the Prime X470 Pro wouldn't be using 6 x IR3553. As you recall , the TDC (thermal design current) parameter for PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) is 114A per Stilt's overview despite the EDC (electrical design current) of 168A. That's ~19A per IR3553 under sustained load. It won't run as cool but it will run , just don't expect to be doing any prolonged AVX instruction-based work on it without airflow.

I'm not going to belabor the MSI X470 M7 topic again because some people are so sensitive about it but if you look at the board it has no heatpipe at the VRM heatsink and 12 sets of discrete mosfets are used. The transient performance is going to be lower since the discrete mosfets' switching times are slower. In terms of power loss it will be close without accounting for driver losses ; efficiency suffers at low load if phase shedding isn't active. As output capacitance is similar to the Asus/GBT boards and R22 chokes are used I would expect steady state performance to come in around the Taichi's at best (the Taichi has more output capacitance and uses R22 chokes).

(see https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C029N-D.PDF , https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C024N-D.PDF)

I don't think you can really go wrong with any of the three boards (CH VII Hero , Gaming 7 WIFI , Taichi) you mentioned as they are known quantities at this point (especially the Taichi which is a X370 rehash). They each have their own shortcomings and idiosyncrasies but that's a different topic.


----------



## cssorkinman

After a full year running 1.5V+ @ 4175 mhz I thought it might be interesting to see if the Titanium or 1800X were any worse for the wear.

Changes in the bios have made it hard to replicate it precisely but it would prime @ 4 ghz on default voltage and auto LLC when new which was about 1.356 volts . Doesn't seem to be any degradation 
Default v-core LLC 2 - Auto would let it lower on this bios than the original.


----------



## jpm888

Will the X370-F handle a stock 2700X with XFR2?

I want to get a 2700X but no X470F or Crosshair 7 is available yet


----------



## SavantStrike

jpm888 said:


> Will the X370-F handle a stock 2700X with XFR2?
> 
> I want to get a 2700X but no X470F or Crosshair 7 is available yet


XFR2 is only available on x470. If you're a DIY person, you can manually over clock to reach the same numbers though.


----------



## ryan92084

SavantStrike said:


> *XFR2 is only available on x470*. If you're a DIY person, you can manually over clock to reach the same numbers though.


Not to go too far off topic but this isn't true afaik. Only PBO was supposed to be x470 exclusive but even that isn't true.


----------



## lorcav123

AlphaC said:


> X470-F STRIX performance with R7 2700X manually overclocked to 4.2GHz
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070678971.html
> 
> 
> With airflow (1200RPM ML120 from Corsair) ~80°C
> View attachment 196425
> 
> 
> Without airflow ~100°C
> View attachment 196417
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> Taichi ~75°C no airflow : http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070591008.html




Is this too bad for x470 strix (just ordered it today)? I expected a lower temp considering that it has one of the top 5 vrm. I am worried that it won't be enough for Zen 2? In test with airflow it means that fan is pointed directly with vrm?


----------



## AlphaC

lorcav123 said:


> Is this too bad for x470 strix (just ordered it today)? I expected a lower temp considering that it has one of the top 5 vrm. I am worried that it won't be enough for Zen 2? In test with airflow it means that fan is pointed directly with vrm?


It's fine , that's a full on AVX load.

If you aren't pushing AVX instructions to the CPU and have a air cooler for example , the ancillary airflow from the CPU cooler flows over the VRM heatsink.

This is just a warning for people using AIOs and no casefans at the area.




jpm888 said:


> Will the X370-F handle a stock 2700X with XFR2?
> 
> I want to get a 2700X but no X470F or Crosshair 7 is available yet



Why wouldn't it?


It even handles manually overclocked CPUs just fine if you don't put it under a load that is unwise (i.e. AVX instructions + no fans at the area with an AIO cooler). With a case fan or CPU cooler fan and even a manually overclocked CPU you'd be fine.


------







View attachment 200209

^ Pro Carbon , I think no PBO


----------



## lorcav123

AlphaC said:


> It's fine , that's a full on AVX load.
> 
> If you aren't pushing AVX instructions to the CPU and have a air cooler for example , the ancillary airflow from the CPU cooler flows over the VRM heatsink.
> 
> This is just a warning for people using AIOs and no casefans at the area.



I have tower type of air CPU cooler. In short difference in CPU load it is something like this:

Games <<<<Aida64 stress test<<<<<<AVX test. AVX is 20-30% heavier than AIDA64?


----------



## AlphaC

lorcav123 said:


> I have tower type of air CPU cooler. In short difference in CPU load it is something like this:
> 
> Games <<<<Aida64 stress test<<<<<<AVX test. AVX is 20-30% heavier than AIDA64?



AIDA64 is not as heavy stress test as AIDA64 with only FPU checked off.


I would advise using Blender (AVX), x264 encoding , OCCT AVX (basically Linpack) , or Prime95 versioned after 26.6 as those are AVX-based.



Anyhow unless your air cooler is ridiculously low RPM below 1200RPM I wouldn't worry too much about it , most 120mm fan tower coolers are spinning 1500-1800RPM and even 140mm fan tower coolers are running 1200RPM+. If you have an AIO watercooler definitely put a case fan at the rear with 1000RPM or so or 1200RPM. What mainly matters is the linear airflow in LFM (linear feet per minute) over the heatsink not so much CFM (cubic feet per minute), so the diameter of the fan 120mm vs 140mm won't matter as much in this instance. Obviously the 140mm fan will tend to push more air at a given RPM.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> 10X IR3553 is pretty much going to handle 180A much like a 6x IR3553 solution handles ~110A
> 
> The IR3553 starts to become less efficient (<90%) at ~ 25A although ideally kept below 20A each if you want to only have to dissipate ~2W each. Gigabyte has increased the thermal conductivity massively versus x370 K7 such that it facilitates the use of IR3553 (40A powerstages) instead of IR3555 (60A). If you look at boards where the mosfets are separate instead of combined in a powerstage , 2W is more or less the limit you can dissipate on them without going into the > 100°C zone provided your total thermal resistance at the VRM heatsink is kept around 35°C/W *§*. 150nH Cooper Bussman chokes labeled FP1007R3 are used http://www1.cooperbussmann.com/pdf/79793630-1b1e-49f8-a6d0-ea9b2be9f2e4.pdf
> 
> (IR3553 data: https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3553.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cd94ee1767)
> 
> *§ *For example, the Onsemi parts being used on some boards list ~50°C/W thermal resistance when they are not heatsinked. Absolute maximum power dissipation (for the Onsemi mosfets) figures at 25°C are cited to be around 2W as well when given a 1 inch square pad while only ~ 0.8W when using minimum pad size.
> 
> The main advantages to a IR3555 used on the CH VII Hero are that it has a larger footprint which translates to more thermal conductivity along with a wider efficiency band > 90% (it is up to around 45A). Gigabyte's approach to the problem was different: they used a heatsink with massively more fin area and a direct contact heatpipe to utilize the full area of the heatsink more effectively. R40 chokes are used on the CH VII Hero, which suggest steady state performance was preferred over transients (chokes / inductors resist changes in current). Per IR3553/IR3550 datasheets for power loss vs output inductance, anything over 150nH has less than 5% normalization difference (i.e. if you lose 2W per powerstage with a R15 inductor you lose ~1.9W with a R40 one).
> 
> Where the TI NexFET powerblocks on the Taichi stand: the driver losses aren't accounted for on their solution , however 12X NexFETs have to deal with less current than 10X IR3553/IR3555 powerstages. The package size is 5x6mm versus the 4x6mm of the IR3553 and 6x6mm of the IR3555 ; thermally it is similar to the IR3553. While the efficiency curve on a CSD87350 NexFET suggests over 90% efficiency at 40A , it isn't a full picture of the situation. If you look at power loss at 15A without accounting for an increase in voltage (which would be around +3% losses at 1.4V , so if you lose 1W it would be more like 1.03W at 1.4V) it's already at 2W of power loss each. Their "typical" design point is 25A (3W power dissipation). A heatpipe is utilized at the board to increase effective surface area as on the CH VII Hero and GBT Gaming 7 , which allows it to compete. The Taichi's R22 chokes are suspected to be the 0.22µH Coiltronics ones http://www.cooperindustries.com/con...roduct-datasheets/bus-elx-ds-10427-fp110v.pdf
> (see http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/csd87350q5d.pdf)
> 
> If you give your board some good airflow even a 6x IR3553 board can handle ~ 4.2GHz on the R7 2700X manually overclocked. If it wasn't possible then the Prime X470 Pro wouldn't be using 6 x IR3553. As you recall , the TDC (thermal design current) parameter for PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) is 114A per Stilt's overview despite the EDC (electrical design current) of 168A. That's ~19A per IR3553 under sustained load. It won't run as cool but it will run , just don't expect to be doing any prolonged AVX instruction-based work on it without airflow.
> 
> I'm not going to belabor the MSI X470 M7 topic again because some people are so sensitive about it but if you look at the board it has no heatpipe at the VRM heatsink and 12 sets of discrete mosfets are used. The transient performance is going to be lower since the discrete mosfets' switching times are slower. In terms of power loss it will be close without accounting for driver losses ; efficiency suffers at low load if phase shedding isn't active. As output capacitance is similar to the Asus/GBT boards and R22 chokes are used I would expect steady state performance to come in around the Taichi's at best (the Taichi has more output capacitance and uses R22 chokes).
> 
> (see https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C029N-D.PDF , https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C024N-D.PDF)
> 
> I don't think you can really go wrong with any of the three boards (CH VII Hero , Gaming 7 WIFI , Taichi) you mentioned as they are known quantities at this point (especially the Taichi which is a X370 rehash). They each have their own shortcomings and idiosyncrasies but that's a different topic.


 I like the detailed analysis of yours including the point about the lack of a heat pipe around the vrm heatsink. That is an area that MSI should have taken care of considering the parts that were used. If that had been done their solution would be quite credible. As it is it vastly better than on their x370 boards with room for more improvement. That puts it 4th behinf the Crosshair Vii, the Taichi, and Gigabyte Gaming 7 . Now that the price point for the MSI board is $229 it more accurately reflects its value. It still has a couple of excellent features that the other boards do not that for me made it a deciding factor.


----------



## Fanu

Crosshair VI Extreme is being sold for the same price as X470 Taichi (in one of the shops in my country)

does extreme use the same VRM setup as Crosshair VI Hero ? Will that VRM pose problems for upcoming >8 core Zen2?


----------



## AlphaC

Fanu said:


> Crosshair VI Extreme is being sold for the same price as X470 Taichi (in one of the shops in my country)
> 
> does extreme use the same VRM setup as Crosshair VI Hero ? Will that VRM pose problems for upcoming >8 core Zen2?


Short answer: no.

Long answer:

The Crosshair *VII* Hero (X470) uses 10+2 IR3555 powerstages (60A rating each). Due to spreading the 10 phases evenly with SOC phases in the middle of the CPU phases, it is even more potent.

The Crosshair VI Extreme (X370) uses 8+4 IR3555 Powerstages (60A rating each ; typical design point is around 40A at 1.2V per powerstage). We've seen this VRM used on X299 and X399.

Taichi X370/X470 uses 12+4 TI NexFET Powerblocks (40A rating each ; typical design point is 25A at 1.3V per powerblock). Asrock's specifications claim "300W EX OC".

The Crosshair *VI* Hero (X370) uses 8+4 TI NexFET Powerblocks (40A rating each ; typical design point is 25A at 1.3V per powerblock).

None of these will have issues unless the upcoming ZEN 2 CPUs on 7nm process consume well in excess of ~200W. In that case your cooling would likely be the limitation unless you have a copper 280/360 radiator with copper CPU block and a proper D5 / DDC pump (i.e. not an AIO or one of those <6W pumps). If VRM gets hot in that instance you'd likely need a monoblock for it anyhow.




-------


@ br0da:


https://post.smzdm.com/p/691635/


this X470 Master SLI variant has SM4336 + SM4337


----------



## Fanu

you sure that VRM is different between C6H and C6E (all other forums report it being the same)?

here are VRM pictures of both of those boards:

C6H
https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php...-vi-hero-amd-x370-motherboard-review_full.jpg

C6E
https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php...-extreme-amd-x370-motherboard-review_full.jpg

if I understood you correctly, C6E has excellent VRM that is comparable to C7H (should have no issues running 10-12core zen2)? would you spend 60€ more for C7H or get the cheaper C6E?

tnx for the answers


----------



## josephimports

Fanu said:


> you sure that VRM is different between C6H and C6E (all other forums report it being the same)?


The difference being the CH7 VRM circuit is wired to utilize 10 CPU phases+2 SOC phases. The CH6 is configured for 8+4. The components themselves are the identical as stated by AlphaC. 

"The Crosshair VII Hero (X470) uses 10+2 IR3555 powerstages (60A rating each). Due to spreading the 10 phases evenly with SOC phases in the middle of the CPU phases, it is even more potent."


----------



## Fanu

thats great

C6E sounds like a better buy considering its cheaper and comes with all the bells and whistles (wifi/bluetooth, 2 nvme slots, m.2 cooling, ****load of fan headers)


----------



## AlphaC

Fanu said:


> you sure that VRM is different between C6H and C6E (all other forums report it being the same)?
> 
> here are VRM pictures of both of those boards:
> 
> C6H
> https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php...-vi-hero-amd-x370-motherboard-review_full.jpg
> 
> C6E
> https://www.tweaktown.com/image.php...-extreme-amd-x370-motherboard-review_full.jpg
> 
> if I understood you correctly, C6E has excellent VRM that is comparable to C7H (should have no issues running 10-12core zen2)? would you spend 60€ more for C7H or get the cheaper C6E?
> 
> tnx for the answers


I obtained that information straight from ASUS's elmor (he linked it to me) and it has been verified multiple places...

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...-hero-amd-x470-motherboard-review/index3.html
http://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-asus-crosshair-vii-hero-wi-fi/4
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.p...t-siebte-generation-mit-x470-fch.html?start=1


https://edgeup.asus.com/2018/the-x4...oosing-the-best-board-for-your-ryzen-build/2/
"While the old Crosshair VI Hero allocates power phases to the CPU and SoC in an 8+4 split, its successor uses a 10+2 arrangement that shifts power to the processor cores."

http://www.overclock.net/forum/27156113-post35156.html


Anyone can verify it by checking continuity between phases. (~0 resistance = continuity)


You have to keep in mind even if there is a theoretical 10-12 core Zen2 , the power use will have to be kept in check if it is using the same PGA1331 socket. X299 / LGA2066 and X399 / TR4 (4094 contacts) sockets are using LGA with many more contacts.


----------



## Fanu

@AlphaC

I am asking whether or not you are sure x370 Crosshair VI Hero and x370 Crosshair VI Extreme have different VRM 

all of the links you posted are regarding x470 Crosshair VII Hero - that doesnt tell me anything
I know that C7H has different VRM layout compared to C6H


----------



## josephimports

Fanu said:


> @AlphaC
> 
> I am asking whether or not you are sure x370 Crosshair VI Hero and x370 Crosshair VI Extreme have different VRM
> 
> all of the links you posted are regarding x470 Crosshair VII Hero - that doesnt tell me anything
> I know that C7H has different VRM layout compared to C6H


My apologies. I stepped in when i shouldn't have.


----------



## AlphaC

Fanu said:


> @*AlphaC*
> 
> I am asking whether or not you are sure x370 Crosshair VI Hero and x370 Crosshair VI Extreme have different VRM
> 
> all of the links you posted are regarding x470 Crosshair VII Hero - that doesnt tell me anything
> I know that C7H has different VRM layout compared to C6H



Yes they have different components as mentioned above. The footprint is different for the parts so it's rather obvious.


If you go with CH VI Extreme it'll be more than fine for any AM4 CPU you can buy right now. Even overclocked LGA2066 CPUs are using that VRM up to ~ 250W and that's with shoddy heatsinks.


----------



## josephimports

AlphaC said:


> Yes they have different components as mentioned above. The footprint is different for the parts so it's rather obvious.
> 
> 
> If you go with CH VI Extreme it'll be more than fine for any AM4 CPU you can buy right now. Even overclocked LGA2066 CPUs are using that VRM up to ~ 250W and that's with shoddy heatsinks.


Sorry, i assumed they were the same when indeed they are not. The tweaktown images clearly demonstrate that.


----------



## encrypted11

AlphaC said:


> 10X IR3553 is pretty much going to handle 180A much like a 6x IR3553 solution handles ~110A
> 
> The IR3553 starts to become less efficient (<90%) at ~ 25A although ideally kept below 20A each if you want to only have to dissipate ~2W each. Gigabyte has increased the thermal conductivity massively versus x370 K7 such that it facilitates the use of IR3553 (40A powerstages) instead of IR3555 (60A). If you look at boards where the mosfets are separate instead of combined in a powerstage , 2W is more or less the limit you can dissipate on them without going into the > 100°C zone provided your total thermal resistance at the VRM heatsink is kept around 35°C/W *§*. 150nH Cooper Bussman chokes labeled FP1007R3 are used http://www1.cooperbussmann.com/pdf/79793630-1b1e-49f8-a6d0-ea9b2be9f2e4.pdf


What about the X470 Strix-F chokes?


----------



## AlphaC

As far as I can tell the X470-F STRIX is verbatim from the X370-F STRIX.


Edited image for luminosity but it appears to be "MIL R68" with the date code under it , same as Prime X470 Pro / Prime X370 PRO.


Spoiler














https://www.hw-journal.de/testberic...rog-strix-x370-f-gaming-test?showall=&start=2


edit: also see https://www.profesionalreview.com/2018/04/19/asus-rog-strix-x470-f-gaming-review/
(specifically https://www.profesionalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/asus-rog-strix-x470-f-review25.jpg)


See also this X470-F review:


> Now I recently added a new test where I look at overall VRM temperatures. I do this using a Flir to test the temperatures of the VRM heatsink. In this case, Asus either did a good job with thermal dissipation or a bad job of transferring any heat at all to the heatsink with the lowest temperature of the three. My other photos help figure this out though. The temperature around the CPU is up at 134.6F where the Aorus with its upgraded cooling was over 10 degrees less. So it seems this board has good cooling, but the Aorus has better cooling, even though the heatsink is cooler in this case.


https://lanoc.org/review/motherboards/7779-asus-rog-strix-x470-f-gaming?showall=&start=5


& this one of the X370-F https://www.hwcooling.net/en/which-x370-for-175-eur-asus-rog-strix-or-gigabyte-gaming-5-en/6/


----------



## br0da

Finally a first X470 review from Steve: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8640/asrock-x470-taichi-ultimate-amd-motherboard-review/index.html


----------



## lb_felipe

br0da said:


> Finally a first X470 review from Steve: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8640/asrock-x470-taichi-ultimate-amd-motherboard-review/index.html


He already tested others x470. I don't know why the X470 AORUS GAMING 7 WIFI is not listed on the TT site. I believe it is some bug or whatever.

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...s-gaming-7-wifi-motherboard-review/index.html

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...i-hero-amd-x470-motherboard-review/index.html

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8640/asrock-x470-taichi-ultimate-amd-motherboard-review/index.html


----------



## AlphaC

It's sorted under CPU , https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...s-gaming-7-wifi-motherboard-review/index.html

@br0da:



Asrock Master SLI

http://koolshare.cn/thread-140760-1-1.html
ISL 95712 PWM and SM4337 + SM4336 mosfets


----------



## gaster

I may be wrong, but it seems like the X470-F does not have a clock generator where the older X370-F did.
The X370-F also had more overall USB ports on the back, and it has the dual AM3/AM4 backplate holes in the PCB. 
The X470-F regressed in a few areas.


----------



## AlphaC

ASUS Prime X470 Pro seems like it struggles with Prime95 past 1.3V with the R7 2700X


----------



## 4x4n

Just watched the video and while I agree that the VRM heatsink is not great, he also has no airflow anywhere around them. 

I have my 2700X at 4ghz, 1.2875v running 100% load 24/7 on World Community Grid. I have a 120mm fan at 1000rpm as intake at the top of the case blowing over the motherboard. I have been running it this way since release as I pre-ordered.

I also have a temp gun and just took readings from the VRM's. He has his temp probe in the right place, I get the highest reading from that point. 65C, and the other areas are 40-55C. On the front of the board, the middle choke is 50C and the VRM heatsink itself is 43-45C. 

So, just as with most of the AM4 boards, a little airflow goes a long way.


----------



## AlphaC

@ br0da: 



https://wccftech.com/amd-b450-motherboards-asrock-asus-msi-computex/ , https://www.techpowerup.com/244845/asus-rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-motherboard-pictured , https://www.tomshardware.com/news/aorus-x399-xtreme-b450-motherboard,37194.html , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPoaoNCNRfQ

Asrock B450 Gaming K4 (no more Fatal1ty?)


Asrock B450 Pro 4

Asrock B450 Gaming ITX/ac 

Asrock B450M-HDV

ASUS Prime B450M-A

ASUS Prime B450 PLUS


ASUS ROG STRIX B450-F Gaming


GIGABYTE B450 Aorus Pro Wifi --- ISL95712 PWM per GamersNexus with ISL6625 drivers

MSI B450 TOMAHAWK (bigger heatsinks)

MSI B450-A PRO


----------



## kd5151

https://www.techpowerup.com/244845/asus-rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-motherboard-pictured

Asus ROG Strix B450-F. Looks just like the X370/470 this time on the outside. The Gigabyte B450 Aorus looks nice also... B450 will be popular once it hits the market.


----------



## sakae48

i'm now more concerned with the quality of thermal pad. my x370-f VRM thermal pad were dry and brittle! add it with something like 2-3mm thick. i hope they moved to something thinner this time.


----------



## Elrick

kd5151 said:


> https://www.techpowerup.com/244845/asus-rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-motherboard-pictured
> 
> Asus ROG Strix B450-F. Looks just like the X370/470 this time on the outside. The Gigabyte B450 Aorus looks nice also... B450 will be popular once it hits the market.


These are my future purchases right there.

Looking forward to the B450 chip set simply because it's time to junk the B350 series, as soon as possible  .


----------



## Rebellion88

Sorry to go off topic slightly, I have picked up a 1600x and 1700x one for a build for me the other for the kids PC, can anyone recommend me 2 motherboards that are fairly solid, and half decent VRM's for some overclocking. I'm not looking to extract every ounce but a half decent overclock will suffice. My Budget is £200 in total for both, so maybe a B350 board for both, I'm happy to miss the newer B450 and X470 to save some £.


----------



## allikat

Rebellion88 said:


> Sorry to go off topic slightly, I have picked up a 1600x and 1700x one for a build for me the other for the kids PC, can anyone recommend me 2 motherboards that are fairly solid, and half decent VRM's for some overclocking. I'm not looking to extract every ounce but a half decent overclock will suffice. My Budget is £200 in total for both, so maybe a B350 board for both, I'm happy to miss the newer B450 and X470 to save some £.


I'd actually look at the MSI X470 Gaming Plus (not the pro) for both. You will need an extra 20 quid per board to make that happen, but the x470 boards have a lot better VRMs with better cooling than the B350s. I used to run my R5 1600 on a MSI B350 Gaming plus, and while the VRM components were up to pushing it to 3.8GHz they did get VERY hot under load.

Also worth looking at the lower end of the X370 board market too. Scan has the MSI X370 Gaming plus at 93 pounds ( https://www.scan.co.uk/products/msi...y-sli-3-way-crossfire-realtek-gbe-usb-31-gen2 ) , and that should be able to do all you want it to. In fact it looks a LOT like the X470 version.. Similar looking big 4 phase Vcore. Not the best for overclocking, but it'd do it with some airflow over the CPU area. I'd suggest looking for some good air coolers to make that happen, even AMD's stock coolers will do the job if you can find those cheap.


----------



## Rebellion88

allikat said:


> I'd actually look at the MSI X470 Gaming Plus (not the pro) for both. You will need an extra 20 quid per board to make that happen, but the x470 boards have a lot better VRMs with better cooling than the B350s. I used to run my R5 1600 on a MSI B350 Gaming plus, and while the VRM components were up to pushing it to 3.8GHz they did get VERY hot under load.
> 
> Also worth looking at the lower end of the X370 board market too. Scan has the MSI X370 Gaming plus at 93 pounds ( https://www.scan.co.uk/products/msi...y-sli-3-way-crossfire-realtek-gbe-usb-31-gen2 ) , and that should be able to do all you want it to. In fact it looks a LOT like the X470 version.. Similar looking big 4 phase Vcore. Not the best for overclocking, but it'd do it with some airflow over the CPU area. I'd suggest looking for some good air coolers to make that happen, even AMD's stock coolers will do the job if you can find those cheap.


Thanks for the advice orignally I was looking at these two for the 1600X:

ASUS ROG STRIX B350-F Gaming £88
MSI B350 Tomahawk £72

and for the 1700X:

ASUS ROG STRIX B350-F Gaming £88
MSI X370 Gaming plus £93


----------



## encrypted11

Not sure if these pics are late.
X470-I Strix.

VRM thermal pads are making good contact.
****ty chipset thermal pads crumble upon removal of heat sink. If I'm missing any vital PCB shots let me know, I might have them.


----------



## AlphaC

Any reason you bought the X470 version over the X370 version?


I'm thinking the X470 has thermal monitoring due to powerstages but the X370 ITX board from ASUS has 50A Optimos.


Also Crosshair VII Hero result:



http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1070804504.html


----------



## encrypted11

Well I borrowed it from a mate so I could have a feel at the state of the memory compatibility (and make some 'google stressapptest stable' memory oc profiles) because I was curious how well they'd work. 
He picked the X470 because it was simply the commercially newer variant.  They're a lot less 'plug and play' as I thought originally but end of the day, they pass gsat on manual tuning.


----------



## poah

recently purchased an MSI X470 gaming M7 to go with my 1700. Tested with and without a rear inlet fan as I run two AIO's to cool CPU/GPU. Used AIDA64 for stressing which is signficantly more than my normall rendering does. Fan was set to 30% which wasn't noticable over ambient sound. Have also ran it upto 1.45 v with the VRM hitting 58C


full standard 42C CPU 55C VRM
with fan 42C CPU 47C VRM

3.9 56C CPU 56C VRM
with fan 56C CPU 51C VRM (putting little finned alu heatsincks ontop dropped it to 48C)

4.0 70C CPU 60C VRM
with fan 70C CPU 53C VRM

4.0 4k render 63C CPU 57C VRM
withfan 63C CPU 55C VRM


----------



## os2wiz

poah said:


> recently purchased an MSI X470 gaming M7 to go with my 1700. Tested with and without a rear inlet fan as I run two AIO's to cool CPU/GPU. Used AIDA64 for stressing which is signficantly more than my normall rendering does. Fan was set to 30% which wasn't noticable over ambient sound. Have also ran it upto 1.45 v with the VRM hitting 58C
> 
> 
> full standard 42C CPU 55C VRM
> with fan 42C CPU 47C VRM
> 
> 3.9 56C CPU 56C VRM
> with fan 56C CPU 51C VRM (putting little finned alu heatsincks ontop dropped it to 48C)
> 
> 4.0 70C CPU 60C VRM
> with fan 70C CPU 53C VRM
> 
> 4.0 4k render 63C CPU 57C VRM
> withfan 63C CPU 55C VRM


 Those numbers seem very reasonable. Of course on the 2700X testing at 4.1GHZ and 4.2 GHZ would be in order. Do you intend to upgrade? Otherwise I do not see the reason you bought this board to match up with a Ryzen 7 1700. I have the same board with a 2700X.


----------



## os2wiz

encrypted11 said:


> Not sure if these pics are late.
> X470-I Strix.
> 
> VRM thermal pads are making good contact.
> ****ty chipset thermal pads crumble upon removal of heat sink. If I'm missing any vital PCB shots let me know, I might have them.


 How did you upload these thumbnails ? The uploads by attachment and drag and drop have been broken for about a month now??? I just ried to upload a picture 10 minutes ago and it failed.


----------



## encrypted11

Desktop site, its below the reply box.

It works when it decides to.


----------



## poah

os2wiz said:


> Those numbers seem very reasonable. Of course on the 2700X testing at 4.1GHZ and 4.2 GHZ would be in order. Do you intend to upgrade? Otherwise I do not see the reason you bought this board to match up with a Ryzen 7 1700. I have the same board with a 2700X.


Because i had a crap B350 board before with no wifi - I've ran the 1700 at 4.1ghz at 1.475v LLC1 to give 1.5v and the VRM temp didn't hit 60C although the CPU temp went skyhigh lol


----------



## os2wiz

poah said:


> Because i had a crap B350 board before with no wifi - I've ran the 1700 at 4.1ghz at 1.475v LLC1 to give 1.5v and the VRM temp didn't hit 60C although the CPU temp went skyhigh lol


Yes the vrm are pretty good, but I hope that is not a 24/7 voltage. Your 1700 won't be crap in 12 months if you keep 1.475 volts. If just a test fine.


----------



## poah

no just for an overclock test. run 3.9 normally


----------



## encrypted11

https://smallformfactor.net/reviews...al1ty-x470-itx-ac-back-future#The-Motherboard

What's a Fairchild YH208P is there a datasheet?

It doesn't look anything like the X370/B350 3+2 phase


----------



## encrypted11

cc @AlphaC


----------



## Ramad

encrypted11 said:


> https://smallformfactor.net/reviews...al1ty-x470-itx-ac-back-future#The-Motherboard
> 
> What's a Fairchild YH208P is there a datasheet?
> 
> It doesn't look anything like the X370/B350 3+2 phase


The MOSFETS are FDPC5030SG from ON Semiconductors: http://www.onsemi.com/PowerSolutions/product.do?id=FDPC5030SG in 3+2 (CPU + SOC) VRM configuration using Intersil ISL95712 which is capable of 4+3, means there are 2 disabled phase connections (1 CPU and 1 SOC connections are disabled).

Every 2 x FDPC5030SG makes 1 VRM phase, that is because they are cheap and that also makes them spread the load to generate less heat, which explains the small heatsink. The CAPs are 12K to makes sure that the motherboard can tolerate high load and heat generation, although I expect the CPU CAPs to run hot (depending on used CPU and/or overclock) under load because airflow is blocked by the VRM heatsink.


----------



## AlphaC

encrypted11 , sorry for the delay

It should be the same as the B350 version with two variants , Fairchild or Sinopower powerblock


Output filtering is on the back side of the board in case you're looking for where the capacitors went.



-------------------

Buildzoid already made a rant a few days ago on B450. I don't fully agree with him though.

The B450 boards look to be promising _somewhat._

Looking forward to seeing what the B450 boards from MSI will perform to and maybe Gigabyte, the Asus and Asrock boards seem to be mostly lazy copy-paste jobs this time around.

https://videocardz.com/76749/asrock-asus-gigabyte-and-msi-b450-motherboards-pictured

Asrock B450 Fatal1ty ITX = copy paste job (likely the Fairchild / Sinopower powerblocks) <-- the standout from Asrock for B450
Asrock B450 Fatal1ty K4 = copy paste job likely Sinopower / NIKOS discrete mosfets ... 3 PWM Phases with "fake doubling" ?
Asrock Pro4 = copy paste job likely Sinopower / NIKOS discrete mosfets

Assume all ATX ASUS to use 4c09B + 4c06B

Asus STRIX B450-F Gaming = B350 Plus copy paste job with better looking heatsink but IO cover to nullify the heatsink? 2 M.2 slots seems to be the major change
Asus STRIX B450 ITX = worse than before likely since the X470 version downgraded current-wise from 50A to 40A in exchange for better monitoring via powerstages
Asus Prime B450M- A = copy paste garbage , see B350M -A
Asus Prime B450M - K = copy paste garbage , see B350M-A
Asus Prime B450 Plus = copy paste with worse heatsink than B350 Plus?
Asus TUF B450 Plus Gaming = copy paste garbage aka B450 Plus (remove the TUF and the Gaming from the name and you derive its origin) , also why bother with a yellowy color when you can buy things that aren't yellow 
Asus TUF B450M Gaming = copy paste garbage aka B450M-A

Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro WIFI = ISL95712 fake 8+3, Onsemi 4c10n + 4c06n , unless it's different than the Aorus Pro
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro = ISL95712 fake 8+3 , Onsemi 4c10n + 4c06n (https://lab501.ro/placi-de-baza/prezentare-b450-aorus-pro/4 suggests it's 4 phase doubled low side with 8 chokes)


Spoiler














Gigabyte B450 Aorus M = needs heatsinks on the SOC and one section of VCORE VRM to be viable but it's likely a fake 8+3 using the Onsemi stuff (see the homepage) , highly likely to be 4 phases doubled low side with 8 chokes
Gigabyte B450M DS3H = garbage 4 phase but they put a heatsink on it , don't expect DS3H to be anything good it never is

MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC = 4x2 something likely ripped from the X470 Pro Carbon or X470 Gaming Plus (Onsemi mosfets 4C024N and 4C029N), I expect great things especially since it doesn't seem to be using cheaper capacitors
MSI B450 Gaming Plus = likely a cheapened 4 phase doubled low side
MSI B450I GAMING PLUS AC = some sort of powerstage apparently <--- standout from MSI
MSI B450 Tomahawk = some sort of 4 phase doubled low side
MSI B450 Bazooka = some sort of 4 phase doubled low side
MSI B450M Mortar = some sort of 4 phase doubled low side probably
MSI B450-A PRO = some sort of 4 phase
B450M PRO-M2 = garbage 4 phase doubled low side


Purchase links I found aren't promising for the B450 pricing though:


Spoiler



MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC:$149.99 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07F85YKLJ/  B450 TOMAHAWK:$119.99 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07F7W5KJS/  B450 GAMING PLUS:$109.99 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07F83RVTC/  B450-A PRO:$99.99 https://www.amazon.com//dp/B07F85YW8R/ 




edit: Did anyone else notice the Gigabyte Aorus board lights up the rear IO from the back? Waste of power IMO


edit2: I think the B450 boards are a lost cause unless they're below $120-130 with WIFI and below $110ish without WIFI. The price difference to a X370/X470 is pretty slim. For example the MSI X470 Carbon is about $160 / $140 after rebate , Asrock X470 Master SLI AC is $130ish, Gigabyte X470 Aorus WIFI is $110 on newegg.


----------



## asdkj1740

gigabyte acutally got significant upgrades on their b450s' spec, which should be appreciated.

ds3h is pricing very low (lowest srp in usnewegg now), with 4 dimm slots. b350 ds3h is 3+3 while b450 d3sh is 4+3 now.

the biggest dissappiontment of gigabye b450 to me is the asymmetric match between mosfets and heatsink coverage...
one set of vcore mosfets is exposed to air on aorus m... while on ds3h board the vrm heatsink takes one set of soc mosfets to act like 5+2?


----------



## AlphaC

An absolute marketing abomination over at MSI but I did find out they have CPU-less BIOS flashback...

https://www.msi.com/Landing/amd-ryzen-b450-gaming-motherboard

On B450 Pro Carbon background it has a RT8894 PWM prominently on display , but the validity of basing it on a background picture on the website in the "tuning" section is low. It's segmented with the addition of an additional 4 pin CPU power connector that's mostly for show.

B450 Tomahawk has no such detail , in fact it is labeled B450*M* Tomahawk so someone was half asleep when putting together the webpage.

B450 Gaming Plus doesn't sugarcoat it, it's a "7 phase" design https://msi.com/Motherboard/B450-GAMING-PLUS.html

As far as Asrock goes , they have the ITX boards up at Newegg for $130
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157844


Asus has a few boards up on Amazon, for example the STRIX B450-F is $130 , B450-I is $160 , TUF B450 is $120 , B450 PLUS is $110


----------



## cssorkinman

AlphaC said:


> An absolute marketing abomination over at MSI but I did find out they have CPU-less BIOS flashback...
> 
> https://www.msi.com/Landing/amd-ryzen-b450-gaming-motherboard
> 
> On B450 Pro Carbon background it has a RT8894 PWM prominently on display , but the validity of basing it on a background picture on the website in the "tuning" section is low. It's segmented with the addition of an additional 4 pin CPU power connector that's mostly for show.
> 
> B450 Tomahawk has no such detail , in fact it is labeled B450*M* Tomahawk so someone was half asleep when putting together the webpage.
> 
> B450 Gaming Plus doesn't sugarcoat it, it's a "7 phase" design https://msi.com/Motherboard/B450-GAMING-PLUS.html
> 
> As far as Asrock goes , they have the ITX boards up at Newegg for $130
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157844
> 
> 
> Asus has a few boards up on Amazon, for example the STRIX B450-F is $130 , B450-I is $160 , TUF B450 is $120 , B450 PLUS is $110


PSST you missed the part where they listed the Tomahawk as having an intel 450 chipset..... lol. Someone dun goofed.


----------



## asdkj1740

well well well, it is interesting, reminding me the 970 3.5g vram things.


----------



## br0da

Biostar X470GTN Gaming Review from Steven


----------



## Melcar

asdkj1740 said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IjWCOXSuKU
> well well well, it is interesting, reminding me the 970 3.5g vram things.



They list it as a "Hybrid VRM", whatever that means. A lot of vendors do "confusing" things like these, not jut GB. It's all marketing.


----------



## asdkj1740

Melcar said:


> They list it as a "Hybrid VRM", whatever that means. A lot of vendors do "confusing" things like these, not jut GB. It's all marketing.


afaik, that "hybrid" comes from the combination of digital pwm and analog mos??

here is the correspondent reddit's link
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/8zy67k/gigabyte_b450_aorus_gaming_pro_pics/


----------



## AlphaC

Goodness, you don't need *49 minutes* to tell people that it's* impossible to be 8 phases* when there's only 4 high side fets...


... TL;DW : double the low side fets cuts your RDS(on) by half it *doesn't cut the current* per fet by half.


-----
EDIT:


Here's the result from Onsemi calculator (http://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/EFFICIENCY SIMULATOR AND MOSFET SELECTOR%2 0FOR%20T3%20AND%20T6.XLSM) by the way , assume a 4 phase design so it's ~ 32.5A per phase if it is 130A for all phases:








This is per PWM phase (i.e. 4 phases).

Circuit 1 , 2 high side fets: 1.779W loss for high side when 2 mosfets used. That would suggest half per mosfet ~ 0.89W each. (at 32.9A it is ~0.95W each) 

--> At 50°C/W to ambient (no heatsink) about + 45°C increase

--> At 25 to 40°C/W to ambient with a typical heatsink application it would still be alright obviously


Circuit 2 , 1 high side fet: 2.105W loss for high side when 1 mosfet used. That's going be hot without a heatsink that works well. (at 32.9A it is ~2.3W each) 

--> At 50°C/W to ambient (no heatsink) about +105 to +115°C increase; 
--> At ~25 to 40°C/W to ambient with a typical heatsink application it would be anywhere to +84°C ... a "good" heatsink implementation would still be in the 80°C area


Meanwhile the low side is around 1.6W loss each. Deadtime and reverse recovery are included here.


Didn't verify their calculator as the back-end is protected (although ripple spec doesn't seem to change much for the mosfet portion), it's just to give a _sense of scale_.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

What I didn't like about the video was just that he always ended up with "because it's bad".

Today's video 



 seems a bit more sensible.

I do hope the quality of these VRMs gets some more media coverage again because it's really irritating to see these kinds of boards with a bunch of series chokes and really crap-end fets.



AlphaC said:


> ... TL;DW : double the low side fets cuts your RDS(on) by half it *doesn't cut the current* per fet by half.


Not sure what you mean by this, the current is split between the 2 fets which means the resistance becomes half.

Not really sure about those numbers either, would have expected the very low duty cycle of the high side fet to make the switching and low side on resistance the dominant factors. Presumably your switching loss is larger for 2 fets because that is a fixed amount of power per switch so 2 fets means 2x power.

Would be interesting to look at the practical performance of different setups like this at different voltages and power ranges.


----------



## AlphaC

It's because two low side or two high side mosfets turn on at the same time in these implementations. You get higher switching losses turning 2 mosfets 1/4 of the time versus one turning on 1/8 of the time. 

For conduction losses if you model the mosfet as 2 resistors in parallel, then it is effectively half the resistance for each PWM phase. It doesn't halve the current per (fake) "phase" , which is why it's effectively 4 phases. Half the current would mean that it would need to be a true 8 phase. I don't know if I'm conveying that properly?


----------



## asdkj1740

gigabyte, asrock, evga
all of them state the number of phases on their webseite.


----------



## asdkj1740

http://www.gigabyte.cz/products/page/mb/b450_aorus_prorev_10#kf
4+4+3

gigabyte always brings us inspiration, sets new standard.

source:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/90fkvu/gigabyte_has_changed_their_vrm_info_on_b450/



https://translate.google.cz/transla...ews.cz/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=200760&edit-text=
"" I tested the power using the AMD Ryzen 7 2700 processor. At the initial setting, the temperature did not exceed 55 ° C. After overclocking at 4 GHz, the 1.4 V temperature exceeded 92 ° C. I only had a desk and I chilled the processor with water, VRM cooled completely passively. After fitting the 120mm fan the temperature dropped to 60 ° C. In a well-ventilated cabinet, the temperatures should be kept up to 83 ° C with an overclocked eight-core Ryzen. ""


assuming the vrm heatsink mounting pressure is correct, i wonder how bad would be those real 4 phases mobos perform
btw, truely thanks to gigabyte, it draws the community a lot attention for learning more about vrm design, which is a good thing.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

AlphaC said:


> It's because two low side or two high side mosfets turn on at the same time in these implementations. You get higher switching losses turning 2 mosfets 1/4 of the time versus one turning on 1/8 of the time.
> 
> For conduction losses if you model the mosfet as 2 resistors in parallel, then it is effectively half the resistance for each PWM phase. It doesn't halve the current per (fake) "phase" , which is why it's effectively 4 phases. Half the current would mean that it would need to be a true 8 phase. I don't know if I'm conveying that properly?


Current per phase is the same, but with fets in parallel the current per fet (or per fake phase) is halved.

But yeah double switching losses (approx) and half the conduction losses seems like the right numbers to me.

Switching power should be the time integral of the voltage*current

Parallel fets makes you have around double the switching time due to the impedance and half the current per fet. So the switching power per fet is the same, 2 fets per phase means it is double overall.

As you said the on state fets are basically resistors so the power losses for on state are halved. P=I^2(R/2)

Alternatively you can consider 2 current paths of half the current but the same resistance which would mean P=2*(I/2)^2R
@asdkj1740

I think reviewers should inform themselves better. Most of what is written on the marketing is complete bollocks anyway.

Phase count is hardly a good metric anyway... there is a huge difference between a 4 phase with cheapo niko semi or SiRa fets and one with IR directfets or the high end powerstages and integrated fets (IR, Nexfet, etc.)


----------



## Spanish Empire

Dear friends,

First of all, I would like to thank the work of those who participate in this thread. I have learned a lot.
I have a problem. I had bad experiences with my Phenom II 1090t and mATX motherboards. Now, I have a 2700x ready to build. I have a Thermaltake V21 chassis (mATX) and I do not know whether to use it for my build or buy an ATX chassis.

My doubts are these:

1) I have read that the VRM (cpu) of strix x370-F / 470-F is stronger than Crosshair VI (6x60A vs 8x40A). I also read that the one in x370-i (itx) was stronger than the one in x470-i (6x60A vs 6x40A). So, the VRM of x370-I (itx) is the same as strix x370-F? Is it stronger in x370-i than in CH VI?

2) I have four possibilities:

- my mATX chassis (€ 0) + new strix x370-i (€ 168) = € 168
- my mATX chassis (€ 0) + new MSI B350I Pro AC (€ 132) = € 132
- new chassis Corsair 540 (€ 115) + amazon refurbished CH Vi (€ 110) = € 225
- new chassis Corsair 540 (€ 115) + amazon refurbished Strx x370-F (€ 95) = € 210

what should I do? What is the best option for a future Ryzen of more cores?

I think the change to ATX format is more expensive, yes, but in that way I will have more possibilities when choosing components in the future.

Oh, I can only go for the Corsair 540 chassis ... it's similar in width to thermaltake v21 and that's (very) important.

Thank you very much and sorry for my English!


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

I would say both of those are pretty safe options.

The IRs aren't the most efficient from what I've been able to get as far as data but they have a very well proven track record.

For the most part these integrated stages perform quite well.

ITX boards aren't ideal power wise, however from what I've tried with my board (z97i plus), it doesn't seem too bad, I can get 100A into my chip with plenty of headroom on the VRM. (6xCSD87350Q5D nexfets)

As long as you don't mind the awkward visual mismatch of an ITX board in a big case (I have the same thing) it shouldn't be a problem at all.


----------



## cssorkinman

Buildzoid's cat


----------



## The Stilt

Overall the situation with B450 board is extremely sad.
Most of the boards are total garbage and so far I have found a single board which I could personally consider to use.

The VRM on ASUS Strix B450-F overheats within 12 minutes of X264 encoding when using a stock 2700X CPU, equipped with an aftermarket cooler (DC Assassin II) in an open air test bench (ambients 16°C lower than AMD spec).
It doesn't even require a 2700X to make ASUS throttle, 2600X with precision boost override enabled will suffice...

The VRM on GIGABYTE B450 AORUS PRO meanwhile has the same exact issues due to almost identical design, however it doesn't cause throttling as either the OTP limit is higher or it is not present at all.

GIGABYTE hits 101°C high-side temperatures easily and ASUS reaches 106°C prior throttling (measured using k-type probe attached to a HS fet).
Both of these boards also use 5000 hours @ 105°C rated caps. MSI is the only one who uses 10K rated ones.

MSI GAMING PRO Carbon seems to be the only board with no issues, since MSI used eight inductors and eight high-side fets in their 4 phase parallel config.
ASUS is a 4 phase config and as is Gigabyte, with the only exception that Gigabyte has eight inductors.

All of them have four CPU VRM phases thou and none of them are properly doubled.

Essentially ASUS and Gigabyte boards have been rendered useless by saving the price of four mosfets.


----------



## asdkj1740

The Stilt said:


> Overall the situation with B450 board is extremely sad.
> Most of the boards are total garbage and so far I have found a single board which I could personally consider to use.
> 
> The VRM on ASUS Strix B450-F overheats within 12 minutes of X264 encoding when using a stock 2700X CPU, equipped with an aftermarket cooler (DC Assassin II) in an open air test bench (ambients 16°C lower than AMD spec).
> It doesn't even require a 2700X to make ASUS throttle, 2600X with precision boost override enabled will suffice...
> 
> The VRM on GIGABYTE B450 AORUS PRO meanwhile has the same exact issues due to almost identical design, however it doesn't cause throttling as either the OTP limit is higher or it is not present at all.
> 
> GIGABYTE hits 101°C high-side temperatures easily and ASUS reaches 106°C prior throttling (measured using k-type probe attached to a HS fet).
> Both of these boards also use 5000 hours @ 105°C rated caps. MSI is the only one who uses 10K rated ones.
> 
> MSI GAMING PRO Carbon seems to be the only board with no issues, since MSI used eight inductors and eight high-side fets in their 4 phase parallel config.
> ASUS is a 4 phase config and as is Gigabyte, with the only exception that Gigabyte has eight inductors.
> 
> All of them have four CPU VRM phases thou and none of them are properly doubled.
> 
> Essentially ASUS and Gigabyte boards have been rendered useless by saving the price of four mosfets.


hi Stilt, would you mind taking some photos about the thermal pads under the vrm heatsink of gigabyte aorus pro?
gigabyte has been using insufficient thickness of thermal pad since z370, the overheat vrm problem can be "solved" by replacing 0.5mm thicker thermal pad. would you try this, thank you.


----------



## Nighthog

The Stilt said:


> Overall the situation with B450 board is extremely sad.
> Most of the boards are total garbage and so far I have found a single board which I could personally consider to use.
> 
> The VRM on ASUS Strix B450-F overheats within 12 minutes of X264 encoding when using a stock 2700X CPU, equipped with an aftermarket cooler (DC Assassin II) in an open air test bench (ambients 16°C lower than AMD spec).
> It doesn't even require a 2700X to make ASUS throttle, 2600X with precision boost override enabled will suffice...
> 
> The VRM on GIGABYTE B450 AORUS PRO meanwhile has the same exact issues due to almost identical design, however it doesn't cause throttling as either the OTP limit is higher or it is not present at all.
> 
> GIGABYTE hits 101°C high-side temperatures easily and ASUS reaches 106°C prior throttling (measured using k-type probe attached to a HS fet).
> Both of these boards also use 5000 hours @ 105°C rated caps. MSI is the only one who uses 10K rated ones.
> 
> MSI GAMING PRO Carbon seems to be the only board with no issues, since MSI used eight inductors and eight high-side fets in their 4 phase parallel config.
> ASUS is a 4 phase config and as is Gigabyte, with the only exception that Gigabyte has eight inductors.
> 
> All of them have four CPU VRM phases thou and none of them are properly doubled.
> 
> Essentially ASUS and Gigabyte boards have been rendered useless by saving the price of four mosfets.


Thanks for some great info there!

I think they are missing a segment between the crap and the overkill extreme top-end boards... <-- the ones with the only good VRM in any fashion.
Why can't they bring the top end VRM to mid-tier and not keep have the mid-tier use the entry level VRM.


----------



## AlphaC

MSI B450I : IR3555 with IR35201 PWM controller 6+2 per HKEPC
https://www.hkepc.com/17041/打造高性能Mini_PC_MSI_B450I_Gaming_Plus_AC
^ my issue with this is how they skimped out elsewhere so badly that it is using ALC887 and a Realtek LAN. It's also seemingly lacking a type-C USB connector on the back panel. Wireless-AC 3168 kind of makes up for it though.
* High current 50A inductors per MSI.


Asrock B450 ITX : ISL95712 PWM with the Sinopower SM7341 powerblocks (6+2 per hkepc) . The SOC is using 2 powerblocks per SOC phase. High current 60A Cooper Bussman inductors (labeled R22).
https://www.hkepc.com/17015
(Source #2 : https://www.anandtech.com/show/1308...motherboard-reviews-fatal1ty-on-a-b450-budget)


Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro : ISL95712 PWM with the 4C10N + 4C06N (doubled low side , 2x inductor layout) in 4+3 PWM setup. The SOC is using one high + low side mosfet per phase.
https://www.hkepc.com/17069/高性價比功能齊全_GIGABYTE_B450_AORUS_Pro_WiFi


Asus B450-F : ASP1405I (rebranded ISL95712 ?) with 4C09B + 4C06B (doubled low side) in 4+2 PWM setup . The SOC seems to be using double the mosfets for high side + low side which is why there are 4 chokes there.
https://www.hkepc.com/17067/ROG_B450電競大板_ASUS_ROG_Strix_B450-F_Gaming



I believe B450 is meant for the Ryzen 5 2600X and the R5 2400G on some boards with better SOC VRM. It is artificial product segmentation.


----------



## cssorkinman

2700 X too much for a ASUS ROG Strix X470-I Gaming in an INWIN 901? Planning on using the supplied cpu cooler initially with an intake fan in the bottom of the case and an exhaust at the back.


----------



## The Stilt

asdkj1740 said:


> hi Stilt, would you mind taking some photos about the thermal pads under the vrm heatsink of gigabyte aorus pro?
> gigabyte has been using insufficient thickness of thermal pad since z370, the overheat vrm problem can be "solved" by replacing 0.5mm thicker thermal pad. would you try this, thank you.


The thermal pads are absolutely fine.
All of the fets had made a proper imprint on it.

Using a single high side fet is the issue.
Adding a second one, like MSI did would reduce the per component power dissipation and make the cooling easier due to larger surface.

101°C is IMO totally unacceptable, especially when the caps are rated for 5K hours (~ 7900 hours at 101°C).


----------



## The Stilt

AlphaC said:


> Asus B450-F : ASP1405I (rebranded ISL95712 ?) with 4C09B + 4C06B (doubled low side) in 4+2 PWM setup . The SOC seems to be using double the mosfets for high side + low side which is why there are 4 chokes there.
> https://www.hkepc.com/17067/ROG_B450電競大板_ASUS_ROG_Strix_B450-F_Gaming


This is pretty interesting as the B450-F board I've got uses ASP1106G controller.
Otherwise the VRM layout is identical, so the controller makes no difference on the issue.


----------



## AlphaC

The ASUS B450 ATX lineup is probably worst per Tom's hardware:
reference Gigabyte X470 Gaming 7 VRM = 22.6°C over ambient
reference MSI X470 Gaming M7 VRM = 30°C over ambient
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro wifi = 66.6°C over ambient
Asus TUF B450 = 69.42°C over ambient
_ The TUF heatsink is severely under designed for its target market, but the Gigabyte B450 heatsink doesn’t fair much better but is properly suited for its target market._
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-b450-aorus-pro-wifi,5705-3.html

(per https://edgeup.asus.com/2018/announcing-asus-b450-motherboards-rog-strix-tuf-gaming-prime/ the only major upgrade for the B450-F is PCIE, aesthetic + audio)


+69°C vs ambient for X470 TUF 
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-tuf-alliance-x470-plus-gaming-atx-motherboard,5688-4.html


STRIX B450-F = 68°C overclocked https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_strix_b450-f_gaming_review/15
^ this seems off to me. The B450-I on the same chart is 77°C when overclocked. In the video he says that it is the same layout as the X470-F Strix which is wrong.


HWUnboxed VRM test has the Gigabyte B450 worse than ASUS' B450 in a no-airflow environment



Spoiler



























Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro , 4200 MHz All cores and ~1.44 Volts *ONLY 5 minutes of heating*:
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/gigabyte_b450_aorus_pro_review,18.html

Gigabyte B450 Aorus B450 Pro , Ryzen 7 2700X ~84-94°C in their testing depending on if it was overclocked to 4.2GHz or stock
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=172287

Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro - only heatsink temperatures

https://www.hardwareinside.de/gigabyte-b450-aorus-pro-im-test-35117/5/



Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro , no OC with H110i on high speed (12V) = 57°C
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8...wifi-amd-x470-motherboard-review/index10.html



Spoiler



MSI X470 M7 , no OC with H110i on high speed (12V) = 53°C (VRM heatsink isn't that great if this is the case)
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8681/msi-x470-gaming-m7-ac-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html

Asrock X470 Taichi , no OC with H110i on high speed (12V) = 36°C
https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8685/asrock-x470-taichi-amd-motherboard-review/index10.html



Gigabyte B450 Aorus pro ("Lucky n00b" Overclocker testing)
http://oc.jagatreview.com/2018/07/hands-on-review-overclocking-gigabyte-b450-aorus-pro-wifis/5/




> OCCT AVX is a heavy workload and not realistic to day-to-day usage, so we tried using Blender (1 hour), which can be a real task an end user could use.
> The results were better, with a maximum of 81 °C Δ T over ambient (97 degrees considering ambient temperature). Giving another approach, if the test would take place in an ambient temperature of 30 degrees Celsius, the reading would be 111 °C.


 http://www.xanxogaming.com/reviews/gigabyte/b450-aorus-pro-wifi-english/7/


ASUS B450-I = 6x IR3553 , SOC is 1x IR3555
https://www.techbang.com/posts/6011...ni-itx-main-machine-board-analysis-assessment

Asus B450-I 
https://www.xfastest.com/thread-221011-1-1.html


ASUS B450-I



> However, I encountered overheating of the device. It was possible to calculate it by activation of thermotrottling. The effectiveness of LinX's work began to fall before our eyes, and the value in the VRM area reached 100 ° C.
> 
> Room temperature overcame the threshold at 28 ° C, so cooling the air to 26 ° C allowed the situation to normalize. I note that all tests were conducted within the framework of an open stand. But, whatever it was, it was possible to overclock the maximum processor and memory without limiting the use of special means.
> Heating the upper edge of the radiator reached 77 ° C, the energy consumption of the stand was within the limits of 64 and 293 watts. On the consumption graph it is interesting to note the jump down at the very end of the test, obviously, this again triggered the protection mechanisms, but they did not manage to influence the result of the calculations.


https://www.overclockers.ua/motherboard/asus-rog-strix-b450-i-gaming/all/


Asrock B450 K4 , SM4336+SM4337 variant
https://www.xfastest.com/thread-221078-1-1.html


Asrock B450 ITX , 110°C with Ryzen 7 2700X overclocked to 4.2GHz



Spoiler










 
MSI B450 Tomahawk , only *5 minutes of heating*
https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_b450_tomahawk_review,18.html


B450 Tomahawk review (Jagatreview's Lucky n00b is part of MSI OC team)
http://oc.jagatreview.com/2018/07/m...k-vs-msi-b350-tomahawk-plus-di-ryzen-7-2700x/


B450 Tomahawk review by Level1techs


Spoiler










 
B450 Tomahawk uses NTMFS4C029N + NTMFS4C024N , Richtek RT8894A PWM (4+2)
http://www.expreview.com/63079-all.html
*Note it has TWO High side fets and TWO low side fets per phase. This in addition to the lower RDS(on) of the Onsemi mosfets used on the board allow it to be competitive with low end X470.









---------------


The MSI B450 Pro Carbon everyone is paying attention to:
R5 2600X @ 4.3GHz , 136 W load, VRM temp = 48.5°C
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/B450_GAMING_PRO_CARBON_AC/14.html

MSI B450-I review at optimumtech


Spoiler










IR35201 + 6X IR3555 for VCore








ITX size board plus small heatsink limits it for R7 2700X



----------------


More B450 coverage
https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/85...oorzieningen-fase-choke-en-mosfet-hoe-zit-het


> ASRock Fatal1ty B450 Gaming K4 Intersil ISL95712 (3x2)+3 Sinopower SM4336NSKP + SM4337NSKP
> Asus RoG Strix B450-F Gaming Digi+ ASP1106 4+(2x2) ON Semiconductor 4C06B + 4C10B
> Asus RoG Strix B450-I Gaming Digi+ ASP1405I 6+1 IR3553M
> Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro Intersil ISL95712 (4x2)+3 1x ON Semiconductor 4C06N + 0,5x 4C10N
> Gigabyte B450M DS3H Intersil ISL95712 4+3 ON Semiconductor 4C06B + 4C10B
> MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC Richtek RT8894A (4x2)+2 2x ON Semiconductor 4C024+ 4C029
> MSI B450 Tomahawk Richtek RT8894A 4+2 2x ON Semiconductor 4C024 + 4C029
> MSI B450-A Pro Richtek RT8894A 4+2 2x ON Semiconductor 4C024 + 4C029
> MSI B450I Gaming Plus AC IR35201 6+1 IR3555M


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

TUF is basically the super budget line for Asus this time around which is a real shame considering the lineage of the Sabertooth and similar boards...

That MSi B350i Gaming doesn't have that small of a heatsink either, problem is probably that it's a solid block of metal with rubbish surface area.

In theory the ITX boards are your best bet if you want a good VRM, but the heatsinks are so rubbish that it makes little difference.

I am not convinced AMD intended for the boards to be VRM segmented between the B and X lines, I am pretty sure that the motherboard manufacturers are doing this entirely by themselves, trying to see what kind of skimping and crummy marketing they can get away with on the low end because to some degree it is mirrored on the intel side within the Z series boards. It is somewhat hard for the board manufacturers to really segment between the B and X boards since 4 SATA ports is enough for the vast majority of the market (and you get 2 extra off the SOC) and multi GPU is basically dead too. But either way, hopefully it won't be too long until we see boards with banks of directfets x)

I attached a preliminary version of a mosfet comparison list, I hope it gives some overview of some of the differences between the different fets. Open for suggestions and feedback


----------



## asdkj1740

The Stilt said:


> The thermal pads are absolutely fine.
> All of the fets had made a proper imprint on it.
> 
> Using a single high side fet is the issue.
> Adding a second one, like MSI did would reduce the per component power dissipation and make the cooling easier due to larger surface.
> 
> 101°C is IMO totally unacceptable, especially when the caps are rated for 5K hours (~ 7900 hours at 101°C).


i doubt that, or i dont believe in gigabyte anymore lol.
do those imprints look like this?
https://youtu.be/HKeGOkJoiIA?t=233
(3:53)

fp5k from japanese factory is more prefered for sure.
thx!


----------



## jclafi

Guys,

I ordered a MSI X470 Gaming Pro motherboard to pair w/ R5 2600. It's not one expensive/top board since my budget is limited. I did search this thread but nothing about it, just some MSI Gaming 7 info.

Any data regading the MSI X470 Gaming Pro VRM ? 

Look´s like is the same MSI X470 Gaming Plus, but other name on it..

For now i will overclock the R5 but in the future i',m planing some R7 CPU.

Thanks !


----------



## The Stilt

asdkj1740 said:


> i doubt that, or i dont believe in gigabyte anymore lol.
> do those imprints look like this?
> https://youtu.be/HKeGOkJoiIA?t=233
> (3:53)
> 
> fp5k from japanese factory is more prefered for sure.
> thx!


Well feel free to do that.










The contact was more than sufficient as you can see.
You can even see the component markings and SMDs from the imprints.

Notice the white mark?
Thats where my k-type probe was installed.
101°C measured with ~ 130W CPU core power draw, in an open air test bench while using a cooler (DC Assassin II) which pushes fly-by air directly to the VRM.

2700X easily consumes >= 125W e.g. during X264 encoding at stock (without even Precision Boost Override being enabled).

The issue only exists because the manufacturers wanted to save < 60 cents in the BOM (the cost of four additional high side fets).
GIGABYTE is not the only one with this issue, ASUS has the same exact one in B450-F Strix. The issue isn't as bad on Gigabyte as it is on ASUS since Gigabyte uses eight inductors (vs. ASUS 4) and that gives a larger surface area to dissipate the heat from.
The difference is around 5°C in favor of GB.


----------



## asdkj1740

The Stilt said:


> Well feel free to do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The contact was more than sufficient as you can see.
> You can even see the component markings and SMDs from the imprints.
> 
> Notice the white mark?
> Thats where my k-type probe was installed.
> 101°C measured with ~ 130W CPU core power draw, in an open air test bench while using a cooler (DC Assassin II) which pushes fly-by air directly to the VRM.
> 
> 2700X easily consumes >= 125W e.g. during X264 encoding at stock (without even Precision Boost Override being enabled).
> 
> The issue only exists because the manufacturers wanted to save < 60 cents in the BOM (the cost of four additional high side fets).
> GIGABYTE is not the only one with this issue, ASUS has the same exact one in B450-F Strix. The issue isn't as bad on Gigabyte as it is on ASUS since Gigabyte uses eight inductors (vs. ASUS 4) and that gives a larger surface area to dissipate the heat from.
> The difference is around 5°C in favor of GB.


thanks for the pic.
yeah i can see those markings and imprints, but according to the z370 disaster, it still needs 0.5mm more thicker resulting in 10~20c drop. judging from a vertical view to the pad thickness problem is confusing.
as long as the spacers have the same height as the thermal pad, then it is unsufficient. would you mind checking this out too, appreciated that.


----------



## The Stilt

asdkj1740 said:


> thanks for the pic.
> yeah i can see those markings and imprints, but according to the z370 disaster, it still needs 0.5mm more thicker resulting in 10~20c drop. judging from a vertical view to the pad thickness problem is confusing.
> as long as the spacers have the same height as the thermal pad, then it is unsufficient. would you mind checking this out too, appreciated that.


The plastic mounting tab (spacer as your refer to it) is 1.5mm thick.
The thickness on the thermal pad is standard 1mm. The thickness of the mosfets is also 1mm, without the tiny amount of solder under them.
0.5mm is more than sufficient as the thermal resistance of these type of gap fillers typically doesn't improve too much with additional pressure.

Add a second high-side fet in parallel to each CPU phase and there would no longer need to have this discussion. MSI did just that with B450 GAMING PRO Carbon and it is absolute fine (high-side peak 83°C @ ~ 130W load).


----------



## AlphaC

jclafi said:


> Guys,
> 
> I ordered a MSI X470 Gaming Pro motherboard to pair w/ R5 2600. It's not one expensive/top board since my budget is limited. I did search this thread but nothing about it, just some MSI Gaming 7 info.
> 
> Any data regarding the MSI X470 Gaming Pro VRM ?
> 
> Look´s like is the same MSI X470 Gaming Pro Plus, but other name on it..
> 
> For now i will overclock the R5 but in the future i',m planing some R7 CPU.
> 
> Thanks !



There's supposedly the Onsemi 4C029 + Onsemi 4C024 used on the MSI X470 boards as well as the B450 Tomahawk + Pro Carbon boards. The biggest difference in the lineup is the use of the IR35201 PWM on the X470 M7 and X470 Pro Carbon. The onsemi mosfets are more efficient in terms of on state resistance than the SM4336 used on one variant of Asrock B450 boards and some low end X470 as well as the 4c06 low side fet used on the ASUS B450 and Gigabyte low end X470/B450.

I don't think there's really any reason to go with a X470 Gaming Pro over a B450 Pro Carbon unless you plan on dual GPUs.


The PCB looks to be the same, the dual M.2 slots on the B450 Pro Carbon is retained and the B450 Pro Carbon has shielded ALC1220 , Intel LAN, and 802.11ac WIFI included. The B450 Pro Carbon appears to retain the same PCB as the X470 Gaming Plus / Gaming Pro which use the RT8894A PWM from Richtek (everything below X470 Pro Carbon that uses the IR35201 PWM instead).



If you look at the B450 Tomahawk results I posted from several sites, the board is capable of handling a Ryzen 7 albeit with higher temperatures vs a top end board (i.e. Crosshair VII Hero , Gaming 7 , Taichi). This isn't surprising since it is not unlike the older generation X370 Gaming Pro Carbon / X370 SLI PLUS , except less inductors (chokes) are used.


----------



## jclafi

Thanks for the detailed explanation! Very usefull !

About the B450 boards, well they are very difficult (i do not found any one) to buy here where i live. You see tons of B350/320 and some X370 w/ good prices, but 4XX chipset series only X470 ones.

So i opted for the most cheap X470 board i could find, and it is the MSI X470 Gaming Pro. I did find the Carbon but was more expensive, about 25%.

If i can reach 4.1Ghz on all cores will be a happy camper! Looking for some DDR now.... 

Oveclocked @ 4.1Ghz w/ DDR4 3466 this PC will rock !

See ya !



AlphaC said:


> There's supposedly the Onsemi 4C029 + Onsemi 4C024 used on the MSI X470 boards as well as the B450 Tomahawk + Pro Carbon boards. The biggest difference in the lineup is the use of the IR35201 PWM on the X470 M7 and X470 Pro Carbon. The onsemi mosfets are more efficient in terms of on state resistance than the SM4336 used on one variant of Asrock B450 boards and some low end X470 as well as the 4c06 low side fet used on the ASUS B450 and Gigabyte low end X470/B450.
> 
> I don't think there's really any reason to go with a X470 Gaming Pro over a B450 Pro Carbon unless you plan on dual GPUs.
> 
> 
> The PCB looks to be the same, the dual M.2 slots on the B450 Pro Carbon is retained and the B450 Pro Carbon has shielded ALC1220 , Intel LAN, and 802.11ac WIFI included. The B450 Pro Carbon appears to retain the same PCB as the X470 Gaming Plus / Gaming Pro which use the RT8894A PWM from Richtek (everything below X470 Pro Carbon that uses the IR35201 PWM instead).
> 
> 
> 
> If you look at the B450 Tomahawk results I posted from several sites, the board is capable of handling a Ryzen 7 albeit with higher temperatures vs a top end board (i.e. Crosshair VII Hero , Gaming 7 , Taichi). This isn't surprising since it is not unlike the older generation X370 Gaming Pro Carbon / X370 SLI PLUS , except less inductors (chokes) are used.


----------



## lb_felipe

@AlphaC and other friends of mine, which of these is better for Ryzen 7 2700X with auto OC (PBO) and 32GB of RAM?

MSI B450 GAMING PRO CARBON AC

MSI X470 GAMING M7 AC


----------



## AlphaC

X470 M7 is far better than both Pro Carbon boards due to the PWM controller and the use of proper doubling. Whether it is overkill is the question. PBO has limits you can set for power and current (PPT = package power tracking, EDC = electrical design current, TDC = thermal design current) , the M7 will have higher limits as a result.



X470 M7 = IR35201 with 6x doublers (IR3598) and 12 high side / 12 low side fets for VCORE
X470 Pro Carbon = IR35201 with 10 high side / 10 low side fets for VCORE, no proper doubling mechanism
B450 Pro Carbon = RT8894A with 8 high side / 8 low side fets for VCORE, no proper doubling mechanism


All of them use the Onsemi 4C029 + 4C024 mosfet combination


----------



## os2wiz

The Stilt said:


> The thermal pads are absolutely fine.
> All of the fets had made a proper imprint on it.
> 
> Using a single high side fet is the issue.
> Adding a second one, like MSI did would reduce the per component power dissipation and make the cooling easier due to larger surface.
> 
> 101°C is IMO totally unacceptable, especially when the caps are rated for 5K hours (~ 7900 hours at 101°C).


Finally MSI is starting to get fairer analysis of the X470 Gaming M7 AC board. Not the best for sure but one of the top 5 or 6 boards for sure. I see the author of Ryzen Memory Calculator had some very good things to say about the M7 in its dedicated thread on AMD motherboards. he said it was the best of X470 boards for memory overclocking.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

IDK... if they are throwing that big of a VRM on it why not just go with powerstages that have integrated drivers? Probably gain quite a lot of efficiency on the driver circuits by doing that.


----------



## jclafi

My SSD and board just arrived....

Now waiting for the R5 2600 and the memory. Got some Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB DDR4 3200 CL16 .

Not the best memory but it is what i can afford.

In the end i'm happy, so that's what count's.

=D



AlphaC said:


> jclafi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guys,
> 
> I ordered a MSI X470 Gaming Pro motherboard to pair w/ R5 2600. It's not one expensive/top board since my budget is limited. I did search this thread but nothing about it, just some MSI Gaming 7 info.
> 
> Any data regarding the MSI X470 Gaming Pro VRM ?
> 
> Look´s like is the same MSI X470 Gaming Pro Plus, but other name on it..
> 
> For now i will overclock the R5 but in the future i',m planing some R7 CPU.
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's supposedly the Onsemi 4C029 + Onsemi 4C024 used on the MSI X470 boards as well as the B450 Tomahawk + Pro Carbon boards. The biggest difference in the lineup is the use of the IR35201 PWM on the X470 M7 and X470 Pro Carbon. The onsemi mosfets are more efficient in terms of on state resistance than the SM4336 used on one variant of Asrock B450 boards and some low end X470 as well as the 4c06 low side fet used on the ASUS B450 and Gigabyte low end X470/B450.
> 
> I don't think there's really any reason to go with a X470 Gaming Pro over a B450 Pro Carbon unless you plan on dual GPUs.
> 
> 
> The PCB looks to be the same, the dual M.2 slots on the B450 Pro Carbon is retained and the B450 Pro Carbon has shielded ALC1220 , Intel LAN, and 802.11ac WIFI included. The B450 Pro Carbon appears to retain the same PCB as the X470 Gaming Plus / Gaming Pro which use the RT8894A PWM from Richtek (everything below X470 Pro Carbon that uses the IR35201 PWM instead).
> 
> 
> 
> If you look at the B450 Tomahawk results I posted from several sites, the board is capable of handling a Ryzen 7 albeit with higher temperatures vs a top end board (i.e. Crosshair VII Hero , Gaming 7 , Taichi). This isn't surprising since it is not unlike the older generation X370 Gaming Pro Carbon / X370 SLI PLUS , except less inductors (chokes) are used.
Click to expand...


----------



## AlphaC

GorbazTheDragon said:


> IDK... if they are throwing that big of a VRM on it why not just go with powerstages that have integrated drivers? Probably gain quite a lot of efficiency on the driver circuits by doing that.



1. Supplier agreements / bulk buy



2. Retooling


----------



## Karpie 2

*Karpie 2*



The Stilt said:


> The thermal pads are absolutely fine.
> All of the fets had made a proper imprint on it.
> 
> Using a single high side fet is the issue.
> Adding a second one, like MSI did would reduce the per component power dissipation and make the cooling easier due to larger surface.


I believe you are wrong here.

If you think that lack of the high side mosfet make the VRM power design less efficient you are right but this is a very small factor because you save on switching losses heavily. 1 mosfet halves the swithing losses comparing to 2 mosfets. Switching losses always dominate in the HS mosfets thats why the Gigabyte HS mosfets (4c10) are not that bad here comparing to MSI (4c029) because the 4c10s are faster. The total change 2 -> 1 mosfet it in the range of 1W per 10W of losses because the Rdson affect the HS mosfet in ~1:10 (Vin:Vout) ratio comparing to the output current. 

To contradict your theory look at the Hardware Unboxed review: the power consumption for B450 Aorus and Asus Strix are the smallest. The Tomahawk dissipates extra 20W and it still has much lower temps. How good can the Tomahawk heatsink be?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqQcgwz1hYA.

To put some perspective on this: usually VRM losses are about 15W for 150W output (~90% efficiency) so Tomahawk doubles this value and still beats easily Strix board - like 20 less degrees.

I think something is wrong with B450 Aorus/Strix but it is not mosfets. If you can measure the temperature difference between mosfet temp and the heatsink temp (on the other side of the thermopad = at any point of metal) it will give some hing. Maybe thermopads are very bad and if replaced it should change the outcome.

To me, something is wrong here as the MSI Tomahawk has to dissipate extra 20W and does it so easily and nobody cares to look where it is dissipated. Think how much higher temp the CPU or RAM will have if extra 20W must be dissipated - still very is no explanation why the CPU or RAM or any other component consumes more power on the Tomahawk vs Strix if it runs the same speed. The only sensible explanation is that VRM is less efficient (VRM design hints into this direction) but 20W would be huge amount to dissipate for the VRM which even the bigger heatsink would not easily handle.


----------



## The Stilt

Karpie 2 said:


> I believe you are wrong here.
> 
> If you think that lack of the high side mosfet make the VRM power design less efficient you are right but this is a very small factor because you save on switching losses heavily. 1 mosfet halves the swithing losses comparing to 2 mosfets. Switching losses always dominate in the HS mosfets thats why the Gigabyte HS mosfets (4c10) are not that bad here comparing to MSI (4c029) because the 4c10s are faster. The total change 2 -> 1 mosfet it in the range of 1W per 10W of losses because the Rdson affect the HS mosfet in ~1:10 (Vin:Vout) ratio comparing to the output current.
> 
> To contradict your theory look at the Hardware Unboxed review: the power consumption for B450 Aorus and Asus Strix are the smallest. The Tomahawk dissipates extra 20W and it still has much lower temps. How good can the Tomahawk heatsink be?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqQcgwz1hYA.
> 
> To put some perspective on this: usually VRM losses are about 15W for 150W output (~90% efficiency) so Tomahawk doubles this value and still beats easily Strix board - like 20 less degrees.
> 
> I think something is wrong with B450 Aorus/Strix but it is not mosfets. If you can measure the temperature difference between mosfet temp and the heatsink temp (on the other side of the thermopad = at any point of metal) it will give some hing. Maybe thermopads are very bad and if replaced it should change the outcome.
> 
> To me, something is wrong here as the MSI Tomahawk has to dissipate extra 20W and does it so easily and nobody cares to look where it is dissipated. Think how much higher temp the CPU or RAM will have if extra 20W must be dissipated - still very is no explanation why the CPU or RAM or any other component consumes more power on the Tomahawk vs Strix if it runs the same speed. The only sensible explanation is that VRM is less efficient (VRM design hints into this direction) but 20W would be huge amount to dissipate for the VRM which even the bigger heatsink would not easily handle.


The efficiency is not the issue behind this.

Of course there is going to be a temperature difference between one or two high-side fets, as long as you are not saturated cooling wise.

At 105A current draw (1.256V) the high-side fets on ASUS and GB have 8.46A Irms per fet.
Meanwhile ASRock B450M Pro4 has 5.64A and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon 4.23A Irms.

Whatever the high-side losses are, ASRock has 50% higher surface area (6 HS) to transfer the heat into the heatsink while MSI has 100% higher area (8 HS).

The VRM heatsinks on all of the boards are extremely hot, but on ASUS you cannot even hold your finger on it for more than a second.

>= 90% VRM efficiency is total BS, no VRM reaches that kind of overall efficiency under full load. Not even VRMs on Intel 2011 or 2066 boards, which generally have high VRM efficiency due to the CPU using FIVR (relatively low current, high output voltage and therefore optimal duty cycle). Some integrated Power Stages (PowIR, PowerBlock, etc.) themselves might achieve >= 90% efficiency in ideal conditions, but not all of the losses occur in the switching components. There are significant losses in the inductors, capacitors and on the PCB traces as well.

The highest efficiency I've measured on a AM4 board is ~ 83% (C7H).
On average the efficiency is less than 80% and the worst I've seen was ~ 75%.

You think it is a coincidence that both boards which have a single high-side fet per CPU phase suffer from this issue, whereas both boards (ASRock B450M Pro4 and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon) which have two don't?
In that case, feel free.


----------



## verticel

Has Asrock improved VRM quality in their B450 motherboard? From pictures I see that it should be the same as the Fata1ity Gaming K4, but I'm not sure since it's not on the hardwareluxx table.
If you had to choose between the Pro4 and MSI Tomahawk what would you go for? I think that B350 versions of those motherboards were the most popular choices among average consumer, at least the impression I got after spending a lot of time in build-suggestion discussions. Also they look like the only decent choice if we rule out MSI PRO Carbon, which honestly is closer to the X470 motherboards price-wise. There's still MSI PRO-A, which even seems to have better heatsinks than the Tomahawk. I'm not an expert though.
But yeah, AsRock PRO4, MSI Tomahawk, MSI PRO-A - which would you go for?


----------



## Karpie 2

The Stilt said:


> The efficiency is not the issue behind this.
> Of course there is going to be a temperature difference between one or two high-side fets, as long as you are not saturated cooling wise.
> 
> At 105A current draw (1.256V) the high-side fets on ASUS and GB have 8.46A Irms per fet.
> Meanwhile ASRock B450M Pro4 has 5.64A and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon 4.23A Irms.


Could you explain how you got these numbers?

Power per mosfet 8.46A * (12V -1.256V) = ~90W RMS (effective) power per fet. It gives ~350W VRM output power for 4 mosfets or ~260W effective output power at 75% efficiency for the VRM.



> Whatever the high-side losses are, ASRock has 50% higher surface area (6 HS) to transfer the heat into the heatsink while MSI has 100% higher area (8 HS).


True if the mosfets are not connected to the same heatsink. Do you think that two circuits with 4 mosfets and 8 mosfets using the exactly the same heatsink will have total power dissipation capabilities different by factor of 2? The heatsink makes the factor less than 2.



> The VRM heatsinks on all of the boards are extremely hot, but on ASUS you cannot even hold your finger on it for more than a second.


I do not know what is "extremely hot, but on ASUS you cannot even hold your finger". Over 60 celcius human skin burns, At 100 celcius surely burns if you keep your finger almost a second on metal. If the mosfets has 105 celcius and heatsink has 65 the transfer of heat from mosfet to heatsink sucks but you can still say that heatsink is hot and you cannot hold your finger on the heatsink.



> >= 90% VRM efficiency is total BS, no VRM reaches that kind of overall efficiency under full load. Not even VRMs on Intel 2011 or 2066 boards, which generally have high VRM efficiency due to the CPU using FIVR (relatively low current, high output voltage and therefore optimal duty cycle). Some integrated Power Stages (PowIR, PowerBlock, etc.) themselves might achieve >= 90% efficiency in ideal conditions, but not all of the losses occur in the switching components. There are significant losses in the inductors, capacitors and on the PCB traces as well.
> 
> The highest efficiency I've measured on a AM4 board is ~ 83% (C7H).
> On average the efficiency is less than 80% and the worst I've seen was ~ 75%.


I was refering to losses in mosfets only as they are covered by the heatsink. The coils and caps does not contribute directly to the heatsink/mosfet temperatures. However, it may explain how MSI Tomahawk consumes more power without heating the VRM heatsink but only if MSI coils and caps were much worse than GBT which is not the case probably. Thermal images do not confirm it in reviews, either.



> You think it is a coincidence that both boards which have a single high-side fet per CPU phase suffer from this issue, whereas both boards (ASRock B450M Pro4 and MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon) which have two don't?
> In that case, feel free.


Your arguments holds only if:
1. The boards with 4 HS mosfets have lower efficiency = higher power consumption at full load which contradicts the results of the tests at the Hardware Unboxed. Their review confirms the high temperature of GBT/Asus boards you are refering to.

2. Or the thermopads on the GBT/Asus sucks providing temperature difference in range of 50 degrees between the mosfets and the heatsink. Thus, the doubling the mosfet area halves this temperature difference and explains 20 degrees in temps between MSI Tomahawk and Asus Strix.

I am curios here because if you are right it means that 8 HS mosfet boards (MSI Tomahawk, MSI Carbon Pro, GBT X470 Gaming Ultra) can easily beat the X470 ROG Strix-F board (6 HS) in temps because they have advantages of 33% more area of mosfets and 75% lower current per mosfet (50% conductive power loss less). In total, these boards should have 33% (66%*50%) of temps of the X470 Strix. Even the mighty IR mosfets on Strix-F won't save the Asus boards (say 50% lower losses than GBT and less for MSI X470/B450).


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

Have to look at the losses on the mosfets as a case by case thing. Some boards have used SiRA12/14DPs on both high and low side which I expect will make the switching losses quite similar on both sides but the conduction losses significantly biased towards the low sides.

Ones using properly selected fets for each side should have more even distribution of the dissipation.

The specs of the different fets used are vastly different in any case.


----------



## The Stilt

Karpie 2 said:


> Could you explain how you got these numbers?
> 
> Power per mosfet 8.46A * (12V -1.256V) = ~90W RMS (effective) power per fet. It gives ~350W VRM output power for 4 mosfets or ~260W effective output power at 75% efficiency for the VRM.
> 
> 
> 
> True if the mosfets are not connected to the same heatsink. Do you think that two circuits with 4 mosfets and 8 mosfets using the exactly the same heatsink will have total power dissipation capabilities different by factor of 2? The heatsink makes the factor less than 2.
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know what is "extremely hot, but on ASUS you cannot even hold your finger". Over 60 celcius human skin burns, At 100 celcius surely burns if you keep your finger almost a second on metal. If the mosfets has 105 celcius and heatsink has 65 the transfer of heat from mosfet to heatsink sucks but you can still say that heatsink is hot and you cannot hold your finger on the heatsink.
> 
> 
> 
> I was refering to losses in mosfets only as they are covered by the heatsink. The coils and caps does not contribute directly to the heatsink/mosfet temperatures. However, it may explain how MSI Tomahawk consumes more power without heating the VRM heatsink but only if MSI coils and caps were much worse than GBT which is not the case probably. Thermal images do not confirm it in reviews, either.
> 
> 
> 
> Your arguments holds only if:
> 1. The boards with 4 HS mosfets have lower efficiency = higher power consumption at full load which contradicts the results of the tests at the Hardware Unboxed. Their review confirms the high temperature of GBT/Asus boards you are refering to.
> 
> 2. Or the thermopads on the GBT/Asus sucks providing temperature difference in range of 50 degrees between the mosfets and the heatsink. Thus, the doubling the mosfet area halves this temperature difference and explains 20 degrees in temps between MSI Tomahawk and Asus Strix.
> 
> I am curios here because if you are right it means that 8 HS mosfet boards (MSI Tomahawk, MSI Carbon Pro, GBT X470 Gaming Ultra) can easily beat the X470 ROG Strix-F board (6 HS) in temps because they have advantages of 33% more area of mosfets and 75% lower current per mosfet (50% conductive power loss less). In total, these boards should have 33% (66%*50%) of temps of the X470 Strix. Even the mighty IR mosfets on Strix-F won't save the Asus boards (say 50% lower losses than GBT and less for MSI X470/B450).


High-side duty: 1.256V (Vout) / 12.10V (Vin) = 0.10380
SQRT(0.10380) = 0.3221

(105 * 0.3221) / 4 or 6 or 8 = Irms per high-side fet.

Unless your cooling solution is saturated (0° DT), increasing the surface area (lowering the per component power density) will lower the component temperature.

I can measure the heatsink temperature on ASUS and GB tomorrow.
The heatsink on ASUS is definitely > 80°C as touching it hurted like hell.

Based on my testing, most to least efficient: MSI, GB, ASUS, ASRock.

The efficiency on ASUS and ASRock is withing 0.5%, yet ASRock runs over 13°C cooler under the same conditions.
And we're talking about VRM made of Niko-Semi fets...


----------



## cssorkinman

Karpie 2 said:


> Could you explain how you got these numbers?
> 
> Power per mosfet 8.46A * (12V -1.256V) = ~90W RMS (effective) power per fet. It gives ~350W VRM output power for 4 mosfets or ~260W effective output power at 75% efficiency for the VRM.
> 
> 
> 
> True if the mosfets are not connected to the same heatsink. Do you think that two circuits with 4 mosfets and 8 mosfets using the exactly the same heatsink will have total power dissipation capabilities different by factor of 2? The heatsink makes the factor less than 2.
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know what is "extremely hot, but on ASUS you cannot even hold your finger". Over 60 celcius human skin burns, At 100 celcius surely burns if you keep your finger almost a second on metal. If the mosfets has 105 celcius and heatsink has 65 the transfer of heat from mosfet to heatsink sucks but you can still say that heatsink is hot and you cannot hold your finger on the heatsink.
> 
> 
> 
> I was refering to losses in mosfets only as they are covered by the heatsink. The coils and caps does not contribute directly to the heatsink/mosfet temperatures. However, it may explain how MSI Tomahawk consumes more power without heating the VRM heatsink but only if MSI coils and caps were much worse than GBT which is not the case probably. Thermal images do not confirm it in reviews, either.
> 
> 
> 
> Your arguments holds only if:
> 1. The boards with 4 HS mosfets have lower efficiency = higher power consumption at full load which contradicts the results of the tests at the Hardware Unboxed. Their review confirms the high temperature of GBT/Asus boards you are refering to.
> 
> 2. Or the thermopads on the GBT/Asus sucks providing temperature difference in range of 50 degrees between the mosfets and the heatsink. Thus, the doubling the mosfet area halves this temperature difference and explains 20 degrees in temps between MSI Tomahawk and Asus Strix.
> 
> I am curios here because if you are right it means that 8 HS mosfet boards (MSI Tomahawk, MSI Carbon Pro, GBT X470 Gaming Ultra) can easily beat the X470 ROG Strix-F board (6 HS) in temps because they have advantages of 33% more area of mosfets and 75% lower current per mosfet (50% conductive power loss less). In total, these boards should have 33% (66%*50%) of temps of the X470 Strix. Even the mighty IR mosfets on Strix-F won't save the Asus boards (say 50% lower losses than GBT and less for MSI X470/B450).


My MSI 990 FXA GD-80 and 990 gaming run cooler ( vrm, socket and cpu temps ) than my Crosshair formula Z's . Initially so did my 970 gaming, however after a year and a half of abuse by FX 8 cores - it's now running much warmer. I think I managed to singe the thermal pads while attempting to get it into the 24/7 5 ghz club ( 5 ghz ibt avx on an 8 core FX).


----------



## asdkj1740

checked two msi b450 mobos today, to me, msi b450(m) gaming plus has better vcore's heatsink design than the msi b450 tomahawk one: more sides' fins and the middle thickness is smaller(the middle part of the tomahawk's vcore heatsink is quiet thick).

however the thermal pads imprints under the gaming plus's vcore's heatsink are not impressive at all. 
beside, the screws of that heatsink (out of factory state) still have got plently room to tighten them further. 
didnt have time to check the actual vrm temp differences though.


----------



## AlphaC

*B450 Tomahawk results with NH-U14S , R7 2700X @ 4.1GHz 1.408V and low-midgrade 3200C15 RAM*
https://ru.gecid.com/prtart.php?id=53069


> radiator cooling chipset - 41 ° C; radiator cooling elements of the power supply system - 43 ° C (when overclocked - 48 ° C); the chokes of the power subsystem are 48 ° C (in the case of overclocking - 62 ° C).


When B450 Tomahawk goes on sale for sub $100 / sub € 100 it will be worth buying due to the Storemi (Fuzedrive license), it fixes two main things for people that don't care about LAN or audio : I/O has acquired USB 3.1 gen 2 _with type C_, VRM has been mostly fixed , & there's a BIOS flashback function. Troubleshooting is achieved by 4 LEDs indicating which main component it is stalling on, without specifics (same as B450 Aorus boards).

It is lacking the better audio, LAN, and wifi from the Pro Carbon AC as well as 2nd M.2 so the Pro Carbon B450 would be my recommendation for ATX sized B450. The MSI B350 Gaming Pro carbon is around 100 Euros / USD but has 1 M.2 slot and lacks wifi+BT , along with worse VRM components and a smaller VRM heatsink.


B450 Tomahawk results on Ryzen 5 hexcore are respectable with 3400C16 RAM (3200C16 kit)
https://www.overclockzone.com/article/11578-performance-test/

(bios modder) ket's review of* Asrock X470 K4 *: no LLC likely due to ISL95712 PWM


https://www.win-raid.com/t3850f51-Asrock-Fatal-ty-X-Gaming-K-Review.html said:


> Measuring load temperatures for the VRM heatsinks reveal them to be pretty average compared to other results with the thermal load being distributed quite evenly despite there being no heatpipe to help transfer any thermal load. Overall the results from the X470 K4 are average for the thermal tests, fairly comfortably ahead of the GT7 and X370-F, but a distant second when looked at next to the MSI X370 Titanium, that board has a VRM heatsink truly in a league of its own. It is disappointing to see however that despite the heatsinks on the X470 K4 being a little bulkier than on its predecessor that this has not helped in reducing VRM temperatures at least a little the VRMs are one of the hottest areas in a modern PC thus keeping the area as cool as possible should be of paramount importance to ensure reliable operation and longevity of component lifespan.


https://www.win-raid.com/t3850f51-Asrock-Fatal-ty-X-Gaming-K-Review.html
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?296528-Asrock-Fatal1ty-X470-Gaming-K4-Review



* His board was SM4336+SM4337 variant not the random NIKOS variant.




-----


Aorus B450 , managed 66°C somehow

http://diy.pconline.com.cn/1152/11523705_3.html


----------



## lb_felipe

Recommend a 32GB kit for that motherboard with best ratio betwenn clock and timings on the safe bet side.

i was thinking on F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX which is QVL'd by G.Skill for that MB, but I feel we can go better off.

Thanks in advance.


Edit:
Sorry. Wrong Thread. But anyway I kept this. The MB on question is the ASUS C7H.


----------



## jclafi

The build is done !

AMD Ryzen R5 2600
MSI X470 Gaming Pro
nVIDIA GTX1060 6GB
Corsair 16 GB DDR4 3200 CL16
WD Green 240 GB M.2
Kyngston A400 480GB
Seagate Barracuda 1Tb 7200RPM 64Mb
Corsair TX-850

My FX will go to wife.

=D


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

Do we have any info on the X470 Gaming pro VRM? It's not filled in on the HWluxx list...

Presumably same as gaming plus but would be nice if we could verify.


----------



## Solohuman

jclafi said:


> The build is done !
> 
> AMD Ryzen R5 2600
> MSI X470 Gaming Pro
> nVIDIA GTX1060 6GB
> Corsair 16 GB DDR4 3200 CL16
> WD Green 240 GB M.2
> Kyngston A400 480GB
> Seagate Barracuda 1Tb 7200RPM 64Mb
> Corsair TX-850
> 
> My FX will go to wife.
> 
> =D


Looks good, going to OC & bench? if you do, looking forward to results.


----------



## The Stilt

GorbazTheDragon said:


> Do we have any info on the X470 Gaming pro VRM? It's not filled in on the HWluxx list...
> 
> Presumably same as gaming plus but would be nice if we could verify.


Based on the layout, I would guess: RT8894A in 4+2 phase configuration, with the CPU phases connected in parallel (two high-side, two low-side and two inductors) per phase.


----------



## jclafi

Thanks dude !

I did my best to find some good parts for this rig, since my budget was very limited. Yesterday i did update the
BIOS to v14, and a clean Win10 install. Now updating drivers and windows.

Yes overclocking is in the agenda, but not w/ this stock cooler. My guess next month or so i can get a mid of the road CPU cooler,
i will stay on air however.

In the end a happy moment, it's been some good 6 years using my FX and i do like that CPU, but i promissed myself to go Ryzen+ since
i really enjoy AMD CPU's. I like intel too, great performers, but i feel some strange need to support AMD.

Today i plan on play some DOOM, i'll be back w/ some feedback.

=D



Solohuman said:


> Looks good, going to OC & bench? if you do, looking forward to results.


----------



## GameBoy

Is there any info on the B450M Mortar VRM's? What's the likelihood if it having the same VRM as the B450 Tomahawk? Trying to find a Micro ATX board that will handle an overclocked 2700X.


----------



## Elrick

GameBoy said:


> Trying to find a Micro ATX board that will handle an overclocked 2700X.



WE are all still waiting for that special Micro ATX motherboard to arrive, just don't know when it'll be here :cigar: .


----------



## The Stilt

GameBoy said:


> Is there any info on the B450M Mortar VRM's? What's the likelihood if it having the same VRM as the B450 Tomahawk? Trying to find a Micro ATX board that will handle an overclocked 2700X.


Richtek RT8894A
SinoPower SM4337 high-side
SinoPower SM4503 low-side
3 internal drivers for VDDCR_CPU, 3 external Richtek RT9624F drivers (1 for VDDCR_CPU, 2 for VDDCR_SOC)

Not great, but still far better than ASUS B450-F or GIGABYTE AORUS B450 PRO.

Will easily handle a 2700X, as long as you can provide air flow to the VRM heatsink.


----------



## br0da

Just one highside and one lowside FET per phase for VDDCR_CPU?


----------



## The Stilt

br0da said:


> Just one highside and one lowside FET per phase for VDDCR_CPU?


Two, obviously.


----------



## br0da

Great, thx!


----------



## GameBoy

The Stilt said:


> Richtek RT8894A
> SinoPower SM4337 high-side
> SinoPower SM4503 low-side
> 3 internal drivers for VDDCR_CPU, 3 external Richtek RT9624F drivers (1 for VDDCR_CPU, 2 for VDDCR_SOC)
> 
> Not great, but still far better than ASUS B450-F or GIGABYTE AORUS B450 PRO.
> 
> Will easily handle a 2700X, as long as you can provide air flow to the VRM heatsink.


Cheers mate. Would you say it's a lot worse than the Tomahawk/B450-A or just a little worse/comparable?


----------



## The Stilt

GameBoy said:


> Cheers mate. Would you say it's a lot worse than the Tomahawk/B450-A or just a little worse/comparable?


The VRM on B450M Tomahawk is identical to the ATX version, aside of the fets from the different manufacturer (SinoPower vs OnSemi) and the missing SoC VRM heatsink on the B450M.
SoC heatsink is not really needed as the worst case load on the SoC VRM is typically less than 15W.

MSI seems to use identical VRMs on their B450 lineup, outside the Gaming Pro Carbon.

Even the B450 Gaming Plus has identical VRM.


----------



## AlB80

Vgs.on=10V Tj=25C​ 
Low side mosfet - Rds.on typical / max (mOhm) - Id (A) - R.ds.on adjustment for Tj=125C (percent) - datasheet url - notes

good
SinoPower SM7341EH (dual) - 1.0 / 1.2 - 25A - +50% - data
NikoSem PK612DZ (dual) - 1.4 / 1.9 - 20A - +90% - data_ext
FairChild FDPC5030 (dual) - 1.9 / 2.4 - 25A - +40% - data_ext - acquired by OnSemi
OnSemi 4C86N (dual) - 1.7 / 2.6 - 30A - +50% - data
Ubiq QN3107 - 2.1 / 2.6 - 30A - +40% - data
TI CSD87350 (dual) - 2.1 / 2.8 - 20A - +30% - data - Vgs.on=4.5V, Vgs.on.max=8V
OnSemi 4C024N - 2.3 / 2.8 - 30A - +50% - data
SinoPower SM4503 - 2.5 / 3.0 - 20A - +50% - data
NikoSem PK632BA - 2.1 / 3.3 - 20A - +60% - data

not bad
NXP PH4030AL - 2.72 / 4.0 - 15A - +50% - data_ext
OnSemi 4C06N - 3.2 / 4.0 - 30A - +50% - data
Vishay SiRA12BDP RA12 - 2.7 / 4.3 - 10A - +40% - data
Vishay SiRA12DP RA12 - 3.2 / 4.3 - 10A - +50% - data_ext

bad
AdvancedPower AP4024GEMT - 3.5 / 4.5 - 20A - +40% - data
Ubiq QN3054 - 3.8 / 4.8 - 30A - +40% - data
SinoPower SM4336 - 4.4 / 5.3 - 30A - +50% - data
NikoSem PK618BA - 3.7 / 5.5 - 20A - +60% - data
SinoPower SM4364 - 4.7 / 5.7 - 40A - +50% - data


----------



## jclafi

So i did overclock it a little, so far 4.0 Ghz.

Stiil on stock cooler, this CPU is really cold, but i ordered one Cooler Master 212 Turbo factory push/pull.

Some results.... CPUz and R15. W/ this overclock already beat the S.T performance of the i5 8400 in most app´s, with is nice.

R5 [email protected] w/ LPX [email protected] 



Solohuman said:


> Looks good, going to OC & bench? if you do, looking forward to results.


----------



## realtomatoes

haven't followed the thread much since i got my taichi x370 last year.
so much drama with the new boards, i see.
is there any board worth looking into that's better than my current if i were to upgrade?


----------



## Fanu

realtomatoes said:


> haven't followed the thread much since i got my taichi x370 last year.
> so much drama with the new boards, i see.
> is there any board worth looking into that's better than my current if i were to upgrade?


crosshair VII hero is the only one worth the upgrade in your case (and its mostly cause it has better BIOS than taichi boards)


----------



## Solarity

josephimports said:


> Changes/Modifications on the Biostar X470GT8 vs X370GT7
> 
> Added clock generator
> Added clear cmos button
> CPU socket changed from Lotes to Foxconn.
> Memory/CPU traces altered
> PCB layer increased from 4 to 6.
> AM3 mounting bracket support
> Different (upgraded?) CPU VRM chokes
> Relocated debug LED
> LAN changed from Realtek to Intel
> Improved fan control in bios


This looks awesome, I am annoyed at the big names as of late and it seems like has a very good quality VRM. Seems very similar to the Crosshar 7 Hero w/ just one less VRM phase.

Do you happen to have this board, if so how is it?


----------



## jclafi

CPU cooler Just arrived, now the build is complete!

DOOM Ultra Stock Cooler @ 4.0Ghz - 66ºc

DOOM Ultra Hyper 212 Turbo @ 4.1Ghz - 51ºc


----------



## AlphaC

http://greentechreviews.ru/2018/08/11/obzor-materinskoj-platy-asus-prime-b450-plus/
^ B450 Plus review

http://greentechreviews.ru/2018/08/11/obzor-materinskoj-platy-asus-tuf-b450-plus-gaming/
^ B450 TUF Plus review

http://greentechreviews.ru/2018/08/11/obzor-materinskoj-platy-asus-prime-b450m-a/
^ B450M-A review


----------



## poah

realtomatoes said:


> haven't followed the thread much since i got my taichi x370 last year.
> so much drama with the new boards, i see.
> is there any board worth looking into that's better than my current if i were to upgrade?


depends what you think is an upgrade.


----------



## detrophy

Hey guys, is there a pcb breakdown available for X470 Taichi Ultimate, or is this board identical with the x470 Taichi?

Is there a thermal review available?

EDIT:

Oh, I´ve searched on the net, but haven't found anything.


----------



## AlphaC

detrophy said:


> Hey guys, is there a pcb breakdown available for X470 Taichi Ultimate, or is this board identical with the x470 Taichi?
> 
> Is there a thermal review available?
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Oh, I´ve searched on the net, but haven't found anything.



X470 Taichi is literally a reskin/repaint of the X370 Taichi with some value adds such as StoreMi license (worth $20) and USB 3.1 gen 2 header


The gist is : it is a very good board.


----------



## Solohuman

jclafi said:


> So i did overclock it a little, so far 4.0 Ghz.
> 
> Stiil on stock cooler, this CPU is really cold, but i ordered one Cooler Master 212 Turbo factory push/pull.
> 
> Some results.... CPUz and R15. W/ this overclock already beat the S.T performance of the i5 8400 in most app´s, with is nice.
> 
> R5 [email protected] w/ LPX [email protected]


That's very good, I'd be happy with that if using 2600.

My 2600X & MSI gaming pro carbon ac should be here end of this week. Time to reinstall win 10 too!


----------



## detrophy

Today, I've learned that the X470 is literally the same as the X370, does someone know the exact limits of EDC and PPT of this Board wich are good for daily usage? (no 24/7/365)

Im running this board at this moment at 140W cTDP, 168A EDC and 114A TDC.

The next big question is: Is the 1.50 BIOS better at memory and has less, or maybe none, bugs than 1.20?





AlphaC said:


> X470 Taichi is literally a reskin/repaint of the X370 Taichi with some value adds such as StoreMi license (worth $20) and USB 3.1 gen 2 header
> 
> 
> The gist is : it is a very good board.


Thank you!


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

AlB80 said:


> Vgs.on=10V Tj=25C​
> Low side mosfet - Rds.on typical / max (mOhm) - Id (A) - R.ds.on adjustment for Tj=125C (percent) - datasheet url - notes
> 
> good
> SinoPower SM7341 (dual) - 1 / 1.2 - 25A - +50% - data
> OnSemi 4C86N (dual) - 1.7 / 2.6 - 30A - +50% - data
> Ubiq QN3107 - 2.1 / 2.6 - 30A - +40% - data
> TI CSD87350 (dual) - 2.1 / 2.8 - 20A - +30% - data - Vgs.on=4.5V, Vgs.on.max=8V
> OnSemi 4C024N - 2.3 / 2.8 - 30A - +50% - data
> SinoPower SM4503 - 2.5 / 3 - 20A - +50% - data
> NikoSem PK632BA - 2.1 / 3.3 - 20A - +60% - data
> 
> not bad
> NXP PH4030AL - 2.72 / 4 - 15A - +50% - data_ext
> OnSemi 4C06N - 3.2 / 4 - 30A - +50% - data
> Vishay SiRA12BDP RA12 - 2.7 / 4.3 - 10A - +40% - data
> Vishay SiRA12DP RA12 - 3.2 / 4.3 - 10A - +50% - data_ext
> 
> bad
> AdvancedPower AP4024GEMT - 3.5 / 4.5 - 20A - +40% - data
> Ubiq QN3054 - 3.8 / 4.8 - 30A - +40% - data
> SinoPower SM4336 - 4.4 / 5.3 - 30A - +50% - data
> NikoSem PK618BA - 3.7 / 5.5 - 20A - +60% - data
> SinoPower SM4364 - 4.7 / 5.7 - 40A - +50% - data


[/QUOTE]

Not the most useful comparison when you put high and low side fets in the same comparison when one is running at almost 10x the duty cycle of the other...

The low side fets generally prioritise RDSon while the high sides can have better switching characteristics at expense of slightly worse on-state performance.

Some fets are used on both high and low sides too...


----------



## jclafi

*Really good CPU !*

I´ve been busy this week but found some time to enjoy some overclocking, and this is a great CPU to clock UP. I´m happy that i do not buy one i5 8400. In the end 4.3Ghz is possible w/ my R5 2600 but temps are way off, since 1.46v is required to run the CPU that high.

So right now it runs @ 4.2Ghz w/ 1.40v LLC auto. Memory @ 3200 w/ tunned timmings and 1.42v, i did use Ryzen RAM Calculator, i recommend you do too. I re-tested R15 and CPUz benchies w/ the 4.2Ghz overclock, the thing is more then 2x faster than my old FX in M.T. 

Amazing !

4.0Ghz Scores
CPUz: S.T: 461 - M.T: 3860
R15: S.T: 169 - M.T: 1376

4.2Ghz Scores
CPUz: S.T: 486 - M.T: 3880
R15: S.T: 175 - M.T: 1445

The performance @ 4.2Ghz is fantastic ! This CPU really rocks ! 

Congratulations for your R5 2600X and what a great motherboard you got! Time for some fun ! You will enjoy a lot your R5, such fun CPU to play with.

What RAM you have? I´m waiting for some benchies, CPUz and R15 let´s compare both machines !

=D



Solohuman said:


> That's very good, I'd be happy with that if using 2600.
> 
> My 2600X & MSI gaming pro carbon ac should be here end of this week. Time to reinstall win 10 too!


----------



## Shift.

Hey guys, excellent thread. Looking for an mATX/ITX board with a solid VRM, but none of the choices available right now look very promising.

I was scrolling through the last few pages but didn't catch these 2 being mentioned, which seemed like the best choices available on the Egg.

MSI B450 Mortar: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144194

GB Aorus M: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145081

Asrock Pro M: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157843

Between these, any one that is particularly better? Or all they all so terrible I should just hold off and wait for something better?

Thanks guys.


----------



## Fanu

Shift. said:


> Hey guys, excellent thread. Looking for an mATX/ITX board with a solid VRM, but none of the choices available right now look very promising.
> 
> I was scrolling through the last few pages but didn't catch these 2 being mentioned, which seemed like the best choices available on the Egg.
> 
> MSI B450 Mortar: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144194
> 
> GB Aorus M: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145081
> 
> Asrock Pro M: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157843
> 
> Between these, any one that is particularly better? Or all they all so terrible I should just hold off and wait for something better?
> 
> Thanks guys.


there is also this 

https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/g...-b450-motherboard-(b450i-aorus-pro-wifi).html


----------



## Ramad

Shift. said:


> Hey guys, excellent thread. Looking for an mATX/ITX board with a solid VRM, but none of the choices available right now look very promising.
> 
> I was scrolling through the last few pages but didn't catch these 2 being mentioned, which seemed like the best choices available on the Egg.
> 
> MSI B450 Mortar: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813144194
> 
> GB Aorus M: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813145081
> 
> Asrock Pro M: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157843
> 
> Between these, any one that is particularly better? Or all they all so terrible I should just hold off and wait for something better?
> 
> Thanks guys.



No mini ATX comes close, regarding VRM capability, to:


MSI B350I Pro AC: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B350I-PRO-AC
or 
MSI B450I Gaming Plus AC: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B450I-GAMING-PLUS-AC


Both have 6+2 true phases using IR3555 for CPU cores and SOC.


----------



## GorbazTheDragon

The ITX boards (apart from a few) have better VRMs than most of the mATX ones, they do have smaller heatsinks though so you need to blow more air over them.


----------



## rdr09

jclafi said:


> CPU cooler Just arrived, now the build is complete!
> 
> DOOM Ultra Stock Cooler @ 4.0Ghz - 66ºc
> 
> DOOM Ultra Hyper 212 Turbo @ 4.1Ghz - 51ºc


Very nice.


----------



## Shift.

Ramad said:


> No mini ATX comes close, regarding VRM capability, to:
> 
> 
> MSI B350I Pro AC: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B350I-PRO-AC
> or
> MSI B450I Gaming Plus AC: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/B450I-GAMING-PLUS-AC
> 
> 
> Both have 6+2 true phases using IR3555 for CPU cores and SOC.


Thanks to everyone for all the suggestions. Based on all your posts and this video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWAwOH-egFs], have decided to go with the B450I Gaming Plus AC.


----------



## jclafi

Thanks dude !

=)



rdr09 said:


> Very nice.


----------



## AlB80

> Not the most useful comparison when you put high and low side fets in the same comparison when one is running at almost 10x the duty cycle of the other...


This table contains information only for low fets for AM4 and 1151.
What mosfets are not used as low or intended to be used as hi?



> Some fets are used on both high and low sides too...


I know. Is there AM4 board with such configuration?


----------



## asdkj1740

msi b450m mortar.
the thermal pad's imprints are much more impressive than that on the atx versions of mortar/gaming plus.


----------



## buddywh

asdkj1740 said:


> msi b450m mortar.
> the thermal pad's imprints are much more impressive than that on the atx versions of mortar/gaming plus.


The finning on that heatsink looks like it might actually be effective at dissipating some thermal energy into the air.

Any information on performance like how warm the VRM gets under load?


----------



## br0da

Gigabyte B450I Aorus Pro WiFi @ coolpc TW
-> IR35201 (4+2) with 4x IR3556 for VCore and 2x IR3556 for SoC
ASRock B450 Gaming-ITX/ac @ Coolenjoy
-> ISL95712 (3+2) with 6x FDPC5030 ('fake doubled') for VCore and 4x FDPC5030 (two per phase) for SoC
ASRock Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4 @ Chiphell
-> ISL95712 (4+2) with 8x SM4337 & SM4336 ('fake doubled') for VCore and 4x SM4337 & SM4336 ('fake doubled') for SoC. Just like alphaC already figured out by asking the ASRock support.


----------



## realtomatoes

am looking at an itx mobo for a 2700x. which mobo should i look into?


----------



## Kokin

^I started researching ITX boards for a 2700X and I'm between the Asus Strix X470-I ($190) or ASRock Fatal1ty X470 ITX ($167). The MSI B450 ITX board seems to have the best VRMs, but the lack of CPU Voltage offset options is a no-go for me.

I'll be cooling the 2700X with an EK Supremacy EVO RGB block and my 1080Ti with an EK waterblock, so I don't expect CPU/GPU temps to be an issue. However, my main concern is that the VRM heatsink for either board may not get effective cooling due to my custom loop. It will mainly be cooled by a Gentle Typhoon exhaust fan, so there isn't much direct air blowing on the VRM heatsinks. I do have a 40mm fan as seen in the picture below.

Any advice on which to go for? Main use case is gaming. Thanks!

Some key comparison points: 
-Asus has a true 6-phase VRM, while ASRock only has 3-phase VRM. Asus wins in this regard, but the ASRock uses decent components.
-ASRock has double the WiFi speeds (1733Mbps) as well as Bluetooth 5.0 vs Asus with only 867Mbps and BT 4.2. ASRock wins hands down if you plan to use WiFi, although I will be using LAN. 
-Asus has double m.2 slots with a heatsink for the m.2 at the front side, ASRock only has one m.2 slot in the backside without any heatsink. Asus wins.
-ASRock has P/S2 support, USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-C and Optical SPDIF out, whereas the Asus has none of these ports available. ASRock wins.
-I personally prefer the PCB layout of the ASRock better, although I don't expect to use all 4 SATA ports like I currently am on my Z77 board, so the Asus wouldn't be a wiring mess with 2 of the SATA ports being between the memory slots and PCI-E slot.
-Both have 5V and 12V RGB headers
-Both have decent UEFI BIOS menus
-Both are aesthetically similar with a black/gray theme

Top-down view of my current setup:


----------



## Fanu

edit*

wrong recommendations


----------



## poah

Kokin said:


> The MSI B450 ITX board seems to have the best VRMs, but the lack of CPU Voltage offset options is a no-go for me


 off set voltage makes no real difference other than a bit of power saving At idle. 

I used a rear intake on my old b350 tomahawk. Was enough to keep the vrm temps under 65 on my ryzen 1700 overclocked to 3.9 @ 1.325v.


----------



## Fanu

poah said:


> off set voltage makes no real difference other than a bit of power saving At idle.


you also save power at load since max voltage is also offset


----------



## cssorkinman

Fanu said:


> you also save power at load since max voltage is also offset




It's so tiny of an amount it isn't worth worrying about. Nobody is THAT green.....lol.


----------



## Fanu

cssorkinman said:


> It's so tiny of an amount it isn't worth worrying about. Nobody is THAT green.....lol.


what do you mean? with offset of -0.1125 my 2700X never goes over 1.42~V during heavy load

if I dont apply voltage offset, voltage goes up to 1.52~V (which is over safe values - OK for short bursts, but Not OK for everyday work)

its not about saving power as much as it is about running your CPU at safe voltage and lower temps so its easier to cool / so cores can boost higher


----------



## Solohuman

The B450 board in my rig builder profile has NO cpu voltage offset. While typing this from that rig with only 1 tab in browser open & nothing else but Win 10 making this capable. My power meter measures only 65-70w draw for whole system minus monitor from the mains plug in the wall. 

No complaints about that whatsoever!


----------



## cssorkinman

Fanu said:


> what do you mean? with offset of -0.1125 my 2700X never goes over 1.42~V during heavy load
> 
> if I dont apply voltage offset, voltage goes up to 1.52~V (which is over safe values - OK for short bursts, but Not OK for everyday work)
> 
> its not about saving power as much as it is about running your CPU at safe voltage and lower temps so its easier to cool / so cores can boost higher


I've been running my 1800x over 1.51 volts @ 4175 mhz for about 16 months now - in the case of the original Ryzen , keep em cool and it won't hurt them. As for power savings - It's all about load honestly - the difference is minscule at idle. 
It's possible the new chips are different , but I'm much better off running all cores at their max fequency rather than futzing around with boost on my 1800x .


----------



## Struzzin

Does anyone have any idea about voltage on Ryzen for a 3.7 All core ?
I have done 3 Ryzen builds the 1600 and 1700 I did for others were just drop and done. 
My 1700X is @ 3.7 I was getting the BSOD System Thread Exemption Not Handled - is this because my my Voltage was too low ?



Struzzin


----------



## cssorkinman

Struzzin20 said:


> Does anyone have any idea about voltage on Ryzen for a 3.7 All core ?
> I have done 3 Ryzen builds the 1600 and 1700 I did for others were just drop and done.
> My 1700X is @ 3.7 I was getting the BSOD System Thread Exemption Not Handled - is this because my my Voltage was too low ?
> 
> 
> 
> Struzzin


According to silicon lottery 100% of 1700X's tested will do 3.7 stable on 1.36 volts under their test conditions - i believe they use a 240 mm clc for cooling.


----------



## Struzzin

OH WOW
I have mine set at 1.18150 is that too low ??????
Might have to go and set that up a bit higher


----------



## realtomatoes

Kokin said:


> Some key comparison points:
> -Asus has a true 6-phase VRM, while ASRock only has 3-phase VRM. Asus wins in this regard, but the ASRock uses decent components.
> -ASRock has double the WiFi speeds (1733Mbps) as well as Bluetooth 5.0 vs Asus with only 867Mbps and BT 4.2. ASRock wins hands down if you plan to use WiFi, although I will be using LAN.
> -Asus has double m.2 slots with a heatsink for the m.2 at the front side, ASRock only has one m.2 slot in the backside without any heatsink. Asus wins.
> -ASRock has P/S2 support, USB 3.1 Gen2 Type-C and Optical SPDIF out, whereas the Asus has none of these ports available. ASRock wins.
> -I personally prefer the PCB layout of the ASRock better, although I don't expect to use all 4 SATA ports like I currently am on my Z77 board, so the Asus wouldn't be a wiring mess with 2 of the SATA ports being between the memory slots and PCI-E slot.
> -Both have 5V and 12V RGB headers
> -Both have decent UEFI BIOS menus
> -Both are aesthetically similar with a black/gray theme
> 
> Top-down view of my current setup:


nice summary.
thanks.


----------



## VeritronX

Struzzin20 said:


> OH WOW
> I have mine set at 1.18150 is that too low ??????
> Might have to go and set that up a bit higher


My 1700 will do 3.7 stable at that voltage.. but it also does 4ghz stable with less than 1.4v so it's definitely above average.


----------



## virpz

This is what i got by phase with some of the "good" fets listed there...










15	esr_C (mΩ)
0,33	uH
820	uF
60	I-Pw ( mW)
0,23	I-Winding (mΩ)
2,5	R-pcb (mΩ)
0,4	Rgx - HS (Ω)


----------



## virpz

AlB80 said:


> Vgs.on=10V Tj=25C​
> Low side mosfet - Rds.on typical / max (mOhm) - Id (A) - R.ds.on adjustment for Tj=125C (percent) - datasheet url - notes
> 
> good
> SinoPower SM7341EH (dual) - 1.0 / 1.2 - 25A - +50% - data
> NikoSem PK612DZ (dual) - 1.4 / 1.9 - 20A - +90% - data_ext
> FairChild FDPC5030 (dual) - 1.9 / 2.4 - 25A - +40% - data_ext - acquired by OnSemi
> OnSemi 4C86N (dual) - 1.7 / 2.6 - 30A - +50% - data
> Ubiq QN3107 - 2.1 / 2.6 - 30A - +40% - data
> TI CSD87350 (dual) - 2.1 / 2.8 - 20A - +30% - data - Vgs.on=4.5V, Vgs.on.max=8V
> OnSemi 4C024N - 2.3 / 2.8 - 30A - +50% - data
> SinoPower SM4503 - 2.5 / 3.0 - 20A - +50% - data
> NikoSem PK632BA - 2.1 / 3.3 - 20A - +60% - data
> 
> not bad
> NXP PH4030AL - 2.72 / 4.0 - 15A - +50% - data_ext
> OnSemi 4C06N - 3.2 / 4.0 - 30A - +50% - data
> Vishay SiRA12BDP RA12 - 2.7 / 4.3 - 10A - +40% - data
> Vishay SiRA12DP RA12 - 3.2 / 4.3 - 10A - +50% - data_ext
> 
> bad
> AdvancedPower AP4024GEMT - 3.5 / 4.5 - 20A - +40% - data
> Ubiq QN3054 - 3.8 / 4.8 - 30A - +40% - data
> SinoPower SM4336 - 4.4 / 5.3 - 30A - +50% - data
> NikoSem PK618BA - 3.7 / 5.5 - 20A - +60% - data
> SinoPower SM4364 - 4.7 / 5.7 - 40A - +50% - data



I have a slightly different view


VGS 10
15	esr_C (mΩ)
0,33	uH
820	uF
60	I-Pw ( mW)
0,23	Winding (mΩ)
2,5	R-pcb (mΩ)
0,4	Rgx - HS (Ω)


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI-gm6Doiq4









----


also gecid testing (they measured VRM heatsink temperature and not at back of board):
R7 2700X , 4118 МHz @ 1.406V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_rog_strix_x470-f_gaming/ ---> peak 67.2°C at chokes
R7 2700X , 4100 MHz @ 1.414V (might be 3992 MHz @ 1.337 V) https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_prime_x470-pro/ ---> Peak 70°C at chokes
R7 2700X , 4100 MHz @ 1.408V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/msi_b450_tomahawk/?s=0 ---> peak 62°C presumably at chokes 
R7 2700X , 4041 MHz @ 1.332 V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/gigabyte_b450_aorus_pro/ ---> peak 61°C at chokes ; 3400 RAM
R7 2700X , 4049 MHz @ 1.332 V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/gigabyte_x470_aorus_gaming_7_wifi/?s=0 ---> peak 50.3°C at chokes , weird BCLK since this is supposed to be 4.1GHz @ 1.4V in BIOS
R7 2700X , 4100 MHz @ 1.384V after offset / 4000 MHz @ 1.384V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_tuf_x470-plus_gaming/?s=0 ---> peak 81.6°C at chokes ; 3333 RAM
R7 2700X , 4056 МHz @ 1.297V after offset / 3977 MHz @ 1.308V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_tuf_b450m-plus_gaming/?s=1 --> Peak 79.1°C at chokes ; 3333 RAM
R7 2700X , 3956 MHz @ 1.352V https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_rog_strix_x470-i_gaming/ ---> peak 59.1°C at chokes 

Prime X470 Pro https://www.overclockers.ua/motherboard/asus-prime-x470-pro/all/

B450 Aorus Pro https://www.kitguru.net/components/...igabyte-b450-aorus-pro-motherboard-review/11/

B450 Pro Carbon https://3dnews.ru/974799 (ONsemi 4c024 + 4c029 clearly visible)

B450 Tomahawk https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8751/msi-b450-tomahawk-amd-motherboard-review/index3.html

X470 Gaming Plus https://www.anandtech.com/show/12990/the-msi-x470-gaming-plus-review


----------



## likkevrom

AlphaC said:


> Gigabyte B450 Aorus M = needs heatsinks on the SOC and one section of VCORE VRM to be viable but it's likely a fake 8+3 using the Onsemi stuff (see the homepage) , highly likely to be 4 phases doubled low side with 8 chokes


I bought this motherboard and will add some heatsinks to it, but I'm not sure which ones you meant with the SOC/Vcore VRM you note above.
Should I just add sinks to all the 9 uncovered MOSFETs on the top of the socket?

Image of the mobo:
https://tweakers.net/i/jBAmYbbj1GR0O6J8YDxjJ0eOm5o=/i/2002131633.png


----------



## AlphaC

Only top left three are for V_CORE


edit: HardOCP review of B450-I 

*https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/11/01/asus_rog_strix_b450i_gaming_motherboard_review/7*


> Only 1.40v was required on my test Ryzen 7 2700X CPU to achieve 4.2GHz across all its cores.
> 
> *4.2GHz - DDR4 3200MHz*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be it were it not for one issue. The MOSFET cooler is fairly impressive giving its diminutive size. Its slim profile leaves plenty of room for CPU coolers and it seems to be well made. However, there is no replacement for displacement and this cooler goes a long way toward proving that. Under full load, the cooler hits temperatures of 174F on my bench. With some active cooling you can drop that a good bit and I saw temps around 162F.



174°F is around 80°C


----------



## Stormzilla

Asus b450-pro, b450m-pro, strix b450-e VRM ?


----------



## AlphaC

Stormzilla said:


> Asus b450-pro, b450m-pro, strix b450-e VRM ?


 The TUF B450M-Pro and B450 Pro still aren't worth looking at. STRIX B450-E doesn't seem to have pricing anywhere. Looks to be 4 phase VCore with double the components (Onsemi or Vishay Low RDS(on) Powerpaks likely) and the same goes for the SOC section (total 4 chokes).


Still weaker than B450 Pro Carbon


----------



## Stormzilla

B450M-Pro or MSI B450M mortar ? mATX form factor. They are about equal ?


----------



## VeritronX

Stormzilla said:


> B450M-Pro or MSI B450M mortar ? mATX form factor. They are about equal ?


Mortar has a much better heatsink on it, I'd get that.


----------



## AlphaC

B450M Mortar's mosfets are around 33% more efficient for low side conduction loss , so it's not just the VRM heatsink advantage. The only concern I would have for the mortar is the top side mosfets aren't heatsinked whatsoever but those are likely for SOC.


for example:


https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/motherboards/msi-b450m-mortar-review/8/ said:


> We've managed 4.25GHz using 1.425V with most boards we've tested so far with our Ryzen 7 2700X, but more recently, putting a sustained load through our eight-core CPU at these settings has seen issues with throttling, namely with Gigabyte's otherwise excellent B450 Aorus Pro. We now take a slightly closer look at things here, noting the VRM temperatures and testing each board with an extended load to see how they cope in more demanding tasks when all eight cores and 16 threads are being used.
> Amazingly, despite its seemingly diminutive cooling and power delivery, we saw no throttling issues during stress test, with the VRM heatsink just about topping 50°C and the rear of the VRMs reaching well over 70°C according to our IR thermometer - both fairly toasty, there was still no throttling, whereas the Gigabyte board throttled within five minutes. So, if you want to overclock your eight-core Ryzen CPU and will have multi-threaded workloads to throw at it, the MSI board certainly seems far more capable here than the B450 Aorus Pro.





https://www.eteknix.com/msi-b450m-mortar-micro-atx-ryzen-motherboard-review/5/ said:


> The board has zero issues hitting our 4.2 GHz target on all cores. This isn’t the most complex overclocking motherboard in the world, however, that’s a good thing. It was as easy as dialling in the clock speed and the voltage, and we were good to go. With the bigger VRM (for a B450) on this motherboard, stability was faultless throughout our testing.



https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2018/08/msi-b450m-mortar-review/#overclocking


----------



## MBugaria

MSI B450M Bazooka Plus
https://forums.overclockers.ru/download/file.php?id=128714&mode=view
2x 4C029N - 2x 4C024N

It's a bit surprising. Simpler in positioning MSI B450M Bazooka Plus is equipped with slightly more efficient mosfets than say mATX MSI B450M Mortar
Considering that they have the same Vcore heatsink. So overall looks like MSI B450M Bazooka Plus is one of the best choise in mATX range in terms price/VRM quality

MSI B450M Pro-VDH
https://forums.overclockers.ru/download/file.php?id=128713&mode=view
PK616BA -	2x PK632BA

https://forums.overclockers.ru/viewtopic.php?p=15907356#p15907356


----------



## Malax86

Hi, I am building a new pc and I having problem choosing the motherboard.


The system is base on a Ryzen 2600, this kit of ram BLS2K8G4D30BESBK, RX580 8gb, psu is a bequiet pure power 11 500W. My use is gaming and light-medium load application. I think I don't need to oc for the next month-years but in the future I'd like to try it with an air-cooled aftermarket heat cooler.


The mobo I'm looking at the moment are: Asrock b450m pro4 (76€), MSI b450 mortar (98€) and MSI b450 bazooka plus (93€). I read in the topic that the vrm are asrock<MSI mortar< MSI bazooka plus but could it be a problem on a ryzen 2600 build? I mean if i had a 2700 sure I would looking for something better but for a Ryzen 5 is the asrock so bad? The problem with their vrm are just efficiency so it uses more power to deliver or is there any other problem with reliability?


On the other hand MSI don't have offset voltage controll so it can be oc only manually and without coolandquiet and with a fixed frequency is that right? Can it be a problem in the future?



The final problem is the fan header, the bazooka plus has only 2 fan header, if i use a split (with 2 identical fans) will the mobo handles them in the correct way? or I need to tweak something?


----------



## AlphaC

If it's for gaming and not 100% load you ought to be fine.


With R5 2600 you want to overclock it manually rather than with PBO anyway since it is 3.9GHz max and as far as I know the Asrock board doesn't have BCLK modifiers to adjust base clock.


Realistically you can get 4.1-4.2GHz easily , 4.3GHz or so if lucky.


----------



## rockwood-tr

*Should I replace the motherboard?*



asdkj1740 said:


> gigabyte acutally got significant upgrades on their b450s' spec, which should be appreciated.
> 
> ds3h is pricing very low (lowest srp in usnewegg now), with 4 dimm slots. b350 ds3h is 3+3 while b450 d3sh is 4+3 now.
> 
> the biggest dissappiontment of gigabye b450 to me is the asymmetric match between mosfets and heatsink coverage...
> one set of vcore mosfets is exposed to air on aorus m... while on ds3h board the vrm heatsink takes one set of soc mosfets to act like 5+2?


Hello,

I recently bought Aorus M and later learned these VRM issues, I can return the motherboard and have an opportunity to replace it with Asrock B450M Pro4
As written earlier, both the asymmetric match between MOSFETs and heatsink coverage and single highside MOSFET worries me most, even Pro4 has lower quality MOSFETs.

Also hardware unboxed video about "B450 VRM Temp Test: Asus & Gigabyte Disappoint!" makes me worry even more since I will be using a Freezer 33 cooler so airflow will be lower compared to boxed fan.
I am almost sure but need to confirm so I am asking Do you suggest me to replace the Aorus M with Pro4 or keep it?


----------



## cssorkinman

Just put together a Ryzen 2700 machine on the X470 asus mini itx board. 

Ran some p 95 with it today, stock settings its impressive to see 16 cores cranking away at 100% load and only using 65 watts. Upped the clockspeed to 3850 all cores and gave it a short go. Stock cooler 19C ambient no active cooling on mobo.

Backplate was getting pretty warm - I'll get the raytek, shoot it sometime and will post the numbers.

5 minutes of blend


----------



## VeritronX

I bought the MSI B450I Gaming Plus AC and I'm really happy with it, 6+2 phases IR 35201 and IR3555's according to optimum tech. Newest bios has offset voltage and LLC mode 2 gives me 12mv droop on VR_VOUT in hwinfo from idle to prime95 full load. Costs the same here as the B450 tomahawk.


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/B450M Steel Legend/index.asp


"6 Power Phase design" --> likely 4 for CPU

12K FP caps , "60A chokes"


_Supports 105W Water Cooling (Pinnacle Ridge); Supports 95W Water Cooling (Summit Ridge); Supports 65W Water Cooling (Raven Ridge)_


https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/B450 Steel Legend/index.asp


"6 Power Phase design" --> likely 4 for CPU

12K FP caps , "60A chokes"


----------



## cssorkinman

Newest bios for the X370 Titanium features Base clock adjustments. They had one version earlier that had it but this one also has the latest agesa code as well.

Very interesting behavior so far - Auto cpu voltage, auto core boost, auto cpu ratio, 103 base clock, lvl 2 cpu llc = single core 1800X @4220 mhz.


----------



## VeritronX

I just ran prime95 avx blend 14GB for 13hrs overnight on my MSI B450I Gaming Plus AC and the max VRM temp was 75C with a max Cpu + Soc Power (SVI2 TFN) reading of 207W. VR_VOUT max was 1.387v and min was 1.371v


----------



## asdkj1740

AlphaC said:


> https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/B450M Steel Legend/index.asp
> 
> 
> "6 Power Phase design" --> likely 4 for CPU
> 
> 12K FP caps , "60A chokes"
> 
> 
> _Supports 105W Water Cooling (Pinnacle Ridge); Supports 95W Water Cooling (Summit Ridge); Supports 65W Water Cooling (Raven Ridge)_
> 
> 
> https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/B450 Steel Legend/index.asp
> 
> 
> "6 Power Phase design" --> likely 4 for CPU
> 
> 12K FP caps , "60A chokes"


i am confused about this 60a chokes. asrock in the past said this was 40a only. the 60a chokes should be like chokes on z390 taichi.


on the same page under "super alloy" it also shows the same "conflict":
Premium 60A Power Choke

Compared to traditional chokes, ASRock’s premium 60A power chokes effectively make the saturation current up to three times better, thus providing enhanced and improved Vcore voltage to the motherboard.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.unikoshardware.com/2019/01/asus-rog-strix-b450-e-gaming.html
b450e


----------



## Nighthog

Maybe some noted but I bought the Biostar X470GT8 and try to MEM OC on it. was a disaster as it currently is with it's BIOS with only Agesa 1.0.0.4C still for RAM.

Either way I'm kinda seeing and looking at the VRM and seeing it's way overkill for what these AM4 Ryzen processors can possibly draw in power in normal usage. 

I've got a dud launch day Ryzen 1700 and even with this better VRM I'm not really improving my results that much from the AB350-Gaming 3 I had used before. The VRM are a day and night apart concerning people here. 

We are comparing a 4+3 phase design using 4C10N+4C06N to a doubled 4+2(8+4 effective) IR3555 60Amp parts. 

I could reach a ~stable~4.0Ghz for desktop and games with my Ryzen 1700 on the AB350-Gaming 3 (not stress test tolerable) without crashes and whatnot having a 70mm AMD stock fan spinning 3000-5000rpm on the VRM to cool it down. Though still it was high heat. You would burn out the VRM if trying prime AVX or something of the likes. it was usable and ~stable~.
The required voltage was ~1.480V measuring behind the socket with a digital multimeter under load for stability testing the little you did.

On this board the Biostar X470GT8 with a full load-out on the VRM department I don't have a concern with VRM temperatures any more. I did some testing and to reach ~stable~ 4.1Ghz speeds on my Ryzen 1700 sample I have to dazzle it with around ~1.600V. LOL! ridiculous! Even then it was only reaching like 60degrees vrm for the quick benches I did probably will reach 70C on extended test though who wants to risk it with that voltage?!
Either way my WC cpu block and system can't cool the CPU well enough with that voltage anyway reaching 75C core instantly under loads and becoming unstable as it maximizes the safe temp limit. (75 degrees)
For somewhat sane use I went to 4.05Ghz and it runs fine ~1.530V socket measured. VRM may max around 55C in normal usage stays below 40 in idle and cpu doesn't get unstable because of reaching max core temperature that easily as the insane I tried for 4.1Ghz clocks.

But the problem is... I'm barely seemingly scratching the surface what this VRM could do. The BIOS max voltage allowed is insane 2.1volts if I recall correctly now. Who wants to try? HAH!


----------



## AlphaC

Well given the choice , you would want to have a VRM to deal with the popular CLC watercoolers (bad airflow over VRM + preheat).




asdkj1740 said:


> https://www.unikoshardware.com/2019/01/asus-rog-strix-b450-e-gaming.html
> b450e



Too little too late. B450 Pro Carbon has been out for a long time already, the heatsink isn't covered in plastic, and the mosfets are still better. Also B450 Pro Carbon has a USB 3.1 type C on the back panel.


From what I've seen the B450-E also runs way too expensive , in USA it's $180 through third party only and in Germany cost about 10 more than B450 Pro Carbon.


----------



## Elrick

Has anyone looked at this latest, forth coming release;

https://www.funkykit.com/reviews/motherboards/asrock-b450m-steel-legend-am4-motherboard-review/

Very interesting Matx model yet nothing is mentioned anywhere here on OCN.

Just surprised why this particular model has slipped in under the OCN radar.....


----------



## os2wiz

Nighthog said:


> All getting Hyped for the new Ryzen competition!?
> 
> So I was thinking of pre-ordering but the lack of decent VRM sections of most release motherboards seems to be straight up awful if you wanna overclock any unless you want to spend 200$++
> 
> I'm a cheapskate enthusiast and want to spend as little as possible for great things. Comparing all the boards available I'm disappointed for what kind of power delivery we will be getting with most boards.
> 
> Basically all boards arrive with max 4phase design unless you go up to premium deluxe bling designs that all add cost to the absurd when you only want that last part about VRM better the rest you care not much at all about.
> 
> With the leak of the new AMD Ryzen 7 1700 65TDP chip hitting max around 3.8Ghz on the cheaper boards mentioned(most 4-phase and cooking). And topping 4.05Ghz on the premium deluxe boards with the better VRM such as Asus VI hero or Asrock Taichi. I'm torn..
> 
> I really don't want to spend as much on the motherboard as the cpu in the end. (the cheap Ryzen 7 1700)
> 
> Does anyone know which power designs the various boards have yet?
> 
> I'm guessing the cheaper MSI boards have those awful 4-array Nikos per phase. (read bad things about those) Unless you like smoked computers.
> The Titanium being the most expensive release board with only 6-phase what it seems like doesn't attract.(though I guess they are the premium set of VRM chips(not any NIKOS there)
> 
> The Gigabyte mention low(RSD)on and they appear to be their usual design I guess. Vishay?
> They seem to be 1 high, 2 low-side design per phase.
> Problem here is they have the same design all they way up until their premium boards such as "Gigabyte X370 GA-AX370-Gaming 5".
> All lower tier boards have only 4-phase and only at "gaming 5" do we get a what looks like (8+2/6+4)-phase design for cpu power.
> And you can get 2 *TWO*! of the 4-phase boards for the same price as that Gaming 5... Really?
> 
> That lowRDSon 4 phase design I've seen been rated to ~140Watt Max with extra cooling unsinked on much older motherboards. Is it still similar?
> My old Am2+ board with this 4 phase design cooks on 1.4volts and needs extra fan or extra heatsinks with a old Phenom 1 at 3Ghz..(what the wattage may now be for that old clunker I still use)
> 
> They really are tiering out OC only to the expensive boards aren't they?
> 
> So what are you supposed to do? It seems like you need an extra 100$ for the better VRM which means you could actually just buy the 1700X instead and keep the cheap board and have same kind of results but now guaranteed with NO OC?
> 
> *WARNING: Consider the above INACCURATE!*
> Below more accurate:
> _________________________________________________________________________________
> *AMD AM4 Motherboard VRM List (german)*
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146.html


 Well the the Asrock X470 Taichi can be pruchased at under $200 when it is on sale. Saw it for like $189 on Newegg a week or 2 ago. I have the X470 Gaming M7 AC board from MSI. It is just a step below Taichi in vrm quality but has been more than adequate for overclocking my 2700X which I run 24/7 at 4.2 GHZ. I believe when the new X570 boards are released MSI will qualitatively improve the vrm on their 2 top X570 brands: Gaming M& AC and Pro carbon. They will have to to support 12 and 16 core cpus for overclocking.


----------



## Breogan

Elrick said:


> Has anyone looked at this latest, forth coming release;
> 
> https://www.funkykit.com/reviews/motherboards/asrock-b450m-steel-legend-am4-motherboard-review/
> 
> Very interesting Matx model yet nothing is mentioned anywhere here on OCN.
> 
> Just surprised why this particular model has slipped in under the OCN radar.....


According to this post it seems to be a 4+2 phase design:

PWM is an uPI Semi uP9505P, wich can handle up to 4+2 phases. Each phase has an uP1362S driver.

4 CPU VCC: 2x SM4336 / 1x SM4337
2 SoC VCC: 2x SM4336 / 2x SM4337

*EDIT:* Mine just arrived and it came with Nikos MOSFETS instead of Sinopower. Everything else is the same:

4 CPU VCC: 2x PK618BA / 1x PZ0903BK
2 SoC VCC: 2x PK618BA / 2x PZ0903BK


----------



## Elrick

Breogan said:


> According to this post it seems to be a 4+2 phase design:
> 
> PWM is an uPI Semi uP9505P, wich can handle up to 4+2 phases. Each phase has an uP1362S driver.
> 
> 4 CPU VCC: 2x SM4336 / 1x SM4337
> 2 SoC VCC: 2x SM4336 / 2x SM4337
> 
> *EDIT:* Mine just arrived and it came with Nikos MOSFETS instead of Sinopower. Everything else is the same:
> 
> 4 CPU VCC: 2x PK618BA / 1x PZ0903BK
> 2 SoC VCC: 2x PK618BA / 2x PZ0903BK



Thank you for that.


Maybe you should send it back to the retailer and DEMAND the Sinopower VRM version?


Much appreciated :thumb: .


----------



## Elrick

Just placed an order for the *ASRock B450M Steel Legend* :cheers: .
It shall be going into a *SilverStone Fortress Series FT03B Black MicroATX Mini Tower* I have sitting around in it's box. Have lots of packaging of old cases so needed something decent and up to date, within the AMD mATX world of hardware.

Just trying to decide between using a current 2600X or a 2400G left from my son's brief update last year.


----------



## BDOCer

Planning on building a system with 2400g. Gonna OC the iGPU only. Which of these mobo will be better for this, keeping an upgrade to 3000 series on mind:
1. MSI Bazooka Plus
2. Asrock Steel Legend b450m


----------



## NightAntilli

BDOCer said:


> Planning on building a system with 2400g. Gonna OC the iGPU only. Which of these mobo will be better for this, keeping an upgrade to 3000 series on mind:
> 1. MSI Bazooka Plus
> 2. Asrock Steel Legend b450m


The Steel Legend, due to the additional heatsink.


----------



## BDOCer

del


----------



## BDOCer

Breogan said:


> According to this post it seems to be a 4+2 phase design:
> 
> PWM is an uPI Semi uP9505P, wich can handle up to 4+2 phases. Each phase has an uP1362S driver.
> 
> 4 CPU VCC: 2x SM4336 / 1x SM4337
> 2 SoC VCC: 2x SM4336 / 2x SM4337
> 
> *EDIT:* Mine just arrived and it came with Nikos MOSFETS instead of Sinopower. Everything else is the same:
> 
> 4 CPU VCC: 2x PK618BA / 1x PZ0903BK
> 2 SoC VCC: 2x PK618BA / 2x PZ0903BK


can we get a review of the board? specifically the vrm temps? thanks


----------



## Nighthog

Seems Gigabyte is finally taking the VRM seriously.

X570 AORUS XTREME 16phase Infineon Digital VRM, 2X COPPER PCB, 8-Layers. Fins-Array heatsink, E-ATX
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-XTREME-rev-10#kf

X570 AORUS MASTER 14-phase IR (3556M?), 2X COPPER PCB, Fins-Array heatsink, ATX
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf

X570 AORUS ULTRA
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-ULTRA-rev-10#sp

X570 AORUS PRO /WIFI
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-PRO-rev-10#sp
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-PRO-WIFI-rev-10#sp

X570 AORUS ELITE
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-AORUS-ELITE-rev-10#sp

X570 AORUS I PRO WIFI
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-I-AORUS-PRO-WIFI-rev-10#sp

X570 GAMING X
https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-GAMING-X-rev-10#sp


----------



## AlphaC

See https://www.overclock.net/forum/27980148-post152.html

GBT Matthew posted a Google Doc with all the specs.


The Aorus Xtreme is using a new IR 16 phase PWM , 14+2 to 70A TDA21472 powerstages , with backplate.
X570 Aorus Master is using new IR 16 phase PWM , 12+2 to 50A IR3556 Powerstages with thermal backplate
X570 Aorus Ultra /Pro are older design IR35201 , 6 phase doubled to 12 with IR3553 40A powerstages (better than X470 Gaming 7 that has 5 doubled to 10) with the difference between Pro being the 5W/mK thermal pad isn't used
X570 Aorus Elite is similar to Z390 Intel board with ISL69138 PWM and 12 Vishay DrMos via ISL6617 doubler
X570 Aorus ITX board is a _major _step up to 70A powerstages (6 phase)
X570 Gaming X says 10 phases with doublers but 1H2L Powerpak (5 phase doubled low side fet) so I wouldn't have high hopes for it being an upgrade for people on higher end X470 boards , similar to Intel Z390 entry level boards

---------------------------------------------------------
Asrock Taichi said to use "14 phases" 50A DrMos https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Taichi/
---> probably 12x VCORE + 2 SOC , with 6 PWM phases
---> backplate

MSI's lineup seems to use exclusively IR35201 per https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkSTp_tJI2o
---> MSI Godlike is 14+4+1 70A powerstages per https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f8pOLNpO4Y  , https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MEG-X570-GODLIKE.html
--> X570 Creation supposedly 14x IR3555 https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/PRESTIGE-X570-CREATION/Overview
---> MEG X570 ACE is supposedly 12x 60A IR3555
---> MPG X570 Pro Carbon is supposedly 10x dual-N fets 


ASUS lineup https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/the-x570-motherboard-guide-ryzen-to-victory-with-pci-express-4-0/2/
claims 16x 60A IR3555 for Formula, 12x powerstages for the X570 STRIX boards that are ATX sized, 8x 70A TDA21472 for the Impact, 8x powerstages for STRIX ITX, 12x powerstages for TUF


----------



## Ramad

Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master would be a very good/all round motherboard to get. Only if they are willing to stop the none sense of hiding AMD CBS settings and leave the choice to users if they choose to run with auto settings or changing these according to need. Gigabyte have to (re)organize their BIOS, it's a functional mess right now, but nothing is stopping them from making it both functional and organized.

ASUS motherboards will be overpriced pr. usual, so no thanks.


----------



## gupsterg

If I was in the market for a board, best all round seems like the C8H WiFi. Seems like solid HW and should be option laden FW.

As much as I like the appeal of the Formula, I like how the C8H retains the Probeit points, has all the boxes ticked IMO for what I'd want. Has Optimem III, IIRC recent Intel boards are Optimem II. If I have understood correctly would have T-Topology, which was omitted from C7H. Other than gaining 4 extra phases and Optimem III by going C8H I wouldn't gain much for swap over. So it does seem as if I shall stick to the C7H, VRM seems more than ample to take the higher core count 3000 series.

From the Zenith Extreme Alpha onwards, the ASUS offerings seem to have more resemblance with their Intel stable mates.


----------



## asdkj1740

i saw some pics online about x570i aorus, it comes with a backplate with thermal pads on vrm's back side.
i also heard about x570 aours pro actually come with 5w/mk 1.5mm thickness thermal pad.



this time asus calls it "teamed" instead of "twin".

asrock new design on integrated i/o shield on x570 taichi seems interesting and promising.
Flexible Integrated I/O Shield
Unlike most so called pre-mounted I/O shield that is only decorated with fancy color schemes. We reserve more tolerance space and allow IO shield is adjustable when installing, thus fitting chassis perfectly without any mechanical issue.


----------



## chowbaby

asdkj1740 said:


> i saw some pics online about x570i aorus, it comes with a backplate with thermal pads on vrm's back side.
> i also heard about x570 aours pro actually come with 5w/mk 1.5mm thickness thermal pad.
> 
> 
> *
> this time asus calls it "teamed" instead of "twin".*
> 
> asrock new design on integrated i/o shield on x570 taichi seems interesting and promising.
> Flexible Integrated I/O Shield
> Unlike most so called pre-mounted I/O shield that is only decorated with fancy color schemes. We reserve more tolerance space and allow IO shield is adjustable when installing, thus fitting chassis perfectly without any mechanical issue.


Teamed?


----------



## AlphaC

https://twitter.com/mr_ericleehk/status/1132935559460950016

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-Crosshair-VIII-Hero
16x IR3555 on Crosshair VIII Hero , split 14+2 per https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/the-x570-motherboard-guide-ryzen-to-victory-with-pci-express-4-0/2/
"MICROFINE ALLOY CHOKES Each PowIRstage is accompanied by a high-permeability alloy-core choke rated to handle 45 amps."
"10K JAPANESE-MADE BLACK METALLIC CAPACITORS
Input and output filtering is provided by solid-polymer capacitors rated to last thousands of hours at high operating temperatures."


Moot when Aorus Master & xtreme use 16 phase PWM (12 and 14 phases respectively) without need for doubling... the Xtreme has 70A powerstages as well

https://www.msi.com/blog/amd-x570-motherboards-lineup
MSI is 14+4+1 for Godlike (70A powerstages), 14+2+1 for Creation, and 12+2+1 for Ace
Pro carbon is 10+2+1, Edge is 8+2+1 and so is Gaming Plus


----------



## gupsterg

AlphaC said:


> Moot when Aorus Master & xtreme use 16 phase PWM (12 and 14 phases respectively) without need for doubling... the Xtreme has 70A powerstages as well


AFAIK there is no true 16 phase board, even the MSI MEG X399 uses doubling (link).

Personally I like the IR3555M a lot. I've had the ZE sitting at upto ~105C on VRM for ~4hrs continuously for more than one instance and no issues. PCB again was solid. As they have internal temp sensor, the reading in SW is internal temp and not a diode close to VRM, which some implementations use.

The ZE has 8 true phases using IR3555M, having used a 1950X on it for close to ~2yrs I reckon anything 10 phases+ will be sound to use on Ryzen 3000 higher core count CPUs, regardless of doubling, etc on VRM. The TR+ZE was within a pretty low air flow case. I had a 360mm rad at front with fans on outer face as intakes. Top has another 360mm, fans on inside as exhaust. A single 1x 140mm Silent Wings 3 1K RPM fan as case exhuast.

Numerous times I have read information from sources from the industry that implementation of VRM should not be considered poor if doubled, as long as the implementation is good, doubling is a moot point. Again I have read from good sources after x true phases you really aren't being limited by VRM, caveat being good quality components and implementation.

Only had the Zenith Extreme Alpha in action a few days, not really caned it as I did the Zenith Extreme. So far liking the new ASUS VRM setup of not having doublers, but TBH unless I had some kinda of oscilloscope, etc hooked up I doubt I'd be able to tell if the 16 phases where "teamed" 8 or doubled 8. More so the fact I have power delivery over more components on ZEA, is aiding VRM vs say the ZE, IMO.


----------



## AlphaC

Look at what the PWM is:
https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/promopages/Powering_Next_Gen_Processors/
XDPE132G5C	PQFN 7 x 7	Dual rail	Phases: 16


https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/about-infineon/press/market-news/2019/INFPMM201903-052.html


----------



## Ramad

Thank you @AlphaC

"Teamed" means every signal provided by the PWM supplies 2 powerstages at the same time, in other words: 2 powerstages + 2 inductors + 1 capacitor = 1 phase. Probably using IR35201 PWM. 
Asus' 14+2 "phases" are 7+1 phases with double the current output, faster response and higher ripples. The only way to reduce the ripples is by cranking the switching frequency up. 

Gigabyte are using true phases, no doubling. Uses Infineon XDPE132G5C PWM.

MSI are using usual doubling that we all know. Uses Infineon XDPE132G5C PWM.

I will be waiting for Steven's review of these boards on TweakTown.


----------



## gupsterg

AlphaC said:


> Look at what the PWM is:
> https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/product/promopages/Powering_Next_Gen_Processors/
> XDPE132G5C	PQFN 7 x 7	Dual rail	Phases: 16
> 
> 
> https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/about-infineon/press/market-news/2019/INFPMM201903-052.html


Nice  , thanks for the link, nice to know this  , +rep  .

Again this is just my view, it's an old experience which I have posted about a few times on OCN, when relevant. I bought an ASUS Maximus VII Ranger based on reviews and budget at the time to use with a i5 4690K. My first CPU was no spectacular overclocker, I kept thinking it was due to the mobo having 4 true phases doubled to 8. Even though from what I had read in the OCN VRM thread regarding Z87/Z97 VRM I shouldn't be limited again had people like Sin, etc posting info stating after x phases "the return is diminishing". When I bought my 2nd i5 4690K and plugged it into same board I was ecstatically surprised. I nabbed 4.9GHz for daily usage, I have screenies of high load tests on air which it passed with ease. It is the same combo that I gained ~5.0GHz+ validations on air.



Spoiler











So again IMO doubled / "teamed" not a biggie. More so good implementation is what I'd like.

A while back when I saw the Gigabyte boards with finned VRM cooling I was like "Wow, nice, I what it". When I saw The Stilt's write up on X470 which had Gaming 7 and C7H I was surprised to see higher temps on Gaming 7. Source material link.

4.1GHz fixed voltage 1.256, load was P95 28.10 128K in place FFT.



> The temperatures of the Asus and Gigabytes power supplies are not directly proportional to the MSI, as their temperature readings are measured from a PowIRStage internal temperature sensor. Since the separate MSFs of the MSI do not include an internal thermal sensor, normally the temperature of the power supply is measured using an external NTC thermal sensor located near the coils. That's why we used Fluke 54-II thermometer with MSI for temperature measurements, which was attached to the flip side of one of the phase above the CPU. The temperature reading is still external and thus even lower than that of the Asus or Gigabyte motherboards, but based on the measurements, the difference in accuracy was still just over six degrees for a separate meter.
> 
> The asus current supply temperature rose to a maximum of 57 degrees, Gigabytes to 61 degrees and MSI to 72 degrees. The tests were carried out in an open test bench, so the power supply temperatures are slightly lower than in a situation where the assembly is normally housed in a well-ventilated housing.


Dunno if it was open bench scenario that made the finned VRM cooling not shine better.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

AlphaC said:


> https://twitter.com/mr_ericleehk/status/1132935559460950016
> 
> https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-Crosshair-VIII-Hero
> 16x IR3555 on Crosshair VIII Hero , split 14+2 per https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/the-x570-motherboard-guide-ryzen-to-victory-with-pci-express-4-0/2/
> "MICROFINE ALLOY CHOKES Each PowIRstage is accompanied by a high-permeability alloy-core choke rated to handle 45 amps."
> "10K JAPANESE-MADE BLACK METALLIC CAPACITORS
> Input and output filtering is provided by solid-polymer capacitors rated to last thousands of hours at high operating temperatures."
> 
> 
> Moot when Aorus Master & xtreme use 16 phase PWM (12 and 14 phases respectively) without need for doubling... the Xtreme has 70A powerstages as well
> 
> https://www.msi.com/blog/amd-x570-motherboards-lineup
> MSI is 14+4+1 for Godlike (70A powerstages), 14+2+1 for Creation, and 12+2+1 for Ace
> Pro carbon is 10+2+1, Edge is 8+2+1 and so is Gaming Plus


So the 14 vcore phases are doubled and no true like the Master/Xtreme?


----------



## asdkj1740

gupsterg said:


> AFAIK there is no true 16 phase board, even the MSI MEG X399 uses doubling (link).
> 
> Personally I like the IR3555M a lot. I've had the ZE sitting at upto ~105C on VRM for ~4hrs continuously for more than one instance and no issues. PCB again was solid. As they have internal temp sensor, the reading in SW is internal temp and not a diode close to VRM, which some implementations use.
> 
> The ZE has 8 true phases using IR3555M, having used a 1950X on it for close to ~2yrs I reckon anything 10 phases+ will be sound to use on Ryzen 3000 higher core count CPUs, regardless of doubling, etc on VRM. The TR+ZE was within a pretty low air flow case. I had a 360mm rad at front with fans on outer face as intakes. Top has another 360mm, fans on inside as exhaust. A single 1x 140mm Silent Wings 3 1K RPM fan as case exhuast.
> 
> Numerous times I have read information from sources from the industry that implementation of VRM should not be considered poor if doubled, as long as the implementation is good, doubling is a moot point. Again I have read from good sources after x true phases you really aren't being limited by VRM, caveat being good quality components and implementation.
> 
> Only had the Zenith Extreme Alpha in action a few days, not really caned it as I did the Zenith Extreme. So far liking the new ASUS VRM setup of not having doublers, but TBH unless I had some kinda of oscilloscope, etc hooked up I doubt I'd be able to tell if the 16 phases where "teamed" 8 or doubled 8. More so the fact I have power delivery over more components on ZEA, is aiding VRM vs say the ZE, IMO.


there is a new pwm ic natively support 16 pwm from infineon.


----------



## asdkj1740

Ramad said:


> Thank you @AlphaC
> 
> "Teamed" means every signal provided by the PWM supplies 2 powerstages at the same time, in other words: 2 powerstages + 2 inductors + 1 capacitor = 1 phase. Probably using IR35201 PWM.
> Asus' 14+2 "phases" are 7+1 phases with double the current output, faster response and higher ripples. The only way to reduce the ripples is by cranking the switching frequency up.
> 
> Gigabyte are using true phases, no doubling. Uses Infineon XDPE132G5C PWM.
> 
> MSI are using usual doubling that we all know. Uses Infineon XDPE132G5C PWM.
> 
> I will be waiting for Steven's review of these boards on TweakTown.


it is said that msi is still using ir35201 on x570, and they are shocked about the gigabyte choice.


----------



## AlphaC

X570 Creator , looks midrange to me (note Tech Yes City states 12 DrMOs for VCORE as the Taichi):








X570 Extreme4 doesn't have a heatpipe and the heatsink is looking like the Steel Legend's







https://www.computerbase.de/2019-05/amd-x570-luefter/

Update: Extreme4 has been gutted compared to the higher end boards, it's 8 DrMos for VCORE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlG9pIE0XDo


I've been reviewing the lineups and the strongest board per lineup for common single GPU + single/dual NvMe setups:

ASUS' X570 Crosshair Impact : it's a DTX board (slightly bigger than ITX) with 8x 70A powerstages and thermal backplate
--> depending on compatibility with ITX cases this can sell well
--> Crosshair VIII Hero/Formula don't stand out as much in the current x570 boards as they don't have 10G LAN or new powerstages , just more of them

Asrock's X570 Aqua : no word on power delivery but supposedly limited run of 999 , watercooled chipset, Thunderbolt 3, and it is all white (judging by the MSI Xpower & "arctic" boards white PCB sell well)
--> the Taichi doesn't seem to be as strong versus the upgrades other vendors made but the increase in price is determining factor for all boards due to PCIE 4.0 **
--> If it's like on Z390 , the SiC632 (https://www.vishay.com/docs/62992/sic632a.pdf) 50A powerstage is cheaper than IR powerstages
--> update: price is $1000 so it's a halo product

Gigabyte's X570 Aorus Xtreme : no chipset fan is unique as well as the 16 phases direct (no teaming or doubling) with finned heatsink and backplate , 14x 70A infineon powerstage, 10G LAN, 8 layer PCB , right angle connectors = depending on pricing this could sell very well
--> the Aorus Master is likely to be a top pick for most people as it retains the direct PWM and finned heatsink but drops 10G LAN and powerstages downgraded to 50A IR3556

MSI's Prestige X570 Creation: extended heatsink (rather than fins, they just made a large flat metal surface at IO side although it may be covered by plastic) , 14X 60A IR3555 , 10G LAN, Xpander-Z M.2 daughterboard, high midrange level 6 layer PCB 
--> retains most of the Godlike's features but drops the power delivery from 70A powerblocks to IR3555 I think
--> "Prestige" is going to attract more high end buyers than "MEG"...

** You're realistically not going to have more than 13-18A per phase if you're running 14 powerstages on CLC water or air (~250W at 1-1.4V), which means that anything more than 12 decent powerstages (not powerpaks or dual-N fets) is probably going to be overkill. Limiting it to 2W per powerstages peak heatload it's around 17A per 40A IR3553 at 1.2V , ~22A at 1V for Vishay SiC634 50A powerstages, or 22A at 1.2V for a 60A IR3555 based off IR3550. 70A rated TDA21472 (supposed to be up to 95% efficient vs the 90-93% on IR and Vishay powerstages) is something used on the ITX boards for a reason , whereas on ATX or E-ATX it's largely overkill if it's already 10+ phases. If you're buying a 12+ IR powerstage board you're going to need a 280/360 radiator with 1800RPM fan speed at a minimum to push it out of ~90% efficiency band because that's over 300W.

What does this mean for each lineup?
* ASUS' X570-P is probably going to be a massive failure due to feature-set (not even including USB-C even at back panel) and board quality , the STRIX ITX board will be mediocre for high core counts depending on the powerstages used as it's supposedly 8 of them 
* Asrock's lineup is probably going to be bad below the Phantom Gaming 6 (as usual) relative to other vendors , I don't forsee the Steel Legend or Phantom Gaming 4 holding up well at all although both received an audio upgrade to ALC1220; Extreme4 seems a bit more cost cut this time
* Gigabyte's X570 Gaming X is not worth buying since it's 5 phases doubled low side with powerpaks on a 4 layer PCB, you're better off with an older X470 board of decent quality , audio is _ALC887_, also the webpage suggests it's a single BIOS chip with Q-flash+
---> Aorus Elite also is lacking dual BIOS in favor of Qflash+ only, uses ISL PWM, 4 layer PCB + no heatpipe 
* MSI's boards below MEG Ace aren't going to be worth buying in general since they're using less than 6 layer PCB and also dual-N fet or powerpaks <10 , thankfully they're denoted "MPG" for simplicity's sake

Every board needs to tack on ~$50 just for PCIE 4.0 , chipset fan or overkill chipset heatsink, new tariffs, and additional R&D money for power upgrades. I'd expect mid-tier boards to be closer to $250 rather than $180.

--------------------------------------------------------
der8auer posted a video on doublers vs "twin" design, it's supposedly 20ns delay from using doublers _all other things being equal_


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4-78_a33Fo

Have to be careful with this since inductors on doubled VRM usually uses half the inductance. For example 150nH (R15) or 220nH (R22) instead of 400-500nH.


----------



## os2wiz

gupsterg said:


> AFAIK there is no true 16 phase board, even the MSI MEG X399 uses doubling (link).
> 
> Personally I like the IR3555M a lot. I've had the ZE sitting at upto ~105C on VRM for ~4hrs continuously for more than one instance and no issues. PCB again was solid. As they have internal temp sensor, the reading in SW is internal temp and not a diode close to VRM, which some implementations use.
> 
> The ZE has 8 true phases using IR3555M, having used a 1950X on it for close to ~2yrs I reckon anything 10 phases+ will be sound to use on Ryzen 3000 higher core count CPUs, regardless of doubling, etc on VRM. The TR+ZE was within a pretty low air flow case. I had a 360mm rad at front with fans on outer face as intakes. Top has another 360mm, fans on inside as exhaust. A single 1x 140mm Silent Wings 3 1K RPM fan as case exhuast.
> 
> Numerous times I have read information from sources from the industry that implementation of VRM should not be considered poor if doubled, as long as the implementation is good, doubling is a moot point. Again I have read from good sources after x true phases you really aren't being limited by VRM, caveat being good quality components and implementation.
> 
> Only had the Zenith Extreme Alpha in action a few days, not really caned it as I did the Zenith Extreme. So far liking the new ASUS VRM setup of not having doublers, but TBH unless I had some kinda of oscilloscope, etc hooked up I doubt I'd be able to tell if the 16 phases where "teamed" 8 or doubled 8. More so the fact I have power delivery over more components on ZEA, is aiding VRM vs say the ZE, IMO.


 What do you think of the MSI X570 Creation? I like the add on board for extra M.2 pciE drives, but I want solid vrm support as I will buy the 12 core 3900X cpu.


----------



## Blameless

Frankly, the worst VRM I've seen speced out for an X570 motherboard is already going to be overkill for an OCed 3900X on a decent custom loop (I'm assuming ~300w during heavy stress testing with all cores at ~5GHz). Even the ITX boards should handle this in stride.

I've never been less concerned about VRM on a board line up, which is good.

I'm far less impressed with the cooling solutions and aesthetics, however. At this point, I'm looking to get the absolute least expensive X570 board that has decent firmware and then completely replace the cooling on it. Anything not soldered on is getting tossed.


----------



## AlphaC

I don't think it'd be a good idea to run 250-300W through any of the lower end X570 boards such as the Asus X570-P , Asrock X570 Pro4, Asrock X570 Phantom Gaming 4, or Gigabyte X570 Gaming X , or MSI X570 Edge or Gaming Plus


Here's how I would cut it up as of now:


----------



## Blameless

AlphaC said:


> I don't think it'd be a good idea to run 250-300W through any of the lower end X570 boards such as the Asus X570-P , Asrock X570 Pro4, Asrock X570 Phantom Gaming 4, or Gigabyte X570 Gaming X , or MSI X570 Edge or Gaming Plus


Even with these I'm more worried about shoddy memory overclockability and castrated BIOS options than actually overloading the VRMs, but some of these bottom tier parts do seem borderline.

Finding specific details on the budget boards is proving difficult though. Everyone seems much more interested in pushing their high-end parts, understandably.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> X570 Creator , looks midrange to me (note Tech Yes City states 12 DrMOs for VCORE as the Taichi):
> View attachment 271868
> 
> 
> X570 Extreme4 doesn't have a heatpipe and the heatsink is looking like the Steel Legend's
> View attachment 271870
> 
> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-05/amd-x570-luefter/
> 
> Update: Extreme4 has been gutted compared to the higher end boards, it's 8 DrMos for VCORE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlG9pIE0XDo
> 
> 
> I've been reviewing the lineups and the strongest board per lineup for common single GPU + single/dual NvMe setups:
> 
> ASUS' X570 Crosshair Impact : it's a DTX board (slightly bigger than ITX) with 8x 70A powerstages and thermal backplate
> --> depending on compatibility with ITX cases this can sell well
> --> Crosshair VIII Hero/Formula don't stand out as much in the current x570 boards as they don't have 10G LAN or new powerstages , just more of them
> 
> Asrock's X570 Aqua : no word on power delivery but supposedly limited run of 999 , watercooled chipset, Thunderbolt 3, and it is all white (judging by the MSI Xpower & "arctic" boards white PCB sell well)
> --> the Taichi doesn't seem to be as strong versus the upgrades other vendors made but the increase in price is determining factor for all boards due to PCIE 4.0 **
> --> If it's like on Z390 , the SiC632 (https://www.vishay.com/docs/62992/sic632a.pdf) 50A powerstage is cheaper than IR powerstages
> --> update: price is $1000 so it's a halo product
> 
> Gigabyte's X570 Aorus Xtreme : no chipset fan is unique as well as the 16 phases direct (no teaming or doubling) with finned heatsink and backplate , 14x 70A infineon powerstage, 10G LAN, 8 layer PCB , right angle connectors = depending on pricing this could sell very well
> --> the Aorus Master is likely to be a top pick for most people as it retains the direct PWM and finned heatsink but drops 10G LAN and powerstages downgraded to 50A IR3556
> 
> MSI's Prestige X570 Creation: extended heatsink (rather than fins, they just made a large flat metal surface at IO side although it may be covered by plastic) , 14X 60A IR3555 , 10G LAN, Xpander-Z M.2 daughterboard, high midrange level 6 layer PCB
> --> retains most of the Godlike's features but drops the power delivery from 70A powerblocks to IR3555 I think
> --> "Prestige" is going to attract more high end buyers than "MEG"...
> 
> ** You're realistically not going to have more than 13-18A per phase if you're running 14 powerstages on CLC water or air (~250W at 1-1.4V), which means that anything more than 12 decent powerstages (not powerpaks or dual-N fets) is probably going to be overkill. Limiting it to 2W per powerstages peak heatload it's around 17A per 40A IR3553 at 1.2V , ~22A at 1V for Vishay SiC634 50A powerstages, or 22A at 1.2V for a 60A IR3555 based off IR3550. 70A rated TDA21472 (supposed to be up to 95% efficient vs the 90-93% on IR and Vishay powerstages) is something used on the ITX boards for a reason , whereas on ATX or E-ATX it's largely overkill if it's already 10+ phases. If you're buying a 12+ IR powerstage board you're going to need a 280/360 radiator with 1800RPM fan speed at a minimum to push it out of ~90% efficiency band because that's over 300W.
> 
> What does this mean for each lineup?
> * ASUS' X570-P is probably going to be a massive failure due to feature-set (not even including USB-C even at back panel) and board quality , the STRIX ITX board will be mediocre for high core counts depending on the powerstages used as it's supposedly 8 of them
> * Asrock's lineup is probably going to be bad below the Phantom Gaming 6 (as usual) relative to other vendors , I don't forsee the Steel Legend or Phantom Gaming 4 holding up well at all although both received an audio upgrade to ALC1220; Extreme4 seems a bit more cost cut this time
> * Gigabyte's X570 Gaming X is not worth buying since it's 5 phases doubled low side with powerpaks on a 4 layer PCB, you're better off with an older X470 board of decent quality , audio is _ALC887_, also the webpage suggests it's a single BIOS chip with Q-flash+
> ---> Aorus Elite also is lacking dual BIOS in favor of Qflash+ only, uses ISL PWM, 4 layer PCB + no heatpipe
> * MSI's boards below MEG Ace aren't going to be worth buying in general since they're using less than 6 layer PCB and also dual-N fet or powerpaks <10 , thankfully they're denoted "MPG" for simplicity's sake
> 
> Every board needs to tack on ~$50 just for PCIE 4.0 , chipset fan or overkill chipset heatsink, new tariffs, and additional R&D money for power upgrades. I'd expect mid-tier boards to be closer to $250 rather than $180.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------
> der8auer posted a video on doublers vs "twin" design, it's supposedly 20ns delay from using doublers _all other things being equal_
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4-78_a33Fo
> 
> Have to be careful with this since inductors on doubled VRM usually uses half the inductance. For example 150nH (R15) or 220nH (R22) instead of 400-500nH.


 Bottomlineoes the MSI Creation have better than adequate vrm support for 12 core cpu overclock in your humble opinion??? What about support for memory overclock adequate or better than adequate?


----------



## os2wiz

os2wiz said:


> Bottomlineoes the MSI Creation have better than adequate vrm support for 12 core cpu overclock in your humble opinion??? What about support for memory overclock adequate or better than adequate?


 The heatsink is metal no plastic covering on Creation.


----------



## AlphaC

The MSI Creation actually looks to be better than the Crosshair VIII Hero this time , if you discount the possible use of doublers. However Computerbase says it's over 400 Euros. Who knows what the other things cost, the MEG Ace is probably the board to buy in MSI's lineup if you don't want 10G LAN or the M.2 daughterboard.



https://www.computerbase.de/2019-05/msi-x570-mainboards-uebersicht-preise/ said:


> MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus (219 Euro)
> MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge WiFi (239 Euro)
> MSI MPG X570 Gaming Pro Carbon WiFi (299 Euro)
> MSI MEG X570 Ace (429 Euro)
> MSI Prestige X570 Creation (539 Euro)
> MSI MEG X570 Godlike (777 Euro)



As far as I know all memory overclocking should be similar on midrange boards since it's all daisy chain now. Pro Carbon and all "MPG" boards are fewer layers though (4 layers).


----------



## Blameless

What are the least expensive 8-layer X570 boards?


----------



## AlphaC

They're all expensive I think, since the Godlike and Aorus Xtreme are 8 layer and so is the ITX board from Aorus and maybe Asrock.

High Midrange is usually 6 layer (i.e. the Aorus Master/Ultra/Pro and the MSI Creation and Ace)

https://www.kitguru.net/components/...utex-2019-gigabyte-aorus-goes-all-in-on-x570/
(Aorus chart)



https://www.tomshardware.com/news/hands_on-msi-x570-motherboards said:


> The stepped-down MEG and Ace boards (which we’re about to get to) are six-layer boards, while stepping below that gets you a four-layer PCB.


Asrock's Creator, Taichi, and maybe Phantom Gaming 6 might be worth looking at depending on pricing but I'm not sure on the layers

I don't anticipate any of the Asus boards to be "cheap" and good, maybe _OR_ but not _AND_. The ATX boards with a heatpipe on them should be decent though since they're using powerstages (Z390 ASUS transitioned to 50A Vishay powerstages), anything from the ATX STRIX-E/F lineup and upwards.


----------



## gupsterg

TR4 mobo in video but as the "teamed"" VRM is on upcoming AM4 mobos I thought relevant to this thread.



Spoiler


----------



## asdkj1740

so many apaq 5k taiwanese caps started from aorus ultra... which is unexpected and dissappointed.


----------



## chowbaby

Ramad said:


> Thank you @AlphaC
> 
> "Teamed" means every signal provided by the PWM supplies 2 powerstages at the same time, in other words: 2 powerstages + 2 inductors + 1 capacitor = 1 phase. Probably using IR35201 PWM.
> Asus' 14+2 "phases" are 7+1 phases with double the current output, faster response and higher ripples. The only way to reduce the ripples is by cranking the switching frequency up.
> 
> Gigabyte are using true phases, no doubling. Uses Infineon XDPE132G5C PWM.
> 
> MSI are using usual doubling that we all know. Uses Infineon XDPE132G5C PWM.
> 
> I will be waiting for Steven's review of these boards on TweakTown.


Is that actually that bad? I remember all the maximus xi hero complaints a twin/parallel 4 phase, but I thought this was more similar to the maximus xi apex which was a twin/parallel 8 phase which people thought was pretty good.


----------



## Ramad

chowbaby said:


> Is that actually that bad? I remember all the maximus xi hero complaints a twin/parallel 4 phase, but I thought this was more similar to the maximus xi apex which was a twin/parallel 8 phase which people thought was pretty good.


No, it's not bad at all. It may have sounded negative in the way I wrote it, but it's not bad. As soon as the power delivery is at 6 phases or higher then the interleaving effect is good resulting in lower ripples. 7 (14 teamed) phases are fine and while using good components at the same time, which is the case here, but not as good as what Gigabyte and MSI are offering. 

It would be interesting to monitor the capacitors temperature on an overclocked system using teamed phases with a lot of current passing through them. We will find out about that soon.


----------



## AlphaC

Wondering if the slide is wrong or the other press / coverage from websites are all wrong:
https://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/event/1187150.html

Asrock claiming 60A DrMos but their site reads 50A?


Apparently Steel legend has been promoted to above Extreme4 as well. It was previously a B450 /H series Intel board naming. Otherwise it means Extreme4 was demoted.


----------



## chowbaby

Ramad said:


> No, it's not bad at all. It may have sounded negative in the way I wrote it, but it's not bad. As soon as the power delivery is at 6 phases or higher then the interleaving effect is good resulting in lower ripples. 7 (14 teamed) phases are fine and while using good components at the same time, which is the case here, but not as good as what Gigabyte and MSI are offering.
> 
> It would be interesting to monitor the capacitors temperature on an overclocked system using teamed phases with a lot of current passing through them. We will find out about that soon.


But unlikely that the Crosshair hero 8 is less expensive than a Gigabyte x570 master or MSI X570 ACE I guess.


----------



## AlphaC

Crosshair VIII Hero hit 4000C18 , Godlike and Master can hit 3600C14 with Ryzen + (ryzen 7 2700X / Ryzen 5 2600X) apparently while the X570 Taichi they had on the stand was 3600C18:




https://www.facebook.com/gskillofficial/photos/a.2257349654308512/2257352370974907/?type=3&theater


Also MSI's recommendations are not to use their X370 for 12 cores. They also revealed full spec on Godlike ,it has IR35201 PWM with IR3599 doublers and 70A TDA21472 powerstages.




https://youtu.be/EuqZItKo9_c?t=3096


----------



## Ramad

chowbaby said:


> But unlikely that the Crosshair hero 8 is less expensive than a Gigabyte x570 master or MSI X570 ACE I guess.


The will probably price them at the same price as the Maser and ACE or higher. ASUS always like to reflect that they are making better motherboards than other motherboards manufacturers by tagging a premium price on their motherboards. You can compare the price of the excellent MSI MEG X399 creation and to ASUS' Extreme or Extreme Alpha, the MEG as a better product but the Extreme and the Alpha are priced higher. Make no mistake, people will buy the ASUS motherboard because "it's better because it costs more". 

I have used both the C6H and the K7, the C6H could never stabilize my R5 1600 at 4.0GHz, but the K7 could do that without any problem (I have the stress testing results posted last year at the K7 thread).



AlphaC said:


> Crosshair VIII Hero hit 4000C18 , Godlike and Master can hit 3600C14 with Ryzen + (ryzen 7 2700X / Ryzen 5 2600X) apparently while the X570 Taichi they had on the stand was 3600C18:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/gskillofficial/photos/a.2257349654308512/2257352370974907/?type=3&theater
> 
> 
> Also MSI's recommendations are not to use their X370 for 12 cores. They also revealed full spec on Godlike ,it has IR35201 PWM with IR3599 doublers and 70A TDA21472 powerstages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/EuqZItKo9_c?t=3096


Thanks again, +rep for your nice work. 

So MSI are using IR35201 in 7+1 mode on the Godlike. 7 doubled signals using IR3599 for the CPU and 1 signal using IR3599 in quad mode for the SOC.

If IR35201 is providing switching frequency at 800KHz, the CPU powerstages will run at switching frequency of 400KHz while the SOC powerstages will be running at 200KHz. Interesting.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> Crosshair VIII Hero hit 4000C18 , Godlike and Master can hit 3600C14 with Ryzen + (ryzen 7 2700X / Ryzen 5 2600X) apparently while the X570 Taichi they had on the stand was 3600C18:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/gskillofficial/photos/a.2257349654308512/2257352370974907/?type=3&theater
> 
> 
> Also MSI's recommendations are not to use their X370 for 12 cores. They also revealed full spec on Godlike ,it has IR35201 PWM with IR3599 doublers and 70A TDA21472 powerstages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/EuqZItKo9_c?t=3096


Was the memory settings stability tested??? Those results mean very littler unless we know the stability at those settings. If you are only testing whether the system booted with those settings stability most likely comes at aa significantly lower speed and cas latency settings.


----------



## chowbaby

Ramad said:


> The will probably price them at the same price as the Maser and ACE or higher. ASUS always like to reflect that they are making better motherboards than other motherboards manufacturers by tagging a premium price on their motherboards. You can compare the price of the excellent MSI MEG X399 creation and to ASUS' Extreme or Extreme Alpha, the MEG as a better product but the Extreme and the Alpha are priced higher. Make no mistake, people will buy the ASUS motherboard because "it's better because it costs more".
> 
> I have used both the C6H and the K7, the C6H could never stabilize my R5 1600 at 4.0GHz, but the K7 could do that without any problem (I have the stress testing results posted last year at the K7 thread).
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks again, +rep for your nice work.
> 
> So MSI are using IR35201 in 7+1 mode on the Godlike. 7 doubled signals using IR3599 for the CPU and 1 signal using IR3599 in quad mode for the SOC.
> 
> If IR35201 is providing switching frequency at 800KHz, the CPU powerstages will run at switching frequency of 400KHz while the SOC powerstages will be running at 200KHz. Interesting.


That would be frustrating if an Asus C8H was $350 USD or more. In Canada where I live, the Gaming 7 is $300 Canadian and the C7H wifi is still $360. It would be hilarious if the C8H was 20% than a Gigabyte X570 Master..


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

chowbaby said:


> That would be frustrating if an Asus C8H was $350 USD or more. In Canada where I live, the Gaming 7 is $300 Canadian and the C7H wifi is still $360. It would be hilarious if the C8H was 20% than a Gigabyte X570 Master..


About that. Looks like the X570 Master is going to be $350 USD. If Asus price the CH8 Hero above that its DOA.


----------



## AlphaC

Is this considered a leak? https://www.kitguru.net/components/...si-unleashes-full-range-of-x570-motherboards/

"DDR4... Godlike delivers on, with certification for up to 4600MHz"
Ace + Creation = 4533
Pro Carbon/Edge /Gaming + / X570-A = 4400 , since these are 4 layer boards that's high


Asrock's Taichi: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Taichi/
_AMD Ryzen series CPUs (Matisse) support DDR4 4666+(OC) / 4400(OC) / 4300(OC) / 4266(OC) / 4200(OC) / 4133(OC) / 3466(OC) / 3200 / 2933 / 2667 / 2400 / 2133 ECC & non-ECC, un-buffered memory*_


----------



## lb_felipe

@AlphaC, with Ryzen 3000 does it still worth that gold rule of putting a strong VRM with strong cooler to achieve the highest clocks with Precision Boost Overdrive? That is, will I not need bother myself with manual overclock to squeeze the CPU in order to get every drop juice from it?


----------



## Heuchler

+Rep to AlphaC for all the great info on Doubler vs Twin VRM Topology

Roman Hartung (der8auer) did a video after the event on this topic


----------



## AlphaC

lb_felipe said:


> @*AlphaC* , with Ryzen 3000 does it still worth that gold rule of putting a strong VRM with strong cooler to achieve the highest clocks with Precision Boost Overdrive? That is, will I not need bother myself with manual overclock to squeeze the CPU in order to get every drop juice from it?


Nobody knows for sure that is why I would wait for the launch.

Preliminary I would say allocate about 20-22W per core based on Ryzen+ / Threadripper 2nd gen. That's about ~240W for 12 core maxed out (on ambient of course) or 300-350W for 16 cores (based off TR 2950X). So if you're looking at a 12 core I'd get a new board if you don't have a top tier X470 or X370 (which might not support PCIE 4.0 at all).

If you look at X299 and X399 you can get an idea of what a 12/16 core CPU demands generally , it's usually 8 to 12 powerstages , where X399 was pretty boring as it was more or less 8x 60A IR3555 on every board.

If you look at the lineups it's probably wise to buy midrange or higher where they have a heatpipe because there are also important feature differences such as WIFI6 or the LAN solution choice. On ASUS for ATX that's the STRIX-F and higher (Prime Pro for 8 core probably /TUF use cheaper audio and fewer USB ports), on Asrock it seems to be around Phantom Gaming 6 and higher (Creator/Phantom Gaming X / Taichi mainly , Steel Legend/Extreme4 probably will cut it for 12 cores), on Gigabyte it's roughly Aorus Pro and higher (Aorus Elite lacks heatpipe , drops dual BIOS, and is 4 layer), and on MSI it's roughly MEG Ace and higher (all lower end "MPG" is 4 layer board with dual-N fet or powerpak rather than powerstages).

From MSI there's new info that the Dual-N fet on the Pro Carbon is Ubiq QA3111 supposedly 56A (mentioned in GamersNexus video as "3111") which is also used on their RTX 2070 Gaming Z (so it's a shared supply chain):
https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2001935-1-1.html
Some info is still under NDA but it seems that there are IR doublers on the lower end boards this time all the way down the stack.
MSI is _much_ improved this time around , like Aorus lineup was. With X470 they transitioned their product stack to use better capacitors all the way down to Gaming Plus , with X570 they're using better power delivery on "MEG" Ace and up rather than some copy paste Onsemi 4C029N+4C024N powerpak solution as they used on X470 M7 and Ace.

Everyone should be excited that motherboard makers are putting effort into AM4 though. Asrock even brought the Extreme4.


----------



## chowbaby

AlphaC said:


> X570 Creator , looks midrange to me (note Tech Yes City states 12 DrMOs for VCORE as the Taichi):
> View attachment 271868
> 
> 
> X570 Extreme4 doesn't have a heatpipe and the heatsink is looking like the Steel Legend's
> View attachment 271870
> 
> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-05/amd-x570-luefter/
> 
> Update: Extreme4 has been gutted compared to the higher end boards, it's 8 DrMos for VCORE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlG9pIE0XDo
> 
> 
> I've been reviewing the lineups and the strongest board per lineup for common single GPU + single/dual NvMe setups:
> 
> ASUS' X570 Crosshair Impact : it's a DTX board (slightly bigger than ITX) with 8x 70A powerstages and thermal backplate
> --> depending on compatibility with ITX cases this can sell well
> --> Crosshair VIII Hero/Formula don't stand out as much in the current x570 boards as they don't have 10G LAN or new powerstages , just more of them
> 
> Asrock's X570 Aqua : no word on power delivery but supposedly limited run of 999 , watercooled chipset, Thunderbolt 3, and it is all white (judging by the MSI Xpower & "arctic" boards white PCB sell well)
> --> the Taichi doesn't seem to be as strong versus the upgrades other vendors made but the increase in price is determining factor for all boards due to PCIE 4.0 **
> --> If it's like on Z390 , the SiC632 (https://www.vishay.com/docs/62992/sic632a.pdf) 50A powerstage is cheaper than IR powerstages
> --> update: price is $1000 so it's a halo product
> 
> Gigabyte's X570 Aorus Xtreme : no chipset fan is unique as well as the 16 phases direct (no teaming or doubling) with finned heatsink and backplate , 14x 70A infineon powerstage, 10G LAN, 8 layer PCB , right angle connectors = depending on pricing this could sell very well
> *--> the Aorus Master is likely to be a top pick for most people as it retains the direct PWM and finned heatsink but drops 10G LAN and powerstages downgraded to 50A IR3556*
> 
> MSI's Prestige X570 Creation: extended heatsink (rather than fins, they just made a large flat metal surface at IO side although it may be covered by plastic) , 14X 60A IR3555 , 10G LAN, Xpander-Z M.2 daughterboard, high midrange level 6 layer PCB
> --> retains most of the Godlike's features but drops the power delivery from 70A powerblocks to IR3555 I think
> --> "Prestige" is going to attract more high end buyers than "MEG"...
> 
> ** You're realistically not going to have more than 13-18A per phase if you're running 14 powerstages on CLC water or air (~250W at 1-1.4V), which means that anything more than 12 decent powerstages (not powerpaks or dual-N fets) is probably going to be overkill. Limiting it to 2W per powerstages peak heatload it's around 17A per 40A IR3553 at 1.2V , ~22A at 1V for Vishay SiC634 50A powerstages, or 22A at 1.2V for a 60A IR3555 based off IR3550. 70A rated TDA21472 (supposed to be up to 95% efficient vs the 90-93% on IR and Vishay powerstages) is something used on the ITX boards for a reason , whereas on ATX or E-ATX it's largely overkill if it's already 10+ phases. If you're buying a 12+ IR powerstage board you're going to need a 280/360 radiator with 1800RPM fan speed at a minimum to push it out of ~90% efficiency band because that's over 300W.
> 
> What does this mean for each lineup?
> * ASUS' X570-P is probably going to be a massive failure due to feature-set (not even including USB-C even at back panel) and board quality , the STRIX ITX board will be mediocre for high core counts depending on the powerstages used as it's supposedly 8 of them
> * Asrock's lineup is probably going to be bad below the Phantom Gaming 6 (as usual) relative to other vendors , I don't forsee the Steel Legend or Phantom Gaming 4 holding up well at all although both received an audio upgrade to ALC1220; Extreme4 seems a bit more cost cut this time
> * Gigabyte's X570 Gaming X is not worth buying since it's 5 phases doubled low side with powerpaks on a 4 layer PCB, you're better off with an older X470 board of decent quality , audio is _ALC887_, also the webpage suggests it's a single BIOS chip with Q-flash+
> ---> Aorus Elite also is lacking dual BIOS in favor of Qflash+ only, uses ISL PWM, 4 layer PCB + no heatpipe
> * MSI's boards below MEG Ace aren't going to be worth buying in general since they're using less than 6 layer PCB and also dual-N fet or powerpaks <10 , thankfully they're denoted "MPG" for simplicity's sake
> 
> Every board needs to tack on ~$50 just for PCIE 4.0 , chipset fan or overkill chipset heatsink, new tariffs, and additional R&D money for power upgrades. I'd expect mid-tier boards to be closer to $250 rather than $180.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------
> der8auer posted a video on doublers vs "twin" design, it's supposedly 20ns delay from using doublers _all other things being equal_
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4-78_a33Fo
> 
> Have to be careful with this since inductors on doubled VRM usually uses half the inductance. For example 150nH (R15) or 220nH (R22) instead of 400-500nH.


Anyone know if the pro/elite/ultra are going to have the same/similar VRM as the Master like on z390?


----------



## AlphaC

chowbaby said:


> Anyone know if the pro/elite/ultra are going to have the same/similar VRM as the Master like on z390?


Matthew from Gigabyte already mentioned that Aorus Ultra/Pro are the same VRM but the Master has the new PWM (most importantly). The Aorus Ultra/Pro use the same number of PCB layers (6) but the main thing to note besides the PWM choice is the use of Apaq (Taiwanese) capacitors on the Ultra and Pro as well as Elite. If you want a debug LED the Ultra doesn't have one unlike Z390.

I would not buy the Elite if you can help it (step up to the Aorus Pro at least) since the board is a 4 layer one and it doesn't have a heatpipe or fins. It has a more lossy PCB with a different PWM from Intersil rather than IR. If you ever plan to use Crossfire or SLI it doesn't have PCIE bifurcation. If you look on Techpowerup (https://www.techpowerup.com/256138/gigabyte-gives-amd-x570-the-full-aorus-treatment-itx-to-xtreme), Aorus Elite lists "High Definition Audio" rather than AMP UP audio, while their product page lists ALC1200 rather than ALC1220-VB as on higher boards. It also loses Dual BIOS , which has been a main feature of Gigabyte boards, in favor of only QFlash+. As far as competitors go, this will probably line up with something like the ASUS Prime Pro (has S1220A Audio though) or TUF (which is now a bit below midrange , mainly due to Realtek S1200A audio and the Realtek L8200A LAN). The low midrange / "mainstream" Asrock Steel Legend and Extreme4 have ALC1220 + Intel LAN, even the entry Gaming 4 has it. It seems as the entire MSI Lineup from the Edge and up also have those two features as well as bifurcation (Crossfire is listed).

There's also a handy chart on Kitguru (although their PWM number is ISL69147 for the Elite so there's a slight discrepancy).
https://www.kitguru.net/components/...utex-2019-gigabyte-aorus-goes-all-in-on-x570/


Side note: the presentation Matthew gave says 85% of the Aorus Xtreme is covered in metal and the IO shroud is also metal.


----------



## CrazyElf

The good news is that it seems like across the board the VRMs are decent. 


Buildzoid has a video out as well.















Ramad said:


> The will probably price them at the same price as the Maser and ACE or higher. ASUS always like to reflect that they are making better motherboards than other motherboards manufacturers by tagging a premium price on their motherboards. You can compare the price of the excellent MSI MEG X399 creation and to ASUS' Extreme or Extreme Alpha, the MEG as a better product but the Extreme and the Alpha are priced higher. Make no mistake, people will buy the ASUS motherboard because "it's better because it costs more".
> 
> I have used both the C6H and the K7, the C6H could never stabilize my R5 1600 at 4.0GHz, but the K7 could do that without any problem (I have the stress testing results posted last year at the K7 thread).


If this is like history, then we should pay a lot of attention to the new Gigabyte X570 Aorus Extreme. 

One advantage is that it is one of the few boards with a proper heatsink for the VRMs and I guess passively cooled chipset. If nothing else, I think that this goes to show that with a proper finned heatsink as opposed to a solid block of metal, it is entirely possible to have a properly cooled X570 chipset.






Ramad said:


> So MSI are using IR35201 in 7+1 mode on the Godlike. 7 doubled signals using IR3599 for the CPU and 1 signal using IR3599 in quad mode for the SOC.
> 
> If IR35201 is providing switching frequency at 800KHz, the CPU powerstages will run at switching frequency of 400KHz while the SOC powerstages will be running at 200KHz. Interesting.



Yes - I think that there are going to be doubled signals all around for the high end boards.








AlphaC said:


> Crosshair VIII Hero hit 4000C18 , Godlike and Master can hit 3600C14 with Ryzen + (ryzen 7 2700X / Ryzen 5 2600X) apparently while the X570 Taichi they had on the stand was 3600C18:




Makes me wonder what ICs these are. If Samsung has indeed terminated production of B Die, this means:



The Samsung A Die series is as good or better than B Die
Micron E Die
Hynix CJR
They will keep B Die production


Not sure which one though.






AlphaC said:


> Gigabyte's X570 Aorus Xtreme : no chipset fan is unique as well as the 16 phases direct (no teaming or doubling) with finned heatsink and backplate , 14x 70A infineon powerstage, 10G LAN, 8 layer PCB , right angle connectors = *depending on pricing this could sell very well*
> --> the Aorus Master is likely to be a top pick for most people as it retains the direct PWM and finned heatsink but drops 10G LAN and powerstages downgraded to 50A IR3556




Word on the street is that the X570 Aorus Xtreme will be $600 USD.


https://www.tomshardware.com/news/gigabyte-aorus-x570-ryzen_3000-motherboards,39504.html




Grain of salt on this one, but it would be what we would expect for a high end flagship.


----------



## chowbaby

AlphaC said:


> *Matthew from Gigabyte already mentioned that Aorus Ultra/Pro are the same VRM but the Master has the new PWM (most importantly). The Aorus Ultra/Pro use the same number of PCB layers (6) but the main thing to note besides the PWM choice is the use of Apaq (Taiwanese) capacitors on the Ultra and Pro as well as Elite. If you want a debug LED the Ultra doesn't have one unlike Z390.*
> 
> I would not buy the Elite if you can help it (step up to the Aorus Pro at least) since the board is a 4 layer one and it doesn't have a heatpipe or fins. It has a more lossy PCB with a different PWM from Intersil rather than IR. If you ever plan to use Crossfire or SLI it doesn't have PCIE bifurcation. If you look on Techpowerup (https://www.techpowerup.com/256138/gigabyte-gives-amd-x570-the-full-aorus-treatment-itx-to-xtreme), Aorus Elite lists "High Definition Audio" rather than AMP UP audio, while their product page lists ALC1200 rather than ALC1220-VB as on higher boards. It also loses Dual BIOS , which has been a main feature of Gigabyte boards, in favor of only QFlash+. As far as competitors go, this will probably line up with something like the ASUS Prime Pro (has S1220A Audio though) or TUF (which is now a bit below midrange , mainly due to Realtek S1200A audio and the Realtek L8200A LAN). The low midrange / "mainstream" Asrock Steel Legend and Extreme4 have ALC1220 + Intel LAN, even the entry Gaming 4 has it. It seems as the entire MSI Lineup from the Edge and up also have those two features as well as bifurcation (Crossfire is listed).
> 
> There's also a handy chart on Kitguru (although their PWM number is ISL69147 for the Elite so there's a slight discrepancy).
> https://www.kitguru.net/components/...utex-2019-gigabyte-aorus-goes-all-in-on-x570/
> 
> 
> Side note: the presentation Matthew gave says 85% of the Aorus Xtreme is covered in metal and the IO shroud is also metal.


So Aorus Elite to the Pro use IR35201 /ISL69147 and then they're doubled 12 phases instead of the direct 12/14 for the Master and Extreme? And 40A power stages for the Pro and Ultra and 50A for the Elite, so it's not quite identical I guess and that explains the cost separation?


----------



## Nighthog

I updated the first post with some X570 VRM information I gathered up around these last days. Feel free to add info and corrections if you see something wrong.


----------



## AlphaC

chowbaby said:


> So Aorus Elite to the Pro use IR35201 /ISL69147 and then they're doubled 12 phases instead of the direct 12/14 for the Master and Extreme? And 40A power stages for the Pro and Ultra and 50A for the Elite, so it's not quite identical I guess and that explains the cost separation?


For the average person, anything from Aorus Pro and up is a great choice even if they dropped the FP / Japanese Chemicon caps from the Ultra/Pro because the features , IO, and build quality are there (the finned heatsinks with a heatpipe make it less important whether they're using Japanese capacitors because heat won't be concentrated on left side of the board , even if I'm disappointed with that cost cutting choice). Unlike the Elite you still get Dual BIOS and the audio codec is ALC1220-VB. If you don't have a USB 3.1 gen 2 internal header adapter or Type A to Type C, the USB C is unusable on the Aorus Elite since there's none on back panel. The main upgrades from the Aorus Pro to Ultra are the 3rd M.2 and the fins on the heatsink are also on the SOC VRM section.

If you were to buy a competing board from MSI you'd need to go with higher than Pro Carbon to get a comparable power delivery + 6 layer PCB , and the IO on the lower MSI boards is more cut down. MSI did the foolish decision of putting a better VRM on the Pro Carbon (but it's still 10x Dual-N fet) vs the Edge, but then gimping it with a plastic cover and shoddy heatsink. For Asrock it's the same story, you'd need to get a Taichi or Phantom Gaming 6 probably. The Steel Legend is not using a heatpipe and is supposedly 8 phases DrMos , although it retains the core feature of ALC1220 audio and Intel 1G LAN. I'm pretty sure the Steel Legend also doesn't have front panel USB 3.1 gen 2 but it's not as important for most people. Asus usually is priced higher at every bracket but you'd have to get a Prime Pro or STRIX-E board likely (with ASUS you need to buy a crosshair board to get Japanese 10K hour capacitors , STRIX is usually 5K hour Apaq/Taiwan capacitors colored black).



Nighthog said:


> I updated the first post with some X570 VRM information I gathered up around these last days. Feel free to add info and corrections if you see something wrong.



Interested in what the Germans over at Hardwareluxx find out about Asus (WS Ace is in odd positioning , Prime Pro doesn't have info and is the most popular board generally) and Asrock boards honestly (particularly Extreme4 which seems to be below Steel Legend this time). We have official info from Gigabyte and MSI already.

I've seen Sinopower logos on the Asrock Pro4 at the SOC area so it's probably SM4336+SM4337 (since it wasn't a dual-N fet) but I'm not sure.

Not sure why the people at hardwareluxx care about SOC VRM that much though.

The person over at Optimum Tech youtube channel thinks it is 6 phases or 8 phases for the Phantom ITX but didn't take off the heatsink so that is iffy. From an engineering standpoint unless they put in 70A TDA21472 I think it's probably 8 phases (doubled or "twin" 4). Asrock usually designs their ITX boards rather well, you can see the amount of thought they put into it: even using the Intel CPU mount to maximize the board area.


----------



## Elrick

AlphaC said:


> For Asrock it's the same story, you'd need to get a Taichi or Phantom Gaming 6 probably. The Steel Legend is not using a heatpipe and is supposedly 8 phases DrMos , although it retains the core feature of ALC1220 audio and Intel 1G LAN. I'm pretty sure the Steel Legend also doesn't have front panel USB 3.1 gen 2 but it's not as important for most people.



Really love your small graphics shot, showing all the forthcoming IO plate connections that shall be provided for :thumb: .

The ONLY one that caught my attention, was the ever simple "Steel legend" money-shot.

Love what they are providing for me and can't wait for their models to hit Convict Town soon. Hoping indeed to fill a long forgotten Lian Li case (with an X570 Asrock Mainboard) which has been ignored for more than 5 years now.

I no longer buy anymore recent cases because they are indeed poor and redundant, to any decent standards.


----------



## AlphaC

Looking back at the image I think I forgot to circle the PS/2 port on the MSI Creation. My mistake. However, it is quite apparent that the Creation is the strongest board in MSI's lineup once you look past the marketing flashiness.

If you're getting a X570 Steel Legend I'd make sure to wait for reviews. The issue is the Steel Legend used to be part of their lower end lineup (B450). Asrock moved it up market above the Extreme4 , or dropped the Extreme4 below Steel Legend. Hopefully it's the former judging by featureset. Still haven't seen any shots of the registered Phantom Gaming 6 so that might be worth waiting for as that usually has a heatpipe and debug LED.

PCMag's overview of all X570 boards is up:


https://www.pcmag.com/feature/368729/here-s-all-the-amd-x570-motherboards-we-saw-at-computex-2019


----------



## Darkomax

Even if I stay on my X370-I Strix, these new motherboard look exciting, and it seems like Zen2 will be a fun architecture to play with.


----------



## miklkit

AlphaC said:


> Looking back at the image I think I forgot to circle the PS/2 port on the MSI Creation. My mistake. However, it is quite apparent that the Creation is the strongest board in MSI's lineup once you look past the marketing flashiness.
> 
> If you're getting a X570 Steel Legend I'd make sure to wait for reviews. The issue is the Steel Legend used to be part of their lower end lineup (B450). Asrock moved it up market above the Extreme4 , or dropped the Extreme4 below Steel Legend. Hopefully it's the former judging by featureset. Still haven't seen any shots of the registered Phantom Gaming 6 so that might be worth waiting for as that usually has a heatpipe and debug LED.
> 
> PCMag's overview of all X570 boards is up:
> 
> 
> https://www.pcmag.com/feature/368729/here-s-all-the-amd-x570-motherboards-we-saw-at-computex-2019



That overview is interesting but lacking in any real details. From my point of view only the bottom line MSI board, the ASUS alphabet boards, and the Biostar board are interesting.


----------



## Heuchler

*German SOC VRM*



AlphaC said:


> Not sure why the people at hardwareluxx care about SOC VRM that much though.


Could just be a german thing [ja] OR 14nm IO chiplet is more sensitive to ripples with higher DDR4 speed and PCIe Gen 4 (but that seems unlikely).

7+1 with doublers does sound better than 6+2 with doublers. 16 VRM either way.


I hope that manufactures will bring back VRM blocks and more monoblock solutions become available.


----------



## Elrick

*Any new X570 Matx boards on the horizon yet?*

Just wondering with this new chipset being released soon, is there a DECENT small Matx motherboard coming for us addicts here?

Just so desperate for something that isn't a tiny Itx standard but something with some extra meat on the bone.

Been looking for years since the Ryzen tech first arrived, for a solid VRM Matx motherboard with a slew of IO connections available.

Thus far it's been a desert of losers and wannabe's pretending to be high spec but are not in any way. Why is the Matx standard being ignored by the AMD crowd yet in the Intel area they are overflowing with decent Matx models.

_Was hoping that Intel will fix their security issues but they seem to fail consistently on every level. Hence AMD seem's to be the most trusted platform at this moment in time._


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Elrick said:


> Just wondering with this new chipset being released soon, is there a DECENT small Matx motherboard coming for us addicts here?
> 
> Just so desperate for something that isn't a tiny Itx standard but something with some extra meat on the bone.
> 
> Been looking for years since the Ryzen tech first arrived, for a solid VRM Matx motherboard with a slew of IO connections available.
> 
> Thus far it's been a desert of losers and wannabe's pretending to be high spec but are not in any way. Why is the Matx standard being ignored by the AMD crowd yet in the Intel area they are overflowing with decent Matx models.
> 
> _Was hoping that Intel will fix their security issues but they seem to fail consistently on every level. Hence AMD seem's to be the most trusted platform at this moment in time._


The only matx board seen at all at computex was the Asrock Pro4M, so no


----------



## asdkj1740

Elrick said:


> _Was hoping that Intel will fix their security issues but they seem to fail consistently on every level. Hence AMD seem's to be the most trusted platform at this moment in time._


thats becuase amd locks a lot of features/functions before motherboard bios taking control when you press the power button on your case. this is also the reason why amd ryzen have got so many overclocking iusses / reboot issues.
while intel opens those features/funtions for motherboard vendor to take control the whole pc staring up process from the beginning of pressing the power button. this is exactly a chance for someones who want to hack your pc.

and intel is starting to lock all those features.


----------



## CrazyElf

Another take by Buildzoid on the Gigabyte X570 Xtreme.






I'm thinking that right now, Gigabyte may have the best of the X570 boards. It seems like each generation there is a winner - for example for X399, right now it is the MSI X399 MEG Creation. 


VRM is as good as the competition
"True 14 phase" for CPU (controller is 14+2)
Heatsink is actually decent 
Heatsink is apparently good enough for passive cooling (most of the others are active with a fan)

Personally I'd buy the Gigabyte if I were looking for a flagship X570, although right now I'm waiting for Threadripper. 

The rest comes down to the BIOS, as Buildzoid notes. 




Nighthog said:


> MSI:
> MEG X570 GODLIKE *18-phase[14+4]*| TDA21472 70A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer
> PRESTIGE X570 CREATION *16-phase[14+2]*| IR3555 60A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer
> MEG X570 ACE *14-phase[12+2]*| IR3555 60A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer
> MPG X570 GAMING PRO CARBON WIFI *12-phase[10+2]*| UBIQ QA3111N6N 56A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer
> MPG X570 GAMING EDGE WIFI *10-phase[8+2]*| OnSemi NTMFS4C029NT1G/NMMFS4C024NT1G 46A/78A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer
> MPG X570 GAMING PLUS *10-phase[8+2]*| OnSemi NTMFS4C029NT1G/NMMFS4C024NT1G 46A/78A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer
> MPG X570-A PRO *10-phase[8+2]*| OnSemi NTMFS4C029NT1G/NMMFS4C024NT1G 46A/78A, PWM: IR35201(8-phase)*, PCB: ?-Layer



I think the layers are here (skip to 4 minutes in):







So the Godlike is an 8 layer (no surprise) and the Creation is a 6 layer (a bit of a surprise as I had expected it to be 8 layers as well). 


Thanks for updating the list by the way!


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/hands_on-msi-x570-motherboards,39445.html


I hate linking tom's hardware but they mentioned MSI's boards have 6 layer up until Ace (Godlike is 8). Pro Carbon is 4 layer , so is Edge and Gaming Plus.


----------



## drmrlordx

@Nighthog

Are you sure the top-end Asus boards are 12+4? I thought they were 14+2?


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> Nobody knows for sure that is why I would wait for the launch.
> 
> Preliminary I would say allocate about 20-22W per core based on Ryzen+ / Threadripper 2nd gen. That's about ~240W for 12 core maxed out (on ambient of course) or 300-350W for 16 cores (based off TR 2950X). So if you're looking at a 12 core I'd get a new board if you don't have a top tier X470 or X370 (which might not support PCIE 4.0 at all).
> 
> If you look at X299 and X399 you can get an idea of what a 12/16 core CPU demands generally , it's usually 8 to 12 powerstages , where X399 was pretty boring as it was more or less 8x 60A IR3555 on every board.
> 
> If you look at the lineups it's probably wise to buy midrange or higher where they have a heatpipe because there are also important feature differences such as WIFI6 or the LAN solution choice. On ASUS for ATX that's the STRIX-F and higher (Prime Pro for 8 core probably /TUF use cheaper audio and fewer USB ports), on Asrock it seems to be around Phantom Gaming 6 and higher (Creator/Phantom Gaming X / Taichi mainly , Steel Legend/Extreme4 probably will cut it for 12 cores), on Gigabyte it's roughly Aorus Pro and higher (Aorus Elite lacks heatpipe , drops dual BIOS, and is 4 layer), and on MSI it's roughly MEG Ace and higher (all lower end "MPG" is 4 layer board with dual-N fet or powerpak rather than powerstages).
> 
> From MSI there's new info that the Dual-N fet on the Pro Carbon is Ubiq QA3111 supposedly 56A (mentioned in GamersNexus video as "3111") which is also used on their RTX 2070 Gaming Z (so it's a shared supply chain):
> https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2001935-1-1.html
> Some info is still under NDA but it seems that there are IR doublers on the lower end boards this time all the way down the stack.
> MSI is _much_ improved this time around , like Aorus lineup was. With X470 they transitioned their product stack to use better capacitors all the way down to Gaming Plus , with X570 they're using better power delivery on "MEG" Ace and up rather than some copy paste Onsemi 4C029N+4C024N powerpak solution as they used on X470 M7 and Ace.
> 
> Everyone should be excited that motherboard makers are putting effort into AM4 though. Asrock even brought the Extreme4.


Have you seen any leaks on motherboard pricing for MSI ACE or Creation boards. I hope they are not more than $350 or I will be out of luck.


----------



## SwitchFX

The Gigabyte X370 boards were woeful. The X470 gaming 5 and 7 boards were good, IMO, with Asus boards taking the cake and MSI being the worst from what I've read. The new X570 boards are amazing, especially the beefy 14+2 phase VRM on a Gigabyte board, but I'm reading rumors that Asus and AsRock will also be using beefy components regardless of price range. Funny to think of AsRock as quality as I remember them back when they were garbage.

I skipped Zen and Zen+, and might go with Zen2 depending on benchmarks. I don't have a true choice. I'm rocking a dated Ivy Bridge E processor that's outclassed by modern mainstream processors. And Intel don't have an answer for Ryzen until 2023 or whenever Mr. Keller imparts his wizardry on Intel. I'm not going to pay for a security riddled processor given past issues and probability of future issues.


----------



## SwitchFX

os2wiz said:


> Have you seen any leaks on motherboard pricing for MSI ACE or Creation boards. I hope they are not more than $350 or I will be out of luck.


I've seen guestimates of $225 to $340 for a upper mid range. Though given MSIs QA quality with both prior processors and their various board ranges, I'd question the urge to get an MSI board.


----------



## Nighthog

drmrlordx said:


> @Nighthog
> 
> Are you sure the top-end Asus boards are 12+4? I thought they were 14+2?


That was the preliminary information I had gathered. I looked some more and others say 14+2 so I made a change, though I happened to come across info to say Many boards are using DrMOS mosfets rather than IR power stages as preliminary thought by many. Mostly ASRock and some ASUS boards.


----------



## drmrlordx

Nighthog said:


> That was the preliminary information I had gathered. I looked some more and others say 14+2 so I made a change, though I happened to come across info to say Many boards are using DrMOS mosfets rather than IR power stages as preliminary thought by many. Mostly ASRock and some ASUS boards.


Okay, thanks for the clarification, and keep up the good work!


----------



## os2wiz

SwitchFX said:


> I've seen guestimates of $225 to $340 for a upper mid range. Though given MSIs QA quality with both prior processors and their various board ranges, I'd question the urge to get an MSI board.


 Your presumptupous. The top end of MSI's X470 boards was quite good with a mediocre, not a terrible vrm. In every other way it was an excellent board. I got extremely good stable overclocks and benchmark scores with my 2700X on an MSI X470 Gaming M&7 AC. now on X570 their top 3 boards have excellent VRM support and 6 layer PCB on Creation and ACE and 8 layer PCB on the Godlike. the ACE 12x2 vrm Phase , Creation is 12 X 4 vrm. and Godlike 14x4 vrm. Your erroneous conclusions about MSI AMD motherboards give you the Worst Informed Overclock.net Member of the Day award. Their AMD X399 Creation board is the best of the Threadripper boards overall. 
I don't know what you mean by upper mid range. I asked about 2 specific boards that are their 2nd and 3rd best X570 boards . Are they included in your upper mid-range or they plain "upper"


----------



## Priest

Which X570 board is looking to be the best value when it comes to OCing? I am looking closely as the ASRock Extreme 4\Steel Legend with the 8+2 phase setup with no doublers. I don't know enough about the overall VRM quality though.


----------



## AlphaC

Priest said:


> What X570 board is looking to be the best value when it comes to OCing? I am looking closely as the ASRock Extreme 4\Steel Legend with the 8+2 phase setup with no doublers. I don't know enough about the overall VRM quality though.


 Depends on how many cores.

On Asrock lineup the Steel Legend looks to be capable for 8 cores since it's looking to be 8x 50A DrMos powerstages , with the usual features such as USB-C , ALC1220, and Intel LAN. The Taichi/Phantom Gaming X/Creator are using 12x 50A powerstages and are heatpiped. The biggest change on the Creator board is 10G LAN + Thunderbolt 3. No word on pricing yet. Aqua is supposedly a limited run $999 board with 999 available so that's not worth it.

On Asus lineup I'd say Prime X570 Pro at a minimum ($185 TUF X570 PLUS if you can deal with cut down ALC1200 audio + LAN) since supposedly it's 12+2 50A DrMOs, STRIX-E/F is a recommendation if you plan on 12 cores since it has heatpipe. The latest info says that the Prime X570 Pro will be $250 and STRIX-E/F at $300. Crosshair Hero will be $360-380 depending on if you want wifi and will have 14x 60A IR3555 powerstages. The cheapest Asus X570-P board isn't worth buying even if you only buy Asus products since it's lacking USB-C , the TUF board is around $10-15 more which is really minor.
_pricing per https://www.techpowerup.com/256443/...-motherboard-price-list-paints-a-horror-story_

On Gigabyte's lineup just get Aorus Pro / Aorus Ultra / Aorus Master , all those boards are 12x powerstages with either IR35201 doubled or the new Infineon PWM that supports 16 phases direct. Biggest upgrade from $250 Aorus Pro to $300 Ultra is the fins on the SOC VRM heatsink as well as 3rd M.2. The $200 Aorus Elite is 4 layer PCB and has no heatpipe , finned heatsink, or dual BIOs or anything that makes Gigabyte products standout despite having 12x 50A DrMos, while the Gaming X is just bad overall due to power delivery and featureset. Aorus Elite is also missing USB-C on rear IO. If you want an expensive top of the line board the Aorus Xtreme has the power delivery (14x 70A top of the line powerstages "direct"), other featuresets (backplate, 10G LAN, RGB commander, etc), and possesses no chipset fan_ unlike all other boards_.
_Pricing per https://www.anandtech.com/show/14490/gigabyte-unveils-its-x570-aorus-pro-with-or-without-wi-fi-6_

On MSI's lineup it's really rough since supposedly you CAN overclock 12 cores on the 4-layer Pro Carbon (10x Dual-N fet power delivery). However I'd say that's a bad idea and that the Ace is such a massive improvement (12x 60A IR3555 powerstages with heatpiped heatsink) that is where I'd start on MSI's lineup. So Ace/Creation/Godlike (Godlike has a low amount of USB ports and high price so Creation is the better board overall I think). 
Computerbase leaked pricing:


Spoiler



MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus (219 Euro)
MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge WiFi (239 Euro)
MSI MPG X570 Gaming Pro Carbon WiFi (299 Euro)
MSI MEG X570 Ace (429 Euro)
MSI Prestige X570 Creation (539 Euro) 
MSI MEG X570 Godlike (777 Euro)



There's no official pricing yet so those are the "breakpoints" so to speak in each lineup.

--------------------------------------

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/PRIME-X570-PRO/ doesn't list phases but if you look at the diagram it's probably 12+2 unless 10+4 and the specs list DrMos


----------



## Priest

AlphaC said:


> ($185 TUF X570 PLUS if you can deal with cut down ALC1200 audio + LAN) since supposedly it's 12+2 DrMOs


I am trying to get the best VRM setup board on a board that has a 1g Intel Nic (No Realtek) and No WiFi. Don't really care about audio as I typically use an external DAC anyways.

The reason I was strongly considering the ASRock board as it was 8 direct phases with no doublers, which seemed like a good balance between cost and performance in my head, but I guess it depends on the quality of the VRM.


----------



## AlphaC

The Asrock boards are probably not 8 phases direct unless they're using a separate PWM for the SOC. That's extremely unlikely on a mainstream oriented board , even on Gigabyte's lineup only the top 2 boards have the new IR "direct" PWM _which is marketing speak for a 16 phase PWM_. Typical PWM is IR35201 / ISL69138 / ISL69147.


edit: as far as Asus TUF goes, the specs page lists Realtek® L8200A https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/TUF-Gaming-X570-Plus/specifications/


----------



## Priest

AlphaC said:


> The Asrock boards are probably not 8 phases direct unless they're using a separate PWM for the SOC.[/url]


Maybe not, I was just basing that on what I have heard from Tech Yes City at Computex about those 2 boards.


----------



## Elrick

Priest said:


> I am trying to get the best VRM setup board on a board that has a 1g Intel Nic (No Realtek) and No WiFi. Don't really care about audio as I typically use an external DAC anyways.


Have been using an external DAC for six years now. Would be nice getting Intel Nic's instead, any of the Realtek junk pile. Really do despise them on every level despite the release of newer model range.



Priest said:


> The reason I was strongly considering the ASRock board as it was 8 direct phases with no doublers, which seemed like a good balance between cost and performance in my head, but I guess it depends on the quality of the VRM.


Might actually go for the new Gigabyte top model simply due to it's server-like VRM high-quality release. Just really hate the overall size which resembles an Aircraft Carrier  .

Who would of thought that they decided to get back into the game by releasing their new over the top model range. Although I really hate their Bios settings, still confusing after all these years.


----------



## chowbaby

*chowbaby*



Lexi is Dumb said:


> About that. Looks like the X570 Master is going to be $350 USD. If Asus price the CH8 Hero above that its DOA.


https://www.techpowerup.com/256443/...-motherboard-price-list-paints-a-horror-story 

Looks like Asus will be pricing the CH8 above the Gigabyte X570 Master at $359.99 and $379.99 vs $350 USD....


----------



## AlphaC

Update on Taichi VRM: it's 12 powerstages for the VCORE definitely.
https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Taichi/#Overview


----------



## Ramad

My first ASUS motherboard was the A7N8X, which died after 4 months, threw it away and got an ABIT instead. Second and last ASUS motherboard is the C6H. I'm not going to buy a motherboard from ASUS again. Paying more for less is not an option regardless of how many motherboards they give away for users at OCN to polish and market their motherboards.


----------



## larrydavid

AlphaC: How would you rank the memory compatibility/overclocking ability of AM4 board brands in general? Something like Asus > Asrock > MSI ~= Gigabyte > Biostar


----------



## AlphaC

larrydavid said:


> AlphaC: How would you rank the memory compatibility/overclocking ability of AM4 board brands in general? Something like Asus > Asrock > MSI ~= Gigabyte > Biostar


 As far as I know AMD forced daisy chain for all X570

MSI is usually running daisy chain and Asus on X470. I don't expect any change there. MSI has been making all the memory records on Intel lately as well.

X470 Pro Carbon holds the X470 record right now at 2032MHz (4066MHz effective CL20) on water in terms of MHz: https://hwbot.org/submission/3973686_rhodie_memory_frequency_ddr4_sdram_2032.1_mhz

Crosshair VII Hero has had ~2GHz (4000MHz effective CL18) at 60°C (i.e. not LN2) https://hwbot.org/submission/3956314_cyclone174_memory_frequency_ddr4_sdram_1995_mhz

Asrock supposedly has T-topology on X470 Taichi per techpowerup guide https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/4.html

However, on X370 they had some of the best memory overclocking since the Crosshair VI Hero was also T-topology and the TI NexFET powerblock for memory VRM is just outright better than what other vendors were using.

Generally Gigabyte has had the worst memory overclocks on their midrange due to the T-topology unless you run 4 DIMMs. People have gotten 3400-3600 regardless of this. I've seen someone over on hwbot get 1900MHz (3800MHz effective , C18) on their X470 G7 at 62°C CPU though (i.e. not LN2). 

If you're buying in anticipation for Ryzen 3rd gen, AMD states that 3600C16 is the "sweet spot" for Ryzen 3rd gen and that over 3733MHz runs the Infinity Fabric at 2:1 ratio which is suboptimal for latency. 



----

In other news it looks like the X570-P is as I expected , it looks to be 10x powerstages for VCORE which is weaker than the 12x used on ~$10-15 more expensive TUF Plus:







60% (6 of 10) are on the main VRM heatsink whereas 7 of 12 (~58%) are for the TUF so it's relatively equal

As a comparison for the lower midrange: The X570 Steel Legend has_ all 8 _on the main VRM heatsink , MSI Pro carbon has 6 of 10 on the main VRM heatsink as well (60%) but theirs is covered in plastic bits and is using Dual-N fets instead of powerstages, and Aorus Elite has 9 of 12 (75%) on the main VRM heatsink

B450 Pro Carbon had all 8 sets of mosfets on the main "extended" VRM heatsink , the new Gaming Plus / Edge boards have it split 6 on the main VRM heatsink and 2 on the SOC VRM heatsink.


----------



## Hale59

*FLARE X OK?*



AlphaC said:


> If you're buying in anticipation for Ryzen 3rd gen, AMD states that 3600C16 is the "sweet spot" for Ryzen 3rd gen and that over 3733MHz runs the Infinity Fabric at 2:1 ratio which is suboptimal for latency.


G.SKILL FLARE X (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) (2X8GB) here. Will it be fine (ram health) to OC to 3600C16, below 1.5v, on a X470, with a Ryzen 3000? *Edit= And have it run 24/7?


----------



## AlphaC

Hale59 said:


> G.SKILL FLARE X (F4-3200C14D-16GFX) (2X8GB) here. Will it be fine (ram health) to OC to 3600C16, below 1.5v, on a X470, with a Ryzen 3000? *Edit= And have it run 24/7?


 3200C14 is a higher bin than 3600C16 in terms of absolute latency and people have gotten 3600C16 / 3466C14 on <1.4V
The only higher XMP bin (at 1.35V) is probably 3600C15



refer to https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1627555-ryzen-memory-ic-collection-thread.html , https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...-ryzen-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


----------



## Shenhua

AlphaC said:


> As far as I know AMD forced daisy chain for all X570
> 
> MSI is usually running daisy chain and Asus on X470. I don't expect any change there. MSI has been making all the memory records on Intel lately as well.
> 
> X470 Pro Carbon holds the X470 record right now at 2032MHz (4066MHz effective CL20) on water in terms of MHz: https://hwbot.org/submission/3973686_rhodie_memory_frequency_ddr4_sdram_2032.1_mhz
> 
> Crosshair VII Hero has had ~2GHz (4000MHz effective CL18) at 60°C (i.e. not LN2) https://hwbot.org/submission/3956314_cyclone174_memory_frequency_ddr4_sdram_1995_mhz
> 
> Asrock supposedly has T-topology on X470 Taichi per techpowerup guide https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/4.html
> 
> However, on X370 they had some of the best memory overclocking since the Crosshair VI Hero was also T-topology and the TI NexFET powerblock for memory VRM is just outright better than what other vendors were using.
> 
> Generally Gigabyte has had the worst memory overclocks on their midrange due to the T-topology unless you run 4 DIMMs. People have gotten 3400-3600 regardless of this. I've seen someone over on hwbot get 1900MHz (3800MHz effective , C18) on their X470 G7 at 62°C CPU though (i.e. not LN2).
> 
> If you're buying in anticipation for Ryzen 3rd gen, AMD states that 3600C16 is the "sweet spot" for Ryzen 3rd gen and that over 3733MHz runs the Infinity Fabric at 2:1 ratio which is suboptimal for latency.
> 
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> In other news it looks like the X570-P is as I expected , it looks to be 10x powerstages for VCORE which is weaker than the 12x used on ~$10-15 more expensive TUF Plus:
> View attachment 274176
> 
> 60% (6 of 10) are on the main VRM heatsink whereas 7 of 12 (~58%) are for the TUF so it's relatively equal
> 
> As a comparison for the lower midrange: The X570 Steel Legend has_ all 8 _on the main VRM heatsink , MSI Pro carbon has 6 of 10 on the main VRM heatsink as well (60%) but theirs is covered in plastic bits and is using Dual-N fets instead of powerstages, and Aorus Elite has 9 of 12 (75%) on the main VRM heatsink
> 
> B450 Pro Carbon had all 8 sets of mosfets on the main "extended" VRM heatsink , the new Gaming Plus / Edge boards have it split 6 on the main VRM heatsink and 2 on the SOC VRM heatsink.


What about the b450 mortar, tomahawk a and pro carbon? Are they T-Topology or daisy chain? How would you rank them regarding RAM OC.

Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 3 mediante Tapatalk


----------



## Molitro

AlphaC said:


> 3200C14 is a higher bin than 3600C16 in terms of absolute latency and people have gotten 3600C16 / 3466C14 on <1.4V
> The only higher XMP bin (at 1.35V) is probably 3600C15
> 
> 
> 
> refer to https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1627555-ryzen-memory-ic-collection-thread.html , https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...-ryzen-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


I'm starting the quest for DDR4 as I'm gonna go Zen2 in July, and since I hadn't been following the RAM situation with Ryzen I'm pretty out of the loop and got a bit blindsided by all this.
Of course now I find out b-dies are the best, but they're not producing them any more, all the ups and downs about the importance of getting the frecuency+timings right in Ryzen (although apparently will be less so in Zen2), etc... and in general don't know what to choose (or even if I should buy already if I see a nice set), or even the actual importance of getting a good set over a cheaper one (how much performance gain are we talking really with a good RAM over say a set and forget 3200 CL16?).

I quoted you since you seem to know about all this, but, for example, would a Trident Z 2x16GB 3200 CL14 for about 290€ be a good buy? Seems so, I think it's the cheapest 32GB set of, I'm guessing, b-dies I've seen.
Is it that much different for the common mortal over say a 2x16 Trident Z (RGB this time, not that I care) 3200 16-18-18 for 210€?
I mean, I'm willing to spend the extra given how much time they'll be with me (or even the extra resell value), I just don't know enough about the situation still


----------



## AlphaC

Molitro said:


> I'm starting the quest for DDR4 as I'm gonna go Zen2 in July, and since I hadn't been following the RAM situation with Ryzen I'm pretty out of the loop and got a bit blindsided by all this.
> Of course now I find out b-dies are the best, but they're not producing them any more, all the ups and downs about the importance of getting the frecuency+timings right in Ryzen (although apparently will be less so in Zen2), etc... and in general don't know what to choose (or even if I should buy already if I see a nice set), or even the actual importance of getting a good set over a cheaper one (how much performance gain are we talking really with a good RAM over say a set and forget 3200 CL16?).
> 
> I quoted you since you seem to know about all this, but, for example, would a Trident Z 2x16GB 3200 CL14 for about 290€ be a good buy? Seems so, I think it's the cheapest 32GB set of, I'm guessing, b-dies I've seen.
> Is it that much different for the common mortal over say a 2x16 Trident Z (RGB this time, not that I care) 3200 16-18-18 for 210€?
> I mean, I'm willing to spend the extra given how much time they'll be with me (or even the extra resell value), I just don't know enough about the situation still


 16GB sticks are probably dual rank B-die which isn't going to clock as easily. Usually when people talk about B-die it's 2x8GB 3600C15/3200C14/3600C16.

Ryzen 3rd gen might have fixed most of the problems with memory compatability since they moved most if not all boards to daisy chain and also since B-die is being discontinued they have incentive to optimize for Hynix (3600C19 cjr supposedly works decent on Ryzen) or Micron.



Shenhua said:


> What about the b450 mortar, tomahawk a and pro carbon? Are they T-Topology or daisy chain? How would you rank them regarding RAM OC.


Pretty sure that the Pro Carbon can overclock memory decently at least to 3466 officially, but the Mortar is iffy. https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/B450-GAMING-PRO-CARBON-AC#support-mem-14
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/B450M-MORTAR#support-mem-14 --- 3466 is still listed
















I think it's T-topology on those boards since there's bends in the memory traces and on the back it appears all 4 slots are direct to the CPU. I wouldn't count on the Mortar for memory overclocking as it is also a 4 DIMM board on mATX so there has to be either a thicker PCB or clever routing of signals, which is unlikely since it's a budget board.

(https://www.hd-tecnologia.com/review-msi-b450-gaming-pro-carbon-ac/ , https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/motherboards/msi-b450m-mortar-review/1/)


Some more searching: 

https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/


> As a good starting point for RAM-OC, I see the following boards.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS Rog Strix B450-I Gaming
> MSI X470 Gaming Pro Carbon
> ASUS Prime X470 Pro
> ASUS ROG Strix B450-F Gaming
> ASRock Fatal1ty X470 Gaming K4
> ASRock X470 Taichi
> ASUS ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
> Asus Rog Crosshair VII Hero
> MSI X470 Gaming M7
> [MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC *]
> [MSI B450 Tomahawk *]
> 
> 
> 
> The MSI B450 GPC & Tomahawk are the so-called budget boards and officially support 3466 OC.
> How well these boards really can cut off due to the lack of experience yet to be answered.
> 
> 
> Of course, the ASUS ROG Crosshair VII Hero is a great board, but I find it very expensive for the mainstream platform.
> 
> EDIT 19.10.2018: The Asus ROG Strix B450 F Gaming has been removed from the list due to modest VRM cooling. In pure gaming or moderate OC, the board is OK so far, but for the current price, there is too little delivered.




https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f13/ryzen-ram-oc-thread-moegliche-limitierungen-1216557.html
from QVL


> 3600+
> ASUS ROG Strix X470-I Gaming
> ASUS ROG Strix B450-I Gaming
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VII Hero
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VII Hero WIFI
> 
> MSI X470 Gaming M7 AC
> 
> 
> 
> *3533/3600*
> ASRock Fatal1ty X370 Gaming-ITX/ac (1)
> ASRock X370 Taichi (1)
> ASRock X470 Taichi (1)
> ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate
> 
> ASUS Prime X470-Pro
> ASUS ROG Strix X370-I Gaming
> ASUS ROG Strix X370-F Gaming (1)
> ASUS ROG Strix X470-F Gaming
> ASUS ROG Strix B350-I Gaming
> ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
> 
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero WIFI
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero Extreme
> 
> Gigabyte B450 I Aorus Pro WIFI
> Gigabyte Aorus GA-AX370-Gaming K7
> Gigybyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 WIFI
> 
> MSI B450M Mortar (1)
> MSI B450M Mortar Titanium
> MSI B450 Tomahawk (1)
> MSI X470 Gaming Pro Carbon (1)


(I removed the TUF B450 and Asrock B450 which have weaker VRM than Tomahawk)



On page 7, Taichi is listed as T-topology but able to push 3533MHz: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/Ryzen_Memory_Tweaking_Overclocking_Guide/7.html 
-----
https://www.overclock.net/forum/379...listed-also-gigabyte-msi-30.html#post28004354
From Hale59's links

The Asus WS Ace seems to be running 12x IR3555 (AP1405 PWM = IR35201?) , TUF plus seems to be 12x SiC639 on a mediocre heatsink but it's 7 of 12 on the left heatsink so it should be alright


----------



## Molitro

AlphaC said:


> 16GB sticks are probably dual rank B-die which isn't going to clock as easily. Usually when people talk about B-die it's 2x8GB 3600C15/3200C14/3600C16.


I see.
I'm still thinking on wether or not go to 32 gigs instead of 16. 

Thanks.


----------



## asdkj1740

the head of gigabyte motherboard division introduces x570s and pcie4 ssd






1. basically he has the same view of asus on the benefits of no doublers being used. and he also said true 14 phases (with doublers) is a good solution.

2. gigabyte is now trying to aviod the plastic i/o cover covering part of (if not all) the vrm heatsink, in order to increase heat dissipation. x570 aorus elite got the proper cutout on the i/o cover for the vrm heatsink.

3. gigabyte brings down the fin array heatsink design from high end lineup to mainstream. x570 aorus pro has got significant upgrade like fin array heatsink design over the previous generation eg z390 aorus pro.


----------



## AlphaC

The Gaming X isn't a 12 phase if the Google Doc from Matthew is correct. Says 10 phase for VCore 1H2L = doubled low side 5 phase unless it's wrong and actually 10 phase 2H2L Powerpaks. As it's gaming oriented there should have been at least ALC892 (B450 tomahawk level) or ALC1200 (see x570 TUF plus) , instead of that shoddy ALC887 since I doubt it is less than $170. It really dilutes their branding so it's good that it's not an Aorus product. MSI got the message and clearly segments "MEG" / "MPG" and "MAG" ; Asus continues to add ROG to their STRIX lineup even though it adds useless letters and isn't a true ROG product.

The Aorus Elite is far more cut down this time: it's not just heatsink wise, it also loses IR3553 in favor of Vishay powerstage , Dual BIOS, USB-C output, ALC1220, etc. Granted the price difference is more than $10 as on Z390 , along the lines of $50 cheaper I think vs Aorus Pro?

Vishay powerstage supposedly has better thermal conductivity than IR3553 so maybe it evens out the difference between Aorus Pro/Elite as well as competing Asus STRIX/TUF. I suspect IR3553/IR3555 are better in terms of transient, otherwise why would Asus and Gigabyte use it on higher end boards? 

Also, the drop down of the capacitors to the Apaq 5K hour means a 85°C temp = equivalent to lifetime of 105°C with FP caps that are 10K hour (-20°C = roughly double capacitor life) which is why the decision to use finned heatsink in Aorus Pro/Ultra is more of a necessity.
(That's totally fine on the Pro which is competing against the STRIX which have 5K hour Apaq as well rebranded to "MIL" , MSI Pro Carbon that comes with Dual-N fets + no heatpipe so even if it is using Japanese 12K hour capacitors its worse , so it really comes down to how much the Taichi costs with its 12x Vishay powerstages and 12K FP caps)

I don't think it's unreasonable to ditch all the bottom of barrel cheap oriented boards on X570 since it's obvious that it's going to be more expensive than B550. B550 supposedly isn't going to have the PCIE 4.0 from chipset. Apparently motherboard companies don't think so and you get boards like the X570 Pro4 and X570 Gaming Plus which are glorified B450-level boards with PCIe 4.0 tacked on. If the MSI leaked pricing is correct, the X570 Gaming Plus shouldn't exist when the X570 Edge is below 20 Euro difference before VAT , there should have just been a non-wifi model to streamline SKUs and cut down on product lines.


----------



## Nighthog

I hadn't really paid attention what 1H2L meant for the Gaming X before, but it's obvious now. It's their usual style of using 1 High side MOS and 2 low side MOS like they did about on all their other than top tier boards on B350/x370 & B450/X470.

So they use two chokes as well per 1L2H combo? So really just 7-phase total... Their usual shenanigans to seem more powerful than it is. 5phase for CPU and 2 for SOC then[5+2]. A little different than their older style 4+3 combination with the other older PWM controller.
So much weaker than I thought it was. I was constantly thinking dual-setup with 2x2 on high/low.


----------



## Heuchler

newer AMDchipset drivers v19.10.16 on X570 Taichi then on official AMD site [19.10.0429]
https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Taichi/#Download


----------



## Molitro

AlphaC said:


> 16GB sticks are probably dual rank B-die which isn't going to clock as easily. Usually when people talk about B-die it's 2x8GB 3600C15/3200C14/3600C16.
> 
> Ryzen 3rd gen might have fixed most of the problems with memory compatability since they moved most if not all boards to daisy chain and also since B-die is being discontinued they have incentive to optimize for Hynix (3600C19 cjr supposedly works decent on Ryzen) or Micron.


Just to be able to make the decision a bit better, both if I'll go x470 or x570 and the RAM. 
I did see dual rank overclocks worse, but how much we're talking? I'm not interested in pushing the RAM to the top anyway. Say, will the typical 3200 CL14 2x16 do 3600 CL16, which seems to be a good spot for Zen2, for example?


----------



## VeritronX

Buildzoid let slip that something new is also being powered by the soc vrm with the new chips and could affect overclocking (skip to 41:35)


----------



## AlphaC

Molitro said:


> Just to be able to make the decision a bit better, both if I'll go x470 or x570 and the RAM.
> I did see dual rank overclocks worse, but how much we're talking? I'm not interested in pushing the RAM to the top anyway. Say, will the typical 3200 CL14 2x16 do 3600 CL16, which seems to be a good spot for Zen2, for example?


 People have gotten the 16GB sticks to 2933MHz if I remember correctly


Even with single sided B-die most 2nd gen chips can only do 3466-3533MHz. 



https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-memory-tweaking-overclocking-guide/3.html said:


> And what about dual-rank DIMMs? By comparison, results of overclocking dual-rank RAM configurations are pretty sad at the moment. The memory controller has difficulty handling four ranks right now. I was able to achieve 3400 MHz CL14 with Samsung b-die memory modules and 3600 MHz CL16 with Hynix CJR memory modules. Based on my testing, the only upside to using four ranks is the impressive capacity increase and alternation because of the ranks technology, which increases system performance in games.


----------



## Molitro

That's precisely what I read, yes.

Thanks.


----------



## iNeri

AlphaC said:


> The Gaming X isn't a 12 phase if the Google Doc from Matthew is correct. Says 10 phase for VCore 1H2L = doubled low side 5 phase unless it's wrong and actually 10 phase 2H2L Powerpaks. As it's gaming oriented there should have been at least ALC892 (B450 tomahawk level) or ALC1200 (see x570 TUF plus) , instead of that shoddy ALC887 since I doubt it is less than $170. It really dilutes their branding so it's good that it's not an Aorus product. MSI got the message and clearly segments "MEG" / "MPG" and "MAG" ; Asus continues to add ROG to their STRIX lineup even though it adds useless letters and isn't a true ROG product.
> 
> The Aorus Elite is far more cut down this time: it's not just heatsink wise, it also loses IR3553 in favor of Vishay powerstage , Dual BIOS, USB-C output, ALC1220, etc. Granted the price difference is more than $10 as on Z390 , along the lines of $50 cheaper I think vs Aorus Pro?
> 
> Vishay powerstage supposedly has better thermal conductivity than IR3553 so maybe it evens out the difference between Aorus Pro/Elite as well as competing Asus STRIX/TUF. I suspect IR3553/IR3555 are better in terms of transient, otherwise why would Asus and Gigabyte use it on higher end boards?
> 
> Also, the drop down of the capacitors to the Apaq 5K hour means a 85°C temp = equivalent to lifetime of 105°C with FP caps that are 10K hour (-20°C = roughly double capacitor life) which is why the decision to use finned heatsink in Aorus Pro/Ultra is more of a necessity.
> (That's totally fine on the Pro which is competing against the STRIX which have 5K hour Apaq as well rebranded to "MIL" , MSI Pro Carbon that comes with Dual-N fets + no heatpipe so even if it is using Japanese 12K hour capacitors its worse , so it really comes down to how much the Taichi costs with its 12x Vishay powerstages and 12K FP caps)
> 
> I don't think it's unreasonable to ditch all the bottom of barrel cheap oriented boards on X570 since it's obvious that it's going to be more expensive than B550. B550 supposedly isn't going to have the PCIE 4.0 from chipset. Apparently motherboard companies don't think so and you get boards like the X570 Pro4 and X570 Gaming Plus which are glorified B450-level boards with PCIe 4.0 tacked on. If the MSI leaked pricing is correct, the X570 Gaming Plus shouldn't exist when the X570 Edge is below 20 Euro difference before VAT , there should have just been a non-wifi model to streamline SKUs and cut down on product lines.


Thank for the info bro.

So, much better the Aourus Pro for $50 more.

Do you know if this new gigabyte lineup come with daisy chain topology? Or is t again? 

I ask because on the site all the line up spec memory to 3200 mhz on ryzen 3000. Make me belive this are t topology:


----------



## AlphaC

T-topology or not it's better than X470 midrange such that it's running 2133MHz (4266MHz effective) with 3rd gen:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13512793
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13563053


X570 Master at 2138MHz / 4276 MHz effective (maybe bclk involved):
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13472133


AMD has stated 3600C16 is the "sweet spot" and that after 3733MHz the infinity fabric changes from 1:1 ratio to 2:1.


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

iNeri said:


> Do you know if this new gigabyte lineup come with daisy chain topology? Or is t again?


All our X570 are daisy. The website only lists "officially" supported speeds from AMD... Trust me they go _ much _ higher than that.


----------



## iNeri

AlphaC said:


> T-topology or not it's better than X470 midrange such that it's running 2133MHz (4266MHz effective) with 3rd gen:
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13512793
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13563053
> 
> 
> X570 Master at 2138MHz / 4276 MHz effective (maybe bclk involved):
> https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13472133
> 
> 
> AMD has stated 3600C16 is the "sweet spot" and that after 3733MHz the infinity fabric changes from 1:1 ratio to 2:1.


impressive indeed. Thanks for your response.



GBT-MatthewH said:


> All our X570 are daisy. The website only lists "officially" supported speeds from AMD... Trust me they go _ much _ higher than that.


Thanks for confirm. Then the Aourus Pro is the choosed one for me. I mean, its a 6 phase 40a doubled. More than x470 G7 and 250 bucks i cannt say no jejeje


----------



## Streetdragon

The aorus Master gets 70A stages





In the comments sektion


----------



## iNeri

Streetdragon said:


> The aorus Master gets 70A stages
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz4_stcf__0&t=185s
> In the comments sektion


Nah, 70a stages is the Aourus extreme. For the master are 50a stages. Overkill anyways.


----------



## Streetdragon

iNeri said:


> Nah, 70a stages is the Aourus extreme. For the master are 50a stages. Overkill anyways.


sure^^
We have separate coverage live on the channel for AMD keynote coverage. In the meantime, enjoy Buildzoid's Gigabyte X570 Master PCB analysis video. NOTE: Gigabyte has decided to replace the power stages with 70A from the 60A stages shown in some of its early renditions of this board, so it will be improving to 70A for mass production. We also have some coverage of MSI's X570 line 

anyway, still looks good.

I will get the Aorus Master or the MSI Ace. will see wich i wanna get at the end. Like both. Lanes are the same. Maybe MSI hat better Ram traces....


----------



## iNeri

Streetdragon said:


> sure^^
> We have separate coverage live on the channel for AMD keynote coverage. In the meantime, enjoy Buildzoid's Gigabyte X570 Master PCB analysis video. NOTE: Gigabyte has decided to replace the power stages with 70A from the 60A stages shown in some of its early renditions of this board, so it will be improving to 70A for mass production. We also have some coverage of MSI's X570 line
> 
> anyway, still looks good.
> 
> I will get the Aorus Master or the MSI Ace. will see wich i wanna get at the end. Like both. Lanes are the same. Maybe MSI hat better Ram traces....


Are you serious? thats great news 

Indeed that board its an Engineering sample. More reasons to consider the upgrade from the pro or ultra to Master for 350 bucks   because 40 amps stages of ultra and pro seems not far from the original 50 amp stages of the master, but 40 to 70 is to think about it


----------



## GBT-MatthewH

iNeri said:


> Nah, 70a stages is the Aourus extreme. For the master are 50a stages. Overkill anyways.


This is correct - Just to clear up any confusion the X570 Xtreme board photos we sent to BZ had 60A stages. The production boards will have 70A. The Master has 50A, nothing changed here.

Xtreme = 70A Stages - TDA21472.
Master = 50A Stages - IR3556.


----------



## iNeri

GBT-MatthewH said:


> This is correct - Just to clear up any confusion the X570 Xtreme board photos we sent to BZ had 60A stages. The production boards will have 70A. The Master has 50A, nothing changed here.
> 
> Xtreme = 70A Stages - TDA21472.
> Master = 50A Stages - IR3556.


Thanks for the info MatthewH. It was too good to be true the Master with 70a stages. 50a stages are great anyway.


----------



## Streetdragon

hmmm still feel good about the master board^^ has good vrm heatskinks from the loo, so should not be a problem


----------



## sotheray

ASRock X570 Taichi uses 12[6*2]+2[1*2] Phases, SiC634 DrMos, ISL69147(6+1) with ISL6617 doublers, T-Topology memory layout.

However, at ASRock's website https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Phantom Gaming X/index.asp, in the pic "60A choke"(attached below), it shows that X570 Phantom Gaming X uses SiC654 powerstage, which does have OCP&OTP features, while SiC634 does not. So Taichi's VRM is a downgrade of Phantom Gaming X this time?


----------



## Streetdragon

Seems to be, that the gaming x is a bit "better" in terms of VRm and overall quality


----------



## VeritronX

Just in case it was missed (I haven't seen the video posted in here), here's what might be one of the best ITX X570 VRM?

"The little VRM that could.. destroy your 2700X"

(VRM efficiency talk starts around 7:15)


----------



## AlphaC

sotheray said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUtvsAmD3Ws
> 
> ASRock X570 Taichi uses 12[6*2]+2[1*2] Phases, SiC634 DrMos, ISL69147(6+1) with ISL6617 doublers, T-Topology memory layout.
> 
> However, at ASRock's website https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Phantom Gaming X/index.asp, in the pic "60A choke"(attached below), it shows that X570 Phantom Gaming X uses SiC654 powerstage, which does have OCP&OTP features, while SiC634 does not. So Taichi's VRM is a downgrade of Phantom Gaming X this time?


Wouldn't obsess over it, but do know that in the latest Z390 boards such as Phantom Gaming 7 they've been using SiC634. The ISL6617 provides current balancing so it basically down to the OTP. OTP is likely handled by an external temperature sensor. (See https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/9000/asrock-z390-phantom-gaming-motherboard-preview/index3.html)

I don't understand the obsession with memory layout when the Taichi is listing DDR4 4666+(OC) / 4400(OC) / 4300(OC) / 4266(OC) / 4200(OC) / 4133(OC) / 3466(OC). Even with T-topology Taichi was hitting 3533MHz on X370/X470 : AMD's slides show 3200Mhz C14 and 3600C16 both provided 69ns memory latency for Ryzen 3rd gen and it's 100% certain that it can hit 3200C14.

Anyhow, since it's using ISL6617 doublers + 50A DrMos I'm interested in their pricing structure: to price it north of ~$250-300 is very unlikely. The ~$200 Aorus Elite is using the same layout more or less, so most of the upgrades on the Taichi this time around are minor compared to say the ~$180 ASUS TUF Plus (no doublers). You do get a heatpipe , debug code LED, power/reset , wifi 6 + BT, FP 12K capacitors, ALC1220 audio + amp, backplate (not sure if thermal), etc.


------


Speaking of buildzoid's overviews apparently the received the Gigabyte Gaming X and it's actually 10 phases with 2 low side fets per phase (not 5 phases doubled low side) so it's much less of a dumpster fire. Do note that the 2nd low side fet is on the back of the board so it isn't great.


----------



## sotheray

AlphaC said:


> Wouldn't obsess over it, but do know that in the latest Z390 boards such as Phantom Gaming 7 they've been using SiC634. The ISL6617 provides current balancing so it basically down to the OTP. OTP is likely handled by an external temperature sensor. (See https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/9000/asrock-z390-phantom-gaming-motherboard-preview/index3.html)
> 
> I don't understand the obsession with memory layout when the Taichi is listing DDR4 4666+(OC) / 4400(OC) / 4300(OC) / 4266(OC) / 4200(OC) / 4133(OC) / 3466(OC). Even with T-topology Taichi was hitting 3533MHz on X370/X470 : AMD's slides show 3200Mhz C14 and 3600C16 both provided 69ns memory latency for Ryzen 3rd gen and it's 100% certain that it can hit 3200C14.
> 
> Anyhow, since it's using ISL6617 doublers + 50A DrMos I'm interested on their pricing structure: to price it north of ~$250-300 is very unlikely. The ~$200 Aorus Elite is using the same layout more or less, so most of the upgrades on the Taichi this time around are minor compared to say the ~$180 ASUS TUF Plus (no doublers). You do get a heatpipe , debug code LED, power/reset , backplate (not sure if thermal), etc.


ASRock use multi-kind MosFETs on a single board model before(see Z370 extreme4, also some low-end X370/B350/X470/B450 boards), so who knows. 

T-Topology is much better for 4 dimms at very high frequency, Gigabyte Z390 Master can achieve 4533 @4*8g but it can hardly exceed 4200 with 2 dimms. Its QVL: [email protected]*8, [email protected]*8. So QVL is not everything, especially for 2 dimms on a t-topo board.

Also, it seems that the IF frequency has far more than two options (1:1/2:1). So with 3733+ memory frequency may not always mean high latency, if we can maintain IF frequency at a high level.
See https://www.chiphell.com/forum.php?mod=redirect&goto=findpost&ptid=2005499&pid=42412821. Toppc is a MSI engineer who broke DDR4 frequency record at Computex2019.
\\English Translation:
\\Actually it's not a "ratio" adjustment. You may understand more if you think it as a RING adjustment.
\\Of course RING adjustment is the silicon lottery.
\\No one is curious why SOC has four phases?
\\(X570 Godlike, Buildzoid also mentioned this)


----------



## sotheray

AlphaC said:


> Wouldn't obsess over it, but do know that in the latest Z390 boards such as Phantom Gaming 7 they've been using SiC634. The ISL6617 provides current balancing so it basically down to the OTP. OTP is likely handled by an external temperature sensor. (See https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/9000/asrock-z390-phantom-gaming-motherboard-preview/index3.html)
> 
> I don't understand the obsession with memory layout when the Taichi is listing DDR4 4666+(OC) / 4400(OC) / 4300(OC) / 4266(OC) / 4200(OC) / 4133(OC) / 3466(OC). Even with T-topology Taichi was hitting 3533MHz on X370/X470 : AMD's slides show 3200Mhz C14 and 3600C16 both provided 69ns memory latency for Ryzen 3rd gen and it's 100% certain that it can hit 3200C14.
> 
> Anyhow, since it's using ISL6617 doublers + 50A DrMos I'm interested in their pricing structure: to price it north of ~$250-300 is very unlikely. The ~$200 Aorus Elite is using the same layout more or less, so most of the upgrades on the Taichi this time around are minor compared to say the ~$180 ASUS TUF Plus (no doublers). You do get a heatpipe , debug code LED, power/reset , wifi 6 + BT, FP 12K capacitors, ALC1220 audio + amp, backplate (not sure if thermal), etc.
> 
> 
> ------
> 
> 
> Speaking of buildzoid's overviews apparently the received the Gigabyte Gaming X and it's actually 10 phases with 2 low side fets per phase (not 5 phases doubled low side) so it's much less of a dumpster fire. Do note that the 2nd low side fet is on the back of the board so it isn't great.


TUF's VRM is a four phase with ASP1106GGQW, rather than 6 with ASP1405I. Three SiC639 per phase. That really sucks


----------



## AlphaC

ASP1106GGQW is highly likely to be capable of 6+2


----------



## sotheray

AlphaC said:


> ASP1106GGQW is highly likely to be capable of 6+2


ASP1106GGQW is likely to be a RT8877C, which is a 4+2 controller
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f12/pga-am4-mainboard-vrm-liste-1155146-9.html#post25427010


----------



## AlphaC

I just can't see them putting 3 powerstages on 1 phase, would be surprised if it is. Would be 3 powerstages in parallel. Since drivers are integrated into each powerstage it might make for a messy setup. Maybe it's 3 phases doubled to 6 and then parallel to 12 (obviously inferior to the Aorus Elite and Taichi solutions but with total powerstages equal) or 3 quadrupled.

The reason why I think it's capable of driving 6 is because ASUS originally had 6 phases on their RX 570 with ASP1300 + IR3598 (doubled to 6): https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-570-4gb,5028-2.html 

^ Igor is from tomshw.de now since he split off from US Tomshardware completely to make Igor's Lab at tomshw.de
Also greentech reviews: https://greentechreviews.ru/2017/06/08/obzor-videokarty-asus-rog-strix-radeon-rx-570-gaming-oc/ , https://greentechreviews.ru/2015/07/10/obzor-i-testirovanie-videokarty-asus-radeon-r9-390x-strix/

ASP1300 is also present on RX 480 strix using IR3555 powerstages so it's likely an IR PWM : https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-roundup,4962-6.html


It was substituted out from the 2016 rendition with that ASP1106: 
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-rx-470-strix-oc/5.html


ASP1106 on their FM2 board in 3+2 configuration: https://overclockers.ru/lab/show/52111_2/Obzor_i_testirovanie_materinskoj_platy_ASUS_F2A55-M

ASP1300 is supposedly IR PWM of some sort so they're likely interchangeable with modifications such as doublers.




--------------------


Also Gigabyte's entry level X570 Gaming X page is up finally:
https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/X570-GAMING-X-rev-10#kf
"10 phase * Doubled from 5 phases with current balancing."
Extended heatsink , but might have 2nd low side fet on rear of board


Zero USB 3.1 gen 2 , so probably a bad idea


----------



## sotheray

AlphaC said:


> I just can't see them putting 3 powerstages on 1 phase, would be surprised if it is. Would be 3 powerstages in parallel. Since drivers are integrated into each powerstage it might make for a messy setup. Maybe it's 3 phases doubled to 6 and then parallel to 12 (obviously inferior to the Aorus Elite and Taichi solutions but with total powerstages equal) or 3 quadrupled.
> 
> The reason why I think it's capable of driving 6 is because ASUS originally had 6 phases on their RX 570 with ASP1300 + IR3598 (doubled to 6): https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-570-4gb,5028-2.html
> 
> ^ Igor is from tomshw.de now since he split off from US Tomshardware completely to make Igor's Lab at tomshw.de
> Also greentech reviews: https://greentechreviews.ru/2017/06/08/obzor-videokarty-asus-rog-strix-radeon-rx-570-gaming-oc/ , https://greentechreviews.ru/2015/07/10/obzor-i-testirovanie-videokarty-asus-radeon-r9-390x-strix/
> 
> ASP1300 is also present on RX 480 strix using IR3555 powerstages so it's likely an IR PWM : https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-roundup,4962-6.html
> 
> 
> It was substituted out from the 2016 rendition with that ASP1106:
> https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-rx-470-strix-oc/5.html
> 
> 
> ASP1106 on their FM2 board in 3+2 configuration: https://overclockers.ru/lab/show/52111_2/Obzor_i_testirovanie_materinskoj_platy_ASUS_F2A55-M
> 
> ASP1300 is supposedly IR PWM of some sort so they're likely interchangeable with modifications such as doublers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------
> 
> 
> Also Gigabyte's entry level X570 Gaming X page is up finally:
> https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/X570-GAMING-X-rev-10#kf
> "10 phase * Doubled from 5 phases with current balancing."
> Extended heatsink , but might have 2nd low side fet on rear of board
> 
> 
> Zero USB 3.1 gen 2 , so probably a bad idea


Seems that there is no doubler on the TUF X570, so it is likely to be 3-DrMOS-parallel.
https://nguyencongpc.vn/danh-gia-bo-mach-chu-asus-tuf-x570-plus-wifi/

I don't think it is a problem to put 3 driver in parallel. ASRock Z370 Taichi put 2 driver IC in parallel in a single phase, directly linked to the controller. ASUS "twin" design uses IR powerstages which also have driver integrated. I think put 2 or 3 drivers together and directly link to the controller will behave similar essentially, so there won't be a problem.


----------



## sotheray

https://nguyencongpc.vn/asus-crosshair-viii-formula-anh-hung-luong-son-bac/

Seems ASUS C8F/C8H use 6+2 "twin" phase design, 2*IR3555 per phase.



Edit:
http://www.hwbattle.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=hottopic&wr_id=10833&ckattempt=1
ASRock X570 Taichi teardown & some BIOS settings. IF frequency can be adjusted manually.


----------



## AlphaC

That Taichi backplate is such a waste of metal , if someone bought one I would probably stick a thermal pad on the back there to make it semi useful. Right now it seems to exist only to mount the LED light bar.


We knew the Crosshair VIII series was going with "twin" design because ASUS has been peddling it since X299 Deluxe (see also Z390). It's 7+1 not 6+2 since it's stated it's "14 phase" VCORE.


Good info though


----------



## Nighthog

I wasn't expecting the ASRock Taichi to use a ISL69147 PWM... I reckon the gaming X, creator and Aqua will be doing the same?


----------



## sotheray

I cannot find the original source of the "14 phase", also there is no mention on the mb's offical website. 
On the PCB there is something(see attachment) marks which phase belongs to which(Core/Soc), that's why i choose to believe this tear-down info, though the pic on the website is not clear enough for us to recognize.


----------



## AlphaC

> Compared to the Formula, the Hero doesn’t leave much on the table. The voltage regulation module maintains the power stage count at 14+2 based on IR3555 ICs.


https://edgeup.asus.com/2019/the-x570-motherboard-guide-ryzen-to-victory-with-pci-express-4-0/2/



> The 16 PowIRstages are accompanied by MicroFine Alloy chokes, with each stage capable of delivering a whopping 60 amps.
> 
> ...
> Compared to the Formula, the Hero doesn’t leave much on the table. The voltage regulation module maintains the power stage count at 14+2 based on IR3555 ICs. The VRM heatsink has a massive surface area for better heat distribution.


https://rog.asus.com/articles/cross...the-challenge-the-rog-x570-motherboard-guide/
This isn't consistent as prior articles with that particular choke were listing 45A, so maybe it's the same form factor but different amperage rating (i.e different model number).

-----


Nighthog said:


> I wasn't expecting the ASRock Taichi to use a ISL69147 PWM... I reckon the gaming X, creator and Aqua will be doing the same?


Well it's using ISL6617 doublers so the current balancing is there already. ISL69147 might be a newer version of the ISL69138 they were using with the ISL99227B smart powerstages.

I think Asrock's going to have a tough time selling the base Taichi over ~$280ish , the Phantom Gaming X is also going to have a difficult time when similar specced boards from ASUS/Gigabyte/MSI are around $300-360 area with more features and more expensive power delivery. If they price it right it could be a decent alternative to upper midrange boards once again (such as the $250 Prime X570 Pro / $330 STRIX X570-E , $250 Aorus Pro & $300 Aorus Ultra with 3x M.2; definitely better than MSI Pro Carbon but not necessarily the ~$330 Ace with 3x M.2).


----------



## sotheray

Got it Thanks. Then it is most likely to be 7+1(14+2).

Taichi is always a great cost-saving board for overclockers before, especially in China (ASUS exchange rate in China: 1 USD=10-12 CNY)
I do think MSI ACE is a great board for memory overclocking & cost balance, but it has only 4 SATA ports, that really disappoints me.


----------



## AlphaC

Nighthog said:


> I hadn't really paid attention what 1H2L meant for the Gaming X before, but it's obvious now. It's their usual style of using 1 High side MOS and 2 low side MOS like they did about on all their other than top tier boards on B350/x370 & B450/X470.
> 
> So they use two chokes as well per 1L2H combo? So really just 7-phase total... Their usual shenanigans to seem more powerful than it is. 5phase for CPU and 2 for SOC then[5+2]. A little different than their older style 4+3 combination with the other older PWM controller.
> So much weaker than I thought it was. I was constantly thinking dual-setup with 2x2 on high/low.


 Update on this so wrong info gets corrected: buildzoid's video has 10 high side fets so it is 10 phase doubled low side 4c10n+4c06n , 30 total mosfets and 5 doublers. 10 low side fets for VCORe on back of the board. Which is basically a waste of money from their R&D IMO as it could be made cheaper with 8x SiC634. I wouldn't recommend people buy this because it doesn't check any boxes on any particular category: OC features (dual BIOS is absent), IO (no USB 3.1 gen 2 at all), audio (ALC887), LAN (Realtek), etc. It's better than the worst X570 boards' power delivery but gamers and budget people don't care about that and the IO/audio/LAN/dual BIOs is a far better featureset for them (something Asrock+ MSI understand).


----------



## elmor

AlphaC said:


> Update on this so wrong info gets corrected: buildzoid's video has 10 high side fets so it is 10 phase doubled low side 4c10n+4c06n , 30 total mosfets and 5 doublers. 10 low side fets for VCORe on back of the board. Which is basically a waste of money from their R&D IMO as it could be made cheaper with 8x SiC634. I wouldn't recommend people buy this because it doesn't check any boxes on any particular category: OC features (dual BIOS is absent), IO (no USB 3.1 gen 2 at all), audio (ALC887), LAN (Realtek), etc. It's better than the worst X570 boards' power delivery but gamers and budget people don't care about that and the IO/audio/LAN/dual BIOs is a far better featureset for them (something Asrock+ MSI understand).
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1bC3rlHq7w



Even cheap power stages are still about an order of magnitude more expensive than discrete parts.

l1H2L configuration is a common and simple method of increasing the VRM output current when the output voltage is much lower than the input. For example given 12V input and 1.2V output voltage, the high-side MOSFET would only be turning on 1.2/12 = 10% of the time. Therefore the main concern when choosing a high-side MOSFET is not RSon, but the gate charge required to activate it to minimize the significant switching losses at the high-side MOSFET. On the other hand if the high-side MOSFET is only turned on ~10% of the time, it essentially means the low-side FETs are active 90% of the time. Here it's opposite, the main criteria for a low-side MOSFET is that is should have really low RDSon in order to minimize conduction losses. If you put two low-side MOSFETs in parallell you effectively half the RDSon value of the MOSFETs. Plus there's one more component which can help dissipate excess heat.

TLDR: High-side primarily switching losses (Qg), low-side mainly conduction losses (RDSon)


----------



## AlphaC

The SiC634 has a list price of 1.15 in quantity of over 1K , the 4C10N+4C06 is about 0.30 each in quantity over 10K unless you have more info on this. That's not including the 5 doublers or the drivers. It's not like they're using cheap doublers or PWM either so the cost savings there is lost.


----------



## elmor

AlphaC said:


> The SiC634 has a list price of 1.15 in quantity of over 1K , the 4C10N+4C06 is about 0.30 each in quantity over 10K unless you have more info on this. That's not including the 5 doublers or the drivers. It's not like they're using cheap doublers or PWM either so the cost savings there is lost.



Well yeah, but I can't share what Asus pays for those parts. These standard FETs are used for many different purposes not just VRM high/low-side MOSFETs. The negotiated price for discrete parts is much lower than for power stages because of volume. They're buying millions of them. Octopart tells me the cost of 4C10N at 10KU is 0.141 USD from the cheapest vendor. https://octopart.com/search?q=4C10N . Still considering the publicly available pricing, you'll end up with around half the cost of a SiC634 (0.975 USD). If it's worth it to save those 0.4-0.5 USD/stage is another matter.


----------



## Nighthog

Was already updated a day or such back.


----------



## Ramad

The Asrock X570 TaiChi is looking good:https://translate.google.com/transl...php?bo_table=hottopic&wr_id=10833&ckattempt=1


----------



## chowbaby

*chowbaby*



Ramad said:


> The Asrock X570 TaiChi is looking good:https://translate.google.com/transl...php?bo_table=hottopic&wr_id=10833&ckattempt=1


when it says this about the fan:

▲ The number of revolutions monitored in the BIOS is over 4500 rpm and the temperature of the chipset is around 61 degrees. 

They are referring to the max right?


----------



## AlphaC

T124010BL fan is max 5000rpm (40x40mm) so that seems about right


http://www.cooljagusa.com/index.php?m=content&a=index&classid=74&id=119
T for triangle frameless rather than square frame

12 is likely the voltage, 40 is likely the diameter , 10 is likely height in mm

I think the B stands for ball bearing , so S probably stands for sleeve or "EBR" which might be a glorified sleeve bearing.
L probably stands for low speed (U = 8000RPM ; M = 6000RPM).


exact model number without (2): https://www.newegg.com/p/1DR-002T-005T1


----------



## chowbaby

*chowbaby*



AlphaC said:


> T124010BL fan is max 5000rpm (40x40mm) so that seems about right
> 
> 
> http://www.cooljagusa.com/index.php?m=content&a=index&classid=74&id=119
> T for triangle frameless rather than square frame
> 
> 12 is likely the voltage, 40 is likely the diameter , 10 is likely height in mm
> 
> I think the B stands for ball bearing , so S probably stands for sleeve or "EBR" which might be a glorified sleeve bearing.
> L probably stands for low speed (U = 8000RPM ; M = 6000RPM).
> 
> 
> exact model number without (2): https://www.newegg.com/p/1DR-002T-005T1


You think this will spawn a x570 aftermarket 40mm fan replacement market?


----------



## AlphaC

I think that a complete cooling solution with a heatpiped heatsink and a fan bracket could probably be made. Every single x570 uses the same size chipset, it's only down to the mounting holes and clearances.

Something similar to what Thermalright used to make would likely work if clearance is alright.
http://thermalright.com/product/hr-05-sliifx/

Clearance would be like so:







(Image from https://www.extremeoverclocking.com/reviews/cooling/Thermalright_HR-05_SLI_IFX_4.html)


alternative installation orientation:







(source: https://bigbruin.com/2008/hr05ifxsli_4)



This is especially a good proposition for less expensive X570 boards which likely use cheaper fans but might have half decent VRM for the CPU. At 15W you could probably use a CPU heatsink designed for slim 15W ultrabook CPUs as they typically have a heatpipe to transfer heat elsewhere. 6mm heatpipe can already transport at least 40W and 8mm can do 60W , those are the two options below 11mm height of the fan from the Taichi (which would allow for <15mm with mounting hardware). This would solve the clearance issue for high end GPUs which are typically over 9.5" long these days. Obviously this voids warranty.

Looking at 11mm tall copper heatsinks you have Enzotech's CNB-S1L http://www.enzotechnology.com/cnb_s1l.htm
For a 15W chip if it's around 5°C/W for the Enzotech heatsink without even accounting for thermal resistance of the chipset itself and the thermal pad in between, it's going to be hitting over 105°C which is likely going to fry. Obviously a heatpiped solution (to avoid the clearance problem) with more fin area is needed.

For example the X570 Aorus Elite might be worth changing in this fashion since chipset heatsink is not integrated into the M.2 heatsink setup. This means the whole chipset heatsink can be removed without affecting the M.2 slots. Something built with the M.2 shroud as part of the chipset cooling solution as the MSI Ace, Taichi or Steel Legend are not conducive to any modification. Lower end boards such as the MSI Gaming Plus simply aren't worth thinking about since the VRM just adds doublers over the B450 versions ; the MSI Pro Carbon and Edge have the chipset cooling a part of a M.2 shroud as well.

Clearance is at least 4x2" with 10-15mm Z height on the Aorus Elite. It might be closer to 4 x 2.5" (metric I would presume ~100x60mm).








Obviously upgrading your cheap fan with another cheap fan isn't going to solve anything. I think the best option is to have a 90mm+ fluid dynamic bearing (i.e not sleeve or ball bearing) fan permanently on the chipset at 1000-1200RPM except with cross-flow rather than radial blower style. That way the air doesn't get recycled and you retain front to back airflow in all normal orientation ATX cases.

P35 was a 16W TDP chipset too. People are losing their minds over a 16W TDP... when it's been done easily without using a fan even if people don't find heatpiped heatsinks attractive in their RGB light boxes.


----------



## 99belle99

X58 needed a pretty beefy heatsink and pipe also.

https://www.google.ie/search?biw=19....89.89.1......0....1..gws-wiz-img.ikGTG5gOl9U


----------



## Heuchler

*igorsLAB x570 semi-pass chipset cooling*

igorsLAB released some info a week ago - semi-pass chipset cooling






The Balanced Mode is expected to equal the default setting, stating that the fan will not start until it reaches 72 ° C chipset temperature and then operates at 3,000 RPM or 40 percent of maximum RPM. From 80 ° C to 3,600 rev / min and from 95 ° C to 5,000 rev / min accelerated. What kind of noise is expected, but remains unclear. If the level falls below 50 ° C again, the fan shuts off.

In Silenced Mode , the temperature thresholds are higher and the speeds lower, which promises quieter overall performance. Starting at 75 ° C, the fan should start at 2,400 rpm and be accelerated from 85 ° C to 3,000 rpm and 4,000 rpm from 95 ° C. Since the fan switches off again when the temperature falls below 70 ° C, the phases of the passive and silent cooling should be much longer than in Balanced Mode.

The best possible cooling with the highest noise level at the same time is provided by the Boost Mode , where the fan starts at 3,600 rpm from 70 ° C and increases up to 5,500 rpm from 95 ° C. As in Balanced Mode, the fan shuts off again at less than 50 ° C. 


Semi-passive modes with fan curves for X570 cooling
https://www.computerbase.de/2019-06/x570-chipsatz-semi-passiv-kuehlung/

based on information from circles of motherboard manufacturers and explicitly names three modes for chipset cooling on the motherboards X570 Ace and X570 Godlike of the manufacturer MSI, which are based on general guidelines (thermal guidelines) and thus at least in a similar form for Mainboards of other manufacturers could apply.


----------



## Heuchler

Ryzen 1800x compatible with MSI X570 MEG Ace [PC Games Hardware test]


----------



## AlphaC

Heuchler said:


> igorsLAB released some info a week ago - semi-pass chipset cooling
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5bXKwJQxBU&t=252s
> 
> 
> The Balanced Mode is expected to equal the default setting, stating that the fan will not start until it reaches 72 ° C chipset temperature and then operates at 3,000 RPM or 40 percent of maximum RPM. From 80 ° C to 3,600 rev / min and from 95 ° C to 5,000 rev / min accelerated. What kind of noise is expected, but remains unclear. If the level falls below 50 ° C again, the fan shuts off.
> 
> In Silenced Mode , the temperature thresholds are higher and the speeds lower, which promises quieter overall performance. Starting at 75 ° C, the fan should start at 2,400 rpm and be accelerated from 85 ° C to 3,000 rpm and 4,000 rpm from 95 ° C. Since the fan switches off again when the temperature falls below 70 ° C, the phases of the passive and silent cooling should be much longer than in Balanced Mode.
> 
> The best possible cooling with the highest noise level at the same time is provided by the Boost Mode , where the fan starts at 3,600 rpm from 70 ° C and increases up to 5,500 rpm from 95 ° C. As in Balanced Mode, the fan shuts off again at less than 50 ° C.
> 
> Semi-passive modes with fan curves for X570 cooling
> https://www.computerbase.de/2019-06/x570-chipsatz-semi-passiv-kuehlung/
> 
> based on information from circles of motherboard manufacturers and explicitly names three modes for chipset cooling on the motherboards X570 Ace and X570 Godlike of the manufacturer MSI, which are based on general guidelines (thermal guidelines) and thus at least in a similar form for Mainboards of other manufacturers could apply.


 I used to own an older Firepro (Pre-GCN) that has a blower style fan that is more or less that model fan on the Taichi (in terms of size). Even at idle I could hear it. The Firepro I replaced it years ago with runs fan at ~1000 RPM and at full load ~1200RPM. That's on par with top performing dual fan coolers from aftermarket card vendors.



Spoiler



Also own a Quadro and the idiots at Nvidia emailed me back that even if the GPU is idling at 30-40°C that 1800RPM is fine and that they won't change it. In my mind it is "good job Nvidia for pissing me off by locking GPU passthrough and other professional features on Quadros and then putting a terrible fan curve that can't be modified in any software". Talk about being receptive to paying customers. :doh:

If the Polaris10 based WX 5100 didn't throttle so hard (~4 TFLOPs number is only at max clocks) and performed slightly better I would have bought it. The WX 4100 has 4GB VRAM and has a small form factor.



I'd be _very_ skeptical of any motherboard manufacturer's claims that a 3000RPM fan is quiet. They're not putting in "state of the art" (to PCs at least) Noctua liquid crystal polymer fans with below 1mm tip clearance on these boards , they're using OEM sleeve or ball bearings with cheap plastic (i.e. vibration and blade flex) as they use on GPUs except with smaller fan diameters.

In fact the x570 Taichi's fan was used on some GPUs.

The reason you have ~3000RPM as ~40% is the defacto fan voltages are 5, 7, 9, and 12V. MSI definitely went overkill on the fan RPM, a lower max RPM fan should have been chosen for finer control over RPM especially on a board such as the Ace. Maybe it's a Powerlogic * fan they already are using on their GPUs.

The MSI ace is able to get away with more heat dissipation before fan spins up because the main VRM heatsink is connected to the chipset heatsink. For their lower end boards don't expect miracles.

* Powerlogic makes GPU fans for ASUS, EVGA, Gigabyte, and MSI. Asrock seems to use FirstD on their Phantom Gaming GPUs.


----------



## Heuchler

In a professional environment a small high pitch fans would drive me mad. I don't miss 10K SCSI days.
In a high end gaming PC i bet the water pump and all the fans would enough to mix into the annoying background noise.

But I'm operating under the assumption that chipset fan is for worse case - triple NVMe Gen 4 RAID setup with every single PCIe occupied.

Seems like motherboard manufactures forgot how to build proper VRMs and cooling them became artistic than functional (PRIME X370-PRO
heatsink was very disappointing till I had a look in-person at cheaper boards). Mayor improvements in those area since X399 and X370 launch.

I did have a undervolted 80mm NZXT fan over my X58 VRM and two undervolted intel stock PIII fans over my Sabertooth 990FX VRM for years.


[OC3D.net] ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Formula X570 Preview
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_rog_crosshair_viii_formula_x570_preview/1

[eTeknix] MSI MEG X570 ACE Preview & Unboxing





[eTeknix] Gigabyte X570 AORUS Master Preview & Unboxing





[eTeknix] Gigabyte X570 I AORUS Pro WiFi Preview & Unboxing





MSI MEG X570 ACE und MEG X570 GODLIKE Mainboards im Hands-On (German)


----------



## phillyman36

[OC3D.net] ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Formula X570 Preview


----------



## Streetdragon

Your thoughts:
ROG CROSSHAIR VIII HERO
OR
Gigabyte Aorus Master

I like both and the price should be the same more or less. Both have features i like...


----------



## br0da

Just in case it wasn't noticed here yet: There is a (vrm) info collection again over at hardwareluxx: https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...m-liste-x570-p560-b550-a520-a420-1228904.html


----------



## AlphaC

I think emissary42 needs to update Prime X570 Pro , it's likely 12 powerstages (DrMos/IR) and 2 for SOC since it is the same layout as TUF or STRIX-F. Anyhow can check for yourself at https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/PRIME-X570-PRO/


under power section there is the overview with the VRM heatsink semi-transparent



For x570-P probably 10+2 or 8+4 DrMos. see https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/PRIME-X570-P/


Everything else looks alright, I don't think anyone is seriously looking at Asrock Pro4 unless it's dirt cheap so the motivation to find out what kind of Sinopowers are on there is low.


----------



## radier

AlphaC said:


> I don't think anyone is seriously looking at Asrock Pro4 unless it's dirt cheap so the motivation to find out what kind of Sinopowers are on there is low.


170$ without tax isn't dirty cheap for me.


----------



## Heuchler

AlphaC said:


> I used to own an older Firepro (Pre-GCN) that has a blower style fan that is more or less that model fan on the Taichi (in terms of size). Even at idle I could hear it. The Firepro I replaced it years ago with runs fan at ~1000 RPM and at full load ~1200RPM. That's on par with top performing dual fan coolers from aftermarket card vendors.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Also own a Quadro and the idiots at Nvidia emailed me back that even if the GPU is idling at 30-40°C that 1800RPM is fine and that they won't change it. In my mind it is "good job Nvidia for pissing me off by locking GPU passthrough and other professional features on Quadros and then putting a terrible fan curve that can't be modified in any software". Talk about being receptive to paying customers. :doh:
> 
> If the Polaris10 based WX 5100 didn't throttle so hard (~4 TFLOPs number is only at max clocks) and performed slightly better I would have bought it. The WX 4100 has 4GB VRAM and has a small form factor.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd be _very_ skeptical of any motherboard manufacturer's claims that a 3000RPM fan is quiet. They're not putting in "state of the art" (to PCs at least) Noctua liquid crystal polymer fans with below 1mm tip clearance on these boards , they're using OEM sleeve or ball bearings with cheap plastic (i.e. vibration and blade flex) as they use on GPUs except with smaller fan diameters.
> 
> In fact the x570 Taichi's fan was used on some GPUs.
> 
> The reason you have ~3000RPM as ~40% is the defacto fan voltages are 5, 7, 9, and 12V. MSI definitely went overkill on the fan RPM, a lower max RPM fan should have been chosen for finer control over RPM especially on a board such as the Ace. Maybe it's a Powerlogic * fan they already are using on their GPUs.
> 
> The MSI ace is able to get away with more heat dissipation before fan spins up because the main VRM heatsink is connected to the chipset heatsink. For their lower end boards don't expect miracles.
> 
> * Powerlogic makes GPU fans for ASUS, EVGA, Gigabyte, and MSI. Asrock seems to use FirstD on their Phantom Gaming GPUs.


PC Games Hardware test of MEG X570 ACE 
9m 40s they start testing the chipset fan

https://youtu.be/7xL0Jn5med0?t=562
3,000 RPM = 40% is at that level that makes me want to change fans or grab one of my HR-05


----------



## Ramad

Some Geekbench tests that I looked at.

MEG X570 GODLIKE, 16 cores at 5.2 (overclocked, does not look like an error by Geekbench) and RAM at 4266MT/s (seems to be running at 2:1 (RAM:IMC) divider): http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13669966

X570 AORUS MASTER, 6 cores at 4.2 boost and RAM at 3200MT/s (looks like 1:1 (RAM:IMC) divider: http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13682815


----------



## asdkj1740

asus strix e
12+4 
vocre mosfet ir3555
soc mosfet ir3553
vrm controller asp1405i
no doubler ic founded

that 4 phases soc have got the same layout as c7h x470, meaning they are surrounded by vcore mosfets.


we all know asp1405i is a max 8 channel.
6+2 or 4+4, i dont know now.

the chipset cooling desgin is disappointing. 
small heatsink and themal pad is being used to make contact with the chipset.


----------



## Nighthog

AlphaC said:


> I think emissary42 needs to update Prime X570 Pro , it's likely 12 powerstages (DrMos/IR) and 2 for SOC since it is the same layout as TUF or STRIX-F. Anyhow can check for yourself at https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/PRIME-X570-PRO/
> 
> 
> under power section there is the overview with the VRM heatsink semi-transparent
> 
> 
> 
> For x570-P probably 10+2 or 8+4 DrMos. see https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/PRIME-X570-P/


Thanks, both specs 12+2 [X570 Pro] & 8+4 [X570-P] DrMOS confirmed on ASUS product page.


----------



## AlphaC

asdkj1740 said:


> asus strix e
> 12+4
> vocre mosfet ir3555
> soc mosfet ir3553
> vrm controller asp1405i
> no doubler ic founded
> 
> that 4 phases soc have got the same layout as c7h x470, meaning they are surrounded by vcore mosfets.
> 
> 
> we all know asp1405i is a max 8 channel.
> 6+2 or 4+4, i dont know now.
> 
> the chipset cooling desgin is disappointing.
> small heatsink and themal pad is being used to make contact with the chipset.


Neat , thanks for the info.

IR3555 sort of justifies the pricing better. The board makes the MSI ace look worse than it actually is. The VRM is the main reason to get an MSI ace besides the debug LED and 3rd M.2.

MSI probably will have the worst time selling their boards again. Ace needs to be between the STRIX and Crosshair Hero pricing to even survive.



Heuchler said:


> PC Games Hardware test of MEG X570 ACE
> 9m 40s they start testing the chipset fan
> 
> https://youtu.be/7xL0Jn5med0?t=562
> 3,000 RPM = 40% is at that level that makes me want to change fans or grab one of my HR-05



I would think that the Thermalright chipset heatsink I linked earlier is the best option if you have the space


I wonder if it's actually feasible to make a newer version with 120mm fan mount, though 80-90mm axial fan should be much better than 35-40mm 10mm thickness blower.




Nighthog said:


> Thanks, both specs 12+2 [X570 Pro] & 8+4 [X570-P] DrMOS confirmed on ASUS product page.


Originally I thought it was 10+2 since SOC doesn't really need 4 powerstages 



I really don't why the X570-P exists in the consumer market (i.e. non OEM) if the TUF exists as well. The aesthetic on the TUF is pretty lame for most builds and the features aren't amazing but for $10-15 more it gives you 4 more powerstages for VCORE , more audio outputs, and USB-C output.


----------



## phillyman36




----------



## AlphaC

Silicon Lottery QVL:
ASRock X570 Aqua --- low volume sub 1000 units
ASRock X570 Creator
ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming X
ASRock X570 Taichi
ASUS X570 Crosshair VIII Formula
ASUS X570 Crosshair VIII Hero
ASUS X570 STRIX X570-E
ASUS X570 STRIX X570-F
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Xtreme
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro
Gigabyte X570 Aorus Ultra


https://siliconlottery.com/pages/amd-matisse


----------



## Hale59

*AM4-socket Motherboard Comparison*

^ As per title^

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...FnsZYZiW1pfiDZnKCjaXyzd1o/edit#gid=2112472504


----------



## Hale59

VRM Tier List(updated)


----------



## Heuchler

Hale59 said:


> ^ As per title^
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...FnsZYZiW1pfiDZnKCjaXyzd1o/edit#gid=2112472504


Very nice work. I liked your previous B450 X470 VRM charts as well but the new layout and details are great.


Updates to Precision Boost Overdrive for the AMD Ryzen 3000 Series
[Robert Hallock the game cache man himself]





update:

"Every motherboard you have ever seen or heard of meets the AMD minimum specifications for electrical capacity, and exceeds it by some amount of margin. The CPU will not use any VRM headroom beyond the minimum specification unless you tell it to do so with PBO or manual OC. If someone isn't overclocking, better-than-AMD-recommends power supplies just look pretty.

I hope this, in a roundabout way, answers your question.

EXAMPLE: A 105W Ryzen Processor will never use more than 142W socket power; 95A from VRMs when they're thermally-constrained; or 140A from the VRMs when they're not constrained. That's hard-coded into the firmware until you tell the CPU to ignore it. Any motherboard rated for 105W Ryzen processors will meet this and then some. If the motherboard is significantly overbuilt, that extra capacity is does not assist the processor in any way until you override the OEM behavior." R. Hallock

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c7upru/amd_upload_explaining_the_new_precision_boost/esiemcc/


----------



## AlphaC

I don't think 150A is entirely reasonable for the 3900X though. I can get 130A on a Ryzen 7 chip with 8 cores. To be conservative and leave room for AVX2 workloads I'd probably put :
350W / ~ 250A = 16 core , 2 chiplets so extra power for added cache size (see https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/08/31/amd_ryzen_threadripper_2950x_overclocking/5 , https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2950x/17.html)

250W / ~ 200A = 12 core , 2 chiplets so extra power for added cache size

200W / ~ 125A = 8 core
<200W = 6 core


(figure 20-22W per core based off max ambient clocks)


Even if we don't know what is on the Asrock Extreme4 for sure yet, I would definitely check of the 8 core box for that + Steel Legend. Pro4 is iffy and dependent on how bad the Sinopowers used are.


Asus X570-P is 8 powerstages so at a bare minimum I'd think it can do 8 cores , TUF probably 8 or 12 with airflow as it has not heatpipe on it and might be a 4 layer board. If you check off 12 cores for Prime X570 Pro then the STRIX and X570 WS ace (whatever the full name is for the workstation board with IR3555 powerstages) should be checked off.


For Gigabyte's lineup the entire Aorus lineup is on Silicon Lottery's QVL. Gaming X I would say 8 cores is a good baseline, there's 10 low side fets on the back of the board that receive zero cooling so I'd be hesitant about it regardless.



MSI's lineup anything below the Pro Carbon doesn't deserve to have 12 cores checked off without "added cooling required" added on. Pro Carbon uses powerblocks but the fact is there is plastic all over the main heatsink and it also doesn't have a huge amount of fin area.


Your assessment (if you're the one that originated the chart) is also a bit generous to MSI's x470 M7. The heatsink is not heatpiped and the mosfets used are Onsemi powerpaks. I'd put it at 8 cores with misgivings , 12 cores with cooling. Its also a bit generous to the x470 Pro Carbon as it's using a parallel 5 phases of those Onsemi powerpaks.


----------



## Heuchler

AlphaC said:


> I don't think 150A is entirely reasonable for the 3900X though. I can get 130A on a Ryzen 7 chip with 8 cores. To be conservative and leave room for AVX2 workloads I'd probably put :
> 350W / ~ 250A = 16 core , 2 chiplets so extra power for added cache size (see https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/08/31/amd_ryzen_threadripper_2950x_overclocking/5 , https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2950x/17.html)
> 
> 250W / ~ 200A = 12 core , 2 chiplets so extra power for added cache size
> 
> 200W / ~ 125A = 8 core
> <200W = 6 core
> 
> 
> (figure 20-22W per core based off max ambient clocks)



[Source AM4 VRM List] Cr1318 on Reddit (might have a different username here on OCN)
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c7qj5e/am4_vcore_vrm_ratings_to_help_you_decide_on_a/

if he based his list on Buildzoid's videos then they are best case scenario, which I suspect, open bench setup with a 120mm sitting on top of the VRM heatsink.
Overclocking a 12 or 16-core is a completely different experience than a quad-core. Reddit has hundreds of post about if a Ryzen 9 3900/3950X
will work on their B350/B450. They should work but how well they work and the kind of user experience with cheap motherboards is something 
I personally don't want to experience. Pairing a $500 or $750 processor with a $100 motherboard (the $150 board have pretty much the same VRM as 
their $100 counter-parts to me). Many X370 boards have mediocre VRM solutions.

I believe Ryzen 7 3800X should be easy on boards than the Ryzen 7 2700X. VRM kind of fall in the wear-n-tear category to me 
One can be on the edge and run them hot but they will wear out much faster than a premium solution. Threadripper
is an excellent comparison for high core count Ryzen processors. As far as I remember pretty much all TR4 motherboards
used a true 8-phase VRM with either the 50A IR3556 or the 60A IR355. Some might have used 10-phase (5 with doublers)
but I can't thing remember them.

Very curious how 7nm TSMC CPUs with play out. If the Ryzen 7 3700X with 65W will overclock on Air/Water as well as previous lower TDP AMD Chips
Ryzen 7 1700 clocked better than 1700X counter part. FX-8320e/8370e and 95W Phenom II X6 1045T all clocked well.

Safe vCore for Ryzen 3000 is a concern. Zen+ seemed to not handle the same vCore levels of the original 14nm parts.


----------



## Heuchler

ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3 uses Intel LGA115X Retention Kit
Scythe cooler for Intel LGA115X such as SCBYK-2000i
https://twitter.com/Scythe_JP/status/1145502923067052032

[Note 2] Also with regard to the x570 chipset-equipped motherboard, depending on the model where the heat sink is larger, there is a possibility of interfering depending on the CPU cooler used.
https://www.scythe.co.jp/g3-ryzen


----------



## Heuchler

Buildzoid *i need more coffee or had too much coffee already*
ASUS Crosshair VIII Hero (Wifi)// Same VRM as regular Hero and Formula


----------



## Hale59

*VRM Tier List v1.1 (2019-07-02)*

^As per title^

QUOTE:
"Update v1.1 (2019-07-02): Made a fair few changes with this revision, including:

.By popular request, the form factor column has been added.

.By popular request, Biostar's boards have been added. I would still not recommend getting them, but the information's there for your viewing pleasure.

.Phase doubling is now denoted by an asterisk instead of a plus to avoid confusion with the standardised x+y naming scheme for VRMs that denotes [primary rail] + [secondary rail] phases. So a doubled six phase is now denoted as 6 * 2 instead of 6 + 6.

.Changing some of MSI's slightly better B350/X370 designs to be okay for 100A. I think I was a bit too conservative there, the MOSFETs are bad, but they're not that bad.

.All of the garbo tier boards (e.g. ASUS B450M-E) have had their 100A ratings changed to 'needs airflow'.

.I've changed all of the 6 x IR3553 ATX designs to 'needs airflow' for 200A instead of not being recommended, but keep in mind the VRM will be generating approx. 36W of heat at 200A so you really do need a fan directly on that, and I'd also consider not OCing as heavily on those designs for a 3950X.

.All older mITX designs have had their 200A ratings changed to 'not recommended' (sorry MSI B450I lovers), I stumbled on this *Optimum Tech video that really made me re-consider my mITX ratings.

.Shuffled some names around for easier readability and other minor formatting changes." UNQUOTE

*Optimum Tech video:


----------



## phillyman36




----------



## drmrlordx

@AlphaC

I'm inclined to agree. I could see a 3950X getting as high as 280a in some cases. Maybe not with PBO, but with a static, sure. On water, that is. Air? No.

I've hit as high as 152a peak running y-cruncher on my 1800x @ 4.0 GHz. Usually it only hits 145-146a but it can get up there. I would expect similar current draw from a 4.3 GHz 2700x or 4.6-4.7 GHz 3800x.


----------



## AlphaC

As I have stated before, _default_ is 140A limit for 105W CPUs so I would definitely not put 3900X at 150A overclocked this early especially without any insider info on it considering 2950X draws 220-270A or so OCed to 4.2GHz per HardOCP's sample and PBO on air was 188A already.


People on reddit aren't really reasonable because the majority are non-engineering milennials or teenagers that never used a floppy disk , so they don't actually push their systems and just overclock for gaming. That's why you see so many comments of 125°C is totally fine. When the FR4 fiberglass the board is made of is rated for 135°C glass transition temperature and if it's on FR2 that is 105°C ; with capacitors rated 5K hours at 105°C (even if you derate based on 5.3V) it's really not "fine".


6x IR3553 can push about 160-180W , then it hits 85°C even with 1300-1500RPM indirect airflow from NH-U14s / TS140 Power.


edit: this is a quote from AMD's Robert Hallock regarding stock clock CPUs

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/c7upru/amd_upload_explaining_the_new_precision_boost/esjd0ky



> Every motherboard you have ever seen or heard of meets the AMD minimum specifications for electrical capacity, and exceeds it by some amount of margin. The CPU will not use any VRM headroom beyond the minimum specification unless you tell it to do so with PBO or manual OC. If someone isn't overclocking, better-than-AMD-recommends power supplies just look pretty.
> I hope this, in a roundabout way, answers your question.
> EXAMPLE: A 105W Ryzen Processor will never use more than 142W socket power; 95A from VRMs when they're thermally-constrained; or 140A from the VRMs when they're not constrained. That's hard-coded into the firmware until you tell the CPU to ignore it. Any motherboard rated for 105W Ryzen processors will meet this and then some. If the motherboard is significantly overbuilt, that extra capacity is does not assist the processor in any way until you override the OEM behavior.


-----


edit: also Asrock's X570 Steel Legend page lists DrMos: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Steel Legend/index.asp


----------



## Robbært

AlphaC said:


> edit: also Asrock's X570 Steel Legend page lists DrMos: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Steel Legend/index.asp


Their Extreme4 page also say DrMOS link


----------



## Heuchler

[OC3D.net] Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master Preview
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_x570_aorus_master_preview/2


beefy finned VRM heatsink with heatpipe [5 minuet mark]


----------



## Heuchler

ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Hero Unboxing [de]


----------



## phillyman36

ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Hero Preview


----------



## Nighthog

AlphaC said:


> edit: also Asrock's X570 Steel Legend page lists DrMos: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Steel Legend/index.asp





Robbært said:


> Their Extreme4 page also say DrMOS link


I added your info and found they are using Vishay DrMOS SiC654 on their product page images compared to previous info of SiC634 on the Phantom Gaming X that had a thorough check at a earlier point.
Seems to be a newer version?


----------



## AlphaC

SiC654 is still a 90% peak efficiency powerstage
https://www.vishay.com/power-ics/list/product-77110/tab/specifications/


SiC634 is stated as 95% peak although graph suggests ~ 92% https://www.vishay.com/product?docid=76784


It could just be camera angle that the 3 looks like a 5 also.


----------



## ScomComputers

ASUS X570 Strix-F Gaming


----------



## AlphaC

Are they really using ASP1106 on that board when it costs nearly $300? Wow


SiC639: https://www.vishay.com/docs/76585/sic639.pdf


----------



## Nighthog

I've seen this coming, costs are skyrocketing.. 

I think it's not that cheap to produce in Asia as it was some years back. Last years costs seem to go up like hell.


----------



## Heuchler

back in my day the baggier your jeans the better the overclocker you where. skinny jeans everywhere

I mistakenly picked up ROG STRIX B350-F GAMING without looking up reviews. Advertised as 8-phase...well 4-phase for CPU and 2*2 for SOC does add up to 8.
Returned the board unopened. Embarrassing experiences.


----------



## Heuchler

Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master VRM 
http://www.coolpc.com.tw/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=260299


----------



## Nighthog

Heuchler said:


> Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master VRM
> http://www.coolpc.com.tw/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=260299


You could have mentioned they also did the X570 Gaming X in the same go. Found out by looking at the link.


----------



## Heuchler

Nighthog said:


> You could have mentioned they also did the X570 Gaming X in the same go. Found out by looking at the link.


Tasteful GIGABYTE X570 GAMING X nudes for VRM gang


----------



## AlphaC

Cooling the backside of Gaming X is going to be rough.


49°C/W to ambient means you hit 100°C with a mere 1.4W per mosfet (equal to 2.8W per low side). I suspect it will get very toasty around 170-180A so running a 12 core on it is not a great idea if you intend to use PBO. Efficiency should be around 85-88 89% at 130-170A due to doublers though.

low side https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C06N-D.PDF
high side https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/NTMFS4C10N-D.PDF


I covered this before, but it is also missing USB 3.1 gen 2. It doesn't really have redeeming features for the mainstream market. Most people are better off waiting for B550 if they're on a tighter budget , additionally B550 is unlikely to have a fan because the B550 boards won't have PCIE 4.0.


----------



## VeritronX

doesn't the gaming x also come with a backplate that cools those chips? I thought bz said it would in his video a while back


----------



## Robbært

VeritronX said:


> doesn't the gaming x also come with a backplate that cools those chips? I thought bz said it would in his video a while back


there ASRock Gaming X and Gigabyte Gaming X
ASRock is good one with DrMOS, 2x Ethernet, have backplate.
Giga is paired MOSFETS (in parallel)


----------



## asdkj1740

there will be a x570 ud from gigabyte soon. ~ august.

i think it is good to see gigabyte has chosen 1H2L for their low end entry level models. 1H2L should be better than 1H1L, even one of the 2L has no cooling at all.
and power users should be able to add little heatsinks to that low side mosfets on the back of the pcb, given the case has enough cutout for cpu on the motherboard tray. if that area is covered by motherboard tray, users can still add thermal pad in between to let the motherboard tray serves us even better.

gigabyte mosfets located are so closed to each other, and the vrm of top side row has just 3 vcore mosfets. the heat direct touch heatpipe is definitely helping to make better use of the top vrm heatsink. 
for low end models, i hope gigabyte would use more spaces in between and try to put more vcore mosfets on top rather than left side.



http://home.coolpc.com.tw/gtchen/gi...ng-x/coolpc-x570-aorus-master-gaming-x-11.jpg
seems to be using thermal pad for chipset cooling as well, and seems no thermal pad in between of the backplate. wasted.


http://home.coolpc.com.tw/gtchen/gi...ng-x/coolpc-x570-aorus-master-gaming-x-34.jpg
vrm heatsink is not good, just a big block without any fins/cutouts....
that size is not as large as other extended heatsinks on other brands, what a shame.


----------



## asdkj1740

asus rog in-charge:
asus teamed/twined desgin is not a parallel design we have seen in the past.
in general parallel means two mosfet and chokes are wired to each other, but asus design is not. as well as cpu feedback wiring for each mosfets on asus desigin is separated (=2) rather than just one signal going back for two parallel mosfets.
so when cpu loading changes, two separated mosfets can then open AT THE SAME TIME to take that load resutling in smaller spike. while under doubling design there is just one mosfet openes up then next mosfet openes up a bit later.


compared to ryzen 2000 series cpu, ryzen 3000 series cpu have even larger and more sipkes in nature due to more cores and higher turbo and higher requirement of power saving.
thats why asus chooses team/twin design on x570.

the ddr4 oc on x570 has optimem III desgin, it is an improvment solely on hardware level desgin, to get you ~200mhz more.


to the picture i uploaded:
Two designs (team/twin vs doubling) have differences in nature. But the rest could be optimized by R&D. engineers would tweak CAPACITANCE & INDUCTANCE to improve transient response and ripple.


----------



## br0da

Actually I think that's a great video describing the difficulties engineers have to adress while designing power supply solutions for the hardware we have nowadays.
I really like the fact ASUS is giving us such content instead of another PR document.

Still there is one thing I kind of dislike:
While they've mentioned one shouldn't judge a VRM design simply by the lag of doublers for not having low ripple current, they haven't been talking about how a good engineer can also optimise a VRM with doublers the other way round for having a good transient response performance. Such controllers as the IR35201 have already features onboard for sensing fast changes in load for then switching highside FETs of different phases on at the same time to achieve the same effect of better response due to lower effective inductance. Of course such a pretty digital process and a signal runtime through even one more IC isn't as fast in response as a pretty analog feedback loop (I know it isn't fully) but actually who knows how it looks in action?
Maybe they've already put these things on in the comparison but who knows either?
A bit more information on the DUT would've been great indeed.

Also I have to admit I'm quite curious about their filter tweaking. Of course they shouldn't tell on public how they achieve there results but there shouldn't be big secrets in designing a chebyshev / low pass second order. You can tweak the cutoff frequency a bit maybe, pay a bit more money for achieving a better Q factor but in the end you'll still be limited to 40dB/dec after cutoff.
A bit more input on the DUT for this comparison would've been great too.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's perfectly fine what ASUS is doing. Such clips aren't made for beeing fully objective and in the end they have to be about selling their own products. It would be the job of independent labs to really compare actual VRM solutions from different manufactures under such conditions for the public. That really isn't ASUS job.
Also I don't want to criticise ASUS design choice, I simply have ways too less knowledge to do so. It's just the way the guy in the video said, don't judge a such complex circuit by just looking at it. Calculate, simulate or test it in a lab.
I simply don't like someone saying 'Don't think we're not that good since we haven't X' but not also saying 'Don't think we're better since they don't have Y'.

In the end this still is simply a video I've pressed the like button for. Great work, thank you!
Btw I'd love to do these tests I'm asking for on my own but unfortunately I can't so I'm hoping for the good equipped labs around the would. Just in case someone might think now I'd test such stuff on my own if I'm already complaining so much here on the forums.


----------



## AlphaC

I think he means they have current sense via powerstages and also control via PWM tri-state.



> The SiC639 incorporate an advanced MOSFET gate driver IC that features high current driving capability, adaptive dead-time control, an integrated bootstrap Schottky diode,a thermal warning (THWn) that alerts the system of excessive junction temperature, and zero current detection to improve light load  efficiency. The drivers are also compatible with a wide range of PWM controllers and supports tri-state PWM, 3.3 V / 5 V PWM logic.


Need to go back through measurement systems and control systems for confirmation of what they're writing although things have progressed so need to refer to new material. If you treat it as RLC circuit of course you need to cut the inductance. Inductors resist change in current.

The best current x570 design is using the new Infineon 16 phase PWM. Provided the BIOS isn't bugged it should perform best due to the direct PWM control & feedback loop without any funny business. Your waveform is going to be vastly superior in ripple_ and_ transient provided your PWM tuning isn't completely off (Ziegler Nichols or otherwise); whether it gets you much more overclocking potential is iffy. If you're looking at a board with doublers on it for a six to eight _or maybe even twelve core_ , the Aorus ITX has 6 phases _direct _to 70A TDA21472 for $220... though I'd wait on reviewers to test thermal performance.

I wonder what toppc from MSI has to say about ROG Bing's propaganda. MSI clearly spent a lot of money on their MEG + Creation power delivery even if they are using doublers. The inductors seem tuned to 220nH.

Aorus Master/Pro/Elite are on 150nH inductors it seems.

Older taichi was using R22 (220nH) inductor from Eaton which owns Cooper Bussman, not sure on x570 what brand it is but they do read LR22 so I think they're 220nH as well.

-------------

Steel Legend back side shot doesn't seem to have doubling https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157885

Looking at the boards up on Newegg there's hilariously bad pricing structure for some boards. 

At the lowest end there's cost cutting to the extreme to put B550 level features with PCIE 4.0.

Anyway Pro4 backside suggests there's 4 doublers on back if not drivers. Audio is 3 jacks with ALC1200.

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157886

MSI x570-A Pro at $160 amazingly lists ALC1220 and we know it has the Onsemi powerpaks ; there's a bundle for $20 off 

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144263


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.youtube.com/user/Toppccbb/videos
toppc has five videos coming up 30mins later!


----------



## AlphaC

MSI ace fastest out of the box (vs Hero/Aorus Master) apparently if for some insane reason you put a stock R7 3700X on a $350 motherboard


-----


Peak power per core = 15-18W
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14605/the-and-ryzen-3700x-3900x-review-raising-the-bar/18


----------



## asdkj1740

toppc said due to strict requirement from amd, review samples with pre launch bios have got harder pbo restriction.
and they are going to release new bios to fix it later, lol.

16c cpu's power will be doubled from 8c, simply because 16c cpu has 2 dies inside whereas 8c cpu has 1 die only.

msi low end models are designed to run 8c cpu without any problem, it is the lowest requirment of msi entry level mobos to handle 8c cpu.


msi 4 phases soc is for dd4 oc. ddr4 oc requires f-clock oc. f-clock has its own voltage namely vddg. vddg is supplied by soc.
f-clock determines the performance limit of ddr4. stock f-clock set by amd is 1800mhz but there are some cpu cant even do 1800mhz.
currently 4 phases soc is not that useful, but on next gen in 2020 it will shine.


toppc is going to shoot a video about vrm designs (doubling vs parallel) in the future.


----------



## Robbært

asdkj1740 said:


> in general parallel means two mosfet and chokes are wired to each other, but asus design is not. as well as cpu feedback wiring for each mosfets on asus desigin is separated (=2) rather than just one signal going back for two parallel mosfets.


They have 4 phase VRM controller
Then there 8(12) DrMOS
Where to extra 4(8) signals going to if 4-phase controller have sense only for 4 phases?


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-x570-taichi/4.html
Vcore: Doubled 6 Phase
CPU PWM:Intersil ISL69147
Power Stages: Vcore: Vishay SiC634 



https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-prime-x570-pro/4.html

Digi+ EPU ASP1106GGQW
Vcore: 4 Phase 

Vcore: Vishay SiC639


----------



## asdkj1740

Robbært said:


> They have 4 phase VRM controller
> Then there 8(12) DrMOS
> Where to extra 4(8) signals going to if 4-phase controller have sense only for 4 phases?


not parallel in power stage and inductor.
in short, same input for each of two power stages that they are not wired with each other, and each of that two power stages has itw own separated feedback sense.
asp controller, i dont know.

msi parallel design may show a clear picture. look at the pinouts of vcore inductors, and compare them with igpu inductor pinouts (igpu is not in parallel).


----------



## Nighthog

I'm feeling a little empty seeing all hit a limit of 4.4ghz on OC currently hardly makes the upgraded VRM useful as it is. Just makes it a non-issue to consider for most at this stage. 

I'm happy to see the upgraded MEM OC capabilities but few reviewers are testing that seriously. 
Even the cheap Asus Prime X570 Pro hitting 4200Mhz MEM. I wonder how this will fare across CPU samples and the other boards.


----------



## Haelous

Were the specs of the MSI X570 Pro Carbon ever confirmed? I'm seeing mixed information in different places. This thread looks like it pulled it's info from hardwareluxx, and doesn't really spell it out compared to other boards. Any pictures of the board without heatsinks?

Is there a data sheet for the uPI QA3111N6N? I can't seem to find it.

How does a 56A Dual-N Mosfet compare to something like the IR3553 or IR3555?


----------



## AlphaC

Haelous said:


> Were the specs of the MSI X570 Pro Carbon ever confirmed? I'm seeing mixed information in different places. This thread looks like it pulled it's info from hardwareluxx, and doesn't really spell it out compared to other boards. Any pictures of the board without heatsinks?
> 
> Is there a data sheet for the uPI QA3111N6N? I can't seem to find it.
> 
> How does a 56A Dual-N Mosfet compare to something like the IR3553 or IR3555?


 It's confirmed at chiphell from toppc, who works with MSI.


The dual N mosfet is basically a poweblock like a TI NexFET. MSI used the same thing on their RTX 2070 GPU (at least one or more of them).



A powerblock is usually less efficient than a powerstage since it doesn't integrate drivers and most powerblocks are basically the high + low side mosfet copackaged for greater efficiency. Powerstages usually have current sense and other such features such as thermal flags that powerblocks don't have.


----


@ Nighthog, the OC performance is disappointing as everything is overbuilt but I did see a site testing on X470 Ultra Gaming and that hit 102°C. So I'd rather have overbuilt and efficient than inadequate and borderline dangerous.


----------



## Haelous

AlphaC said:


> It's confirmed at chiphell from toppc, who works with MSI.
> 
> 
> The dual N mosfet is basically a poweblock like a TI NexFET. MSI used the same thing on their RTX 2070 GPU (at least one or more of them).
> 
> 
> 
> A powerblock is usually less efficient than a powerstage since it doesn't integrate drivers and most powerblocks are basically the high + low side mosfet copackaged for greater efficiency. Powerstages usually have current sense and other such features such as thermal flags that powerblocks don't have.


I get what you mean. This is similar to the X470 Taichi, although with two less phases. Thanks. That was considered a pretty solid board last gen. It sounds like the IR3556 is likely a superior product. It seems like it would at least be able to give the old 10x IR3553 boards (X470 Gaming 7) a run for their money though.

Considering the efficiency loss, is it better to consider it closer to a 500A board then? The heatsinks look nice and I want the chipset fan stop feature MSI has. I was trying to avoid cashing out for the Ace. 3900X w/NH-D14. 

I just have my concerns since it uses a VRM setup unlike any other X570 board.


----------



## AlphaC

I personally feel the x570 Pro Carbon is in a tight spot. They clearly made it to fit a $250ish pricepoint and you can see this in the cut down VRM heatsink. It's a carry over from Z390 that has a bunch of plastic on it and they didn't include a heatpipe despite the low fin area. WIFI is improved over the $210ish Edge but the VRM is hampered by heatsink design such that the price differential is not going to be reflected in results. GReater effectiveness would have been to use the extended heatsink style. Techpowerup or some other site stated it's a 4 layer PCB so it's not an upgrade over MSI Edge in that respect either. The Edge does have slower WIFI 3168 1x1 so if you need WIFI + BT it's worth upgrading the card outright.

Dropping down to the Gaming Plus mainly means you lose RGB functions and have a Realtek LAN. A bunch of concessions were made to hit the aggressive $170 such as M.2 shields and the audio cover.

MEG Ace is a great board from MSI this time around. It's priced competitively for what it has, the power delivery is relatively good for the money, 2.5G LAN mostly for the sake of putting it on the specsheet , it has 3xM.2, has the debug LED, has wifi 6, etc.

The only other board in MSI lineup worth noting is the Creation. MSI Creation makes sense for people that need 10G LAN , M.2 expansion card, + many USB ports : it caters to a content creation audience so it is fit for 12-16 cores ($500 board) , whereas Godlike seems to exist only to fulfill flagship status.

MSI is basically paying people in form of a rebate to do reviews if you buy off Newegg/Amazon/Bestbuy so the step up from $260 Pro Carbon to $370 Ace is less money at the moment as you only get $20 from Pro Carbon but $50 from MEG Ace and up.
https://us.msi.com/Landing/amd-x570-motherboard

If you look back at the $130 B450 Pro Carbon, the reason why it was so successful was that it was the cheapest board with Intel LAN, ALC1220 audio codec, USB 3.1 gen 2 Type C +A rear ports, a 8 high+low powerpak VRM that didn't fry under 8 core loads, muted black color scheme, and RGB functionality for RGB fanatics. Asus' B350-E was launched in response way later but even that didn't have Type C, and the Onsemi mosfets used by ASUS were worse as well.

I think the largest issue at hand right now is that all X570 boards don't have CPUs that actually push them (or reviewers aren't using the right loads maybe). The R9 3900X doesn't overclock much due to heat density so we'll probably have to wait for R9 3950X to actually see larger differences in board quality. For R7 3700X I don't think anything over the MSI Edge or Asrock Steel Legend is necessary. It looks like all CPUs topping out at 4.4GHz all core on these early BIOs even if you dump 1.4-1.5V into them.


----------



## Haelous

That's kinda what I was afraid of; the X570 Carbon doesn't really have anything over any of it's competitors except fan stop. Might as well consider a Crosshair VII at that point for the same price.

Hmm. A $50 MIR puts it closer to a competitor to the Strix X570-E which it definitely looks favorably next to. I didn't realize that was a thing. Thanks.

What would you consider the minimum for a 3900X then, Aorus Pro? I've read some bad things about both Asrock and Gigabyte's fans and their curve unfortunately.


----------



## AlphaC

MSI Ace is probably as good as Crosshair VIII Hero and comes with 3x M.2. If you look at the specsheet for IR35201 PWM each phase has a minimum of 8-12A to turn on with doublers. Powerstages are the same IR3555.



If you go by Anandtech's review with power draw, it's about 15-18W per core, so even a R9 3900X is just under 220W. So I would say a board with 10 powerstages >90% efficiency is recommended.


For R9 3900X I would say the Aorus Elite is the bare minimum. It's on Siliconlottery QVL too.


----------



## chowbaby

Haelous said:


> *That's kinda what I was afraid of; the X570 Carbon doesn't really have anything over any of it's competitors except fan stop. Might as well consider a Crosshair VII at that point for the same price.*
> 
> Hmm. A $50 MIR puts it closer to a competitor to the Strix X570-E which it definitely looks favorably next to. I didn't realize that was a thing. Thanks.
> 
> What would you consider the minimum for a 3900X then, Aorus Pro? I've read some bad things about both Asrock and Gigabyte's fans and their curve unfortunately.


Do Asus and Gigabyte not have fan stop for the chipset fan?


----------



## Heuchler

AlphaC said:


> I think the largest issue at hand right now is that all X570 boards don't have CPUs that actually push them (or reviewers aren't using the right loads maybe). The R9 3900X doesn't overclock much due to heat density so we'll probably have to wait for R9 3950X to actually see larger differences in board quality. For R7 3700X I don't think anything over the MSI Edge or Asrock Steel Legend is necessary. It looks like all CPUs topping out at 4.4GHz all core on these early BIOs even if you dump 1.4-1.5V into them.



long term short term
Ryzen 3000 65 Watt TDP 88 Watt 60 Ampere 90 Ampere
Ryzen 3000 105 Watt TDP 142 Watt 95 Ampere 140 Ampere

https://www.computerbase.de/2019-07/amd-ryzen-3000-test/6/


If the reviews are using ASUS Crosshair VIII Hero boards and disregarded AMDs recommendation to use approved 0066 BIO,S provided in the Press packagea, and used the none vetted BIOS that ASUS told them to us if could explain the low clock speeds because of being power limited.




The Stilt said:


> *First and foremost, a word of warning. When reading ANY of the AMD Ryzen 3000-series "Matisse" launch-day reviews, the first thing you should do is navigate to the page which lists the hardware setups.
> AMD supplied four different motherboards to the media, one from ASRock, ASUS, GIGABYTE and MSI. In case of the ASUS Crosshair VIII Hero Wi-Fi motherboard, the media was instructed to use 0066 bios build,
> which had been vetted and approved by AMD. However, newer bios builds were available and ASUS has also (allegedly) told the media to use those versions. What exactly has transpired here is still under investigation,
> but regardless of the actual reasons behind it, the consequences might be rather significant. In practical terms, all reviews which were done on ASUS Crosshair VIII Formula or Hero motherboards using other than 0066 bios build must
> be considered invalid, at least partially. Reviews using other ASUS motherboard models (not provided by AMD) are under suspicion as well.*
> 
> Few days ago, I noticed certain anomalies, while measuring the power consumption of the different Matisse SKUs. Inspection of the power management parameters revealed no issues, which could have explained those anomalies.
> The external power measurements (VRM DCR) revealed that the CPU was consuming significantly more power, than its power management should have allowed it to. I initially suspected that this was AMDs own doing, in an effort trying
> to boost the performance of the new CPUs even further, but further investigation indicated otherwise.
> 
> AMD had no part in it, and the actions by ASUS are the sole reason behind it. The investigation revealed that ASUS is altering one or more power
> management parameters of the CPU, causing it believe it consumes less power than it actually does. As a result, the frequencies will be higher than the actual power budget would normally allow to. Tricks like this are pretty much a common (mal)practice these
> days however, there is a good reason why this must be considered worse than the others: this "thing" is completely undetectable without external measurements and rather deep knowledge, but also there is no way to disable it either.
> Even a person such as myself, who can control most things on these platforms cannot disable this "thing". As you may notice, at the moment I call this issue the "thing", since I'm giving ASUS the benefit of a doubt.


https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-amd-cpus/1728758-strictly-technical-matisse-not-really.html

Long story short just look at reviews that aren't using ASUS motherboards.


----------



## Shenhua

Nighthog said:


> I'm feeling a little empty seeing all hit a limit of 4.4ghz on OC currently hardly makes the upgraded VRM useful as it is. Just makes it a non-issue to consider for most at this stage.


That makes many of the previous gen boards, really suitable for many of the new CPUs. Some of the x570 boards now look really overkill in VRM area.

At this point the new boards are just pcmasterrace area.


----------



## br0da

asdkj1740 said:


> not parallel in power stage and inductor.
> in short, same input for each of two power stages that they are not wired with each other, and each of that two power stages has itw own separated feedback sense.
> asp controller, i dont know.
> 
> msi parallel design may show a clear picture. look at the pinouts of vcore inductors, and compare them with igpu inductor pinouts (igpu is not in parallel).


Actually I don't see a major difference between those 'teamed' and 'twin / parallel' phases yet.
Even if they could handle those extra sense signals independently they'd pretty much sense the same current since two phases with nearly the same components are in parallel active.

It's perfectly fine arguing with actual performance test results where the design doesn't seem too bad, but speaking about features that the design does not have is crap.


----------



## Haelous

chowbaby said:


> Do Asus and Gigabyte not have fan stop for the chipset fan?


As far as I know, no one but MSI has fan stop. Asus, Asrock, and Gigabyte do not.

There are reports of Gigabyte and Asrock fans either being stuck at 100% or being noisy. In the case of Asrock, the issue happens even when you change the mode of the fan in the BIOS. It's possible these are defective fans, boards or BIOS, but if you buy now this is what you risk getting.

I haven't seen any reports of Asus fans being noisy, but they do run all the time.


----------



## Haelous

AlphaC said:


> MSI Ace is probably as good as Crosshair VIII Hero and comes with 3x M.2. If you look at the specsheet for IR35201 PWM each phase has a minimum of 8-12A to turn on with doublers. Powerstages are the same IR3555.
> 
> 
> 
> If you go by Anandtech's review with power draw, it's about 15-18W per core, so even a R9 3900X is just under 220W. So I would say a board with 10 powerstages >90% efficiency is recommended.
> 
> 
> For R9 3900X I would say the Aorus Elite is the bare minimum. It's on Siliconlottery QVL too.


The Aorus Elite is an even better value than the Pro, but I'm not down with risking the fan noise. I grabbed the Ace from Amazon considering the MIR and free returns. The heatsinks and long heatpipe on the Ace sure look promising as well, even next to the Crosshair VIII or Aorus Master.

I assume you mean 10 power stages just for the CPU, which would put all MSI boards under the Carbon in the dumpster, and the Carbon's VRMs and heatsinks are mediocre.

I am surprised the MSI Ace, Creation, and Godlike aren't on the Siliconlottery QVL. Maybe there's just a story involving them and MSI I'm not familiar with.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://images.anandtech.com/doci/14605/AMD-MSI-firmware-update-boost-changes.png
this seems to be related to exactly what toppc said lol.
amd no!


----------



## Nighthog

asdkj1740 said:


> https://images.anandtech.com/doci/14605/AMD-MSI-firmware-update-boost-changes.png
> this seems to be related to exactly what toppc said lol.
> amd no!


So confirmed broken BIOS/PBO/XFR? How can they miss such a obvious issue?!

So artificial limit gimping the clock speeds for all launch reviews? New tests needed with fixes soon?


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> So confirmed broken BIOS/PBO/XFR? How can they miss such a obvious issue?!
> 
> So artificial limit gimping the clock speeds for all launch reviews? New tests needed with fixes soon?


i dont get the whole picture actually. especially after reading what the stilt has said on his own thread.

what i heard and understanded from his videos are that, amd has very strict requirements to the bios for sample motherboard, for example the power and temperature and voltage and frequeccy etc, namely the behavior of ryzen 3000 cpus. and they are going to release new bios to fine tune these factors according to their own requirements.

i currently just know that the "problem" anandtech has encountered is because of amd's smu settings. this smu settings can only be changed by amd, even motherboard vendors cant overwrite it.


----------



## AlphaC

In layman's terms I believe he means that the BIOS is buggy especially with regards to boost behavior, and that the BIOs versions in the coming weeks and months will iron things out just like they did with Zen1.


ETA at SiliconLottery is July 17th for R9 3900X and 19th for R7 3700X.


----------



## Nighthog

Anyway I hope it works out in the end with that and delivery.

I made a decision and ordered the ASUS PRO WS X570-ACE and a Ryzen 7 3800X, availability is really bad here with only having motherboards and Ryzen 5 3600/x available on launch and the other higher end sku:s arriving earliest next week or the week after(some others 1-2 months later as earliest, YIKES!). 
I hope I ordered from the right place to get the 3800X in some kind of earliest manageable manner. They seem to be running out of stock so can't wait around.

I want the stuff before my summer vacation is over after all.

I'm not seeing my Biostar currently will be any better than it already has shown so moving on to another board.(lack of bios options/OC capabilities)

I got a refund for my old Gigabyte AB350 Gaming 3 for a bad BIOS as I was planning to give it away, got a warranty claim to try get it fixed before but was no good. Money back it was, as only option! no repair or whatnot available. Had to get another board as replacement instead elsewhere(Asus Prime B450-Plus)

The BIOS options available that I saw for the B450 made me go ASUS again as The ACE was fairly priced at the moment to the competition.


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14161/the-amd-x570-motherboard-overview/2


Update on Asrock X70 Pro4 & Phantom Gaming 4 : UP9505PQGW PWM (4+2), UP1961SQ PWM doubler, UP1962SD mosfet


UP1962 only lists as a driver
https://www.upi-semi.com/en-article-upi-681-2161#


I don't know if this is correct (a SIC634 is also listed as a mosfet rather than powerstage) but that is what Anandtech lists


The Asrock X570 Creator apparently is using IR3555 with IR PWM not the SIC634 / SiC632 powerstages.

The Phantom ITX is listed as 8x ISL99227 (60A smart powerstages with exposed top) that they used on Z390 , except doubled using ISL6617.

Also it seems the STRIX X570-E uses ASP1405I PWM (IR35201 likely) while the X570-F uses the ASP1106 cheaper PWM.


----------



## LiquidHaus

der8auer has a really solid video for overclocking on the Ryzen 3000 series. He even got his hands on the 3950X.






He never mentioned BIOS issues regarding PBO but this makes me think you could side step those issues by doing manual overclocks.

Also makes me wonder if Silicon Lottery will have anything worthwhile.


----------



## Nighthog

AlphaC said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14161/the-amd-x570-motherboard-overview/2
> 
> 
> Update on Asrock X70 Pro4 & Phantom Gaming 4 : UP9505PQGW PWM (4+2), UP1961SQ PWM doubler, UP1962SD mosfet
> 
> 
> UP1962 only lists as a driver
> https://www.upi-semi.com/en-article-upi-681-2161#
> 
> 
> I don't know if this is correct (a SIC634 is also listed as a mosfet rather than powerstage) but that is what Anandtech lists
> 
> 
> The Asrock X570 Creator apparently is using IR3555 with IR PWM not the SIC634 / SiC632 powerstages.
> 
> The Phantom ITX is listed as 8x ISL99227 (60A smart powerstages with exposed top) that they used on Z390 , except doubled using ISL6617.
> 
> Also it seems the STRIX X570-E uses ASP1405I PWM (IR35201 likely) while the X570-F uses the ASP1106 cheaper PWM.


Thanks for a heads-up on the new info. All I had was preliminary info/speculation up to now regarding most ASRock boards. Took it's time for some better data to come up regarding their boards.
Though seems there is some question marks on some the data Annandtech had gotten. Seems not correct at a first glance to earlier info we had on some boards.


----------



## AlphaC

anyone Polish?






6:51 testing on 570 Gaming Plus from MSI is around 83°C but then there's an asterisk with 91°C


----------



## sotheray

https://nguyencongpc.vn/tren-tay-bo-mach-chu-asrock-x570-steel-legend/
Seems X570 Steel Legend uses SiC632A Dr.Mos, 8(4*2)+2 Phases with ISL69147 controller.
So Extreme4/Phantom Gaming 6 may use this VRM as well.

(I realized that anandtech shows SiC634/SiC632A on their list, so maybe there are two versions of these boards?)

https://www.vishay.com/docs/62992/sic632a.pdf
https://www.vishay.com/docs/76784/sic634.pdf
The graph shows that SiC632A is a little more efficient than SiC634 which is used on Taichi?


Edit: ASRock puts a "huge"(for 2 phases) heatsink on the 2 phases SOC VRM, with no heatpipe linked to the Core VRM heatsink(which needs to handle 8 phase for VCore). Really can't get that.


----------



## Heuchler

[PCGH] torture test Aorus X570 Xtreme passive cooling capacity using Ryzen 9 3900X with Prime95 w/AVX and The Witcher 3

this one has subtitles and you can use auto translate

Result 11min mark - 55.4°C average with 57.3°C max


----------



## Robbært

AlphaC said:


> anyone Polish?
> 6:51 testing on 570 Gaming Plus from MSI is around 83°C but then there's an asterisk with 91°C


he said
7:20 without cooler 115C MOSFET (he had open stand airflow while testing)

There also review with 80C @ B350 3*2 in parallel.
link
They say 190W, which is 135A @1.4V. There no 22.5A @80C MOSFETs in B350-B450 boards.
I think it was throttle or weak review.

10-phase Gigabyte Z390 Gaming X (same VRM as Gigabyte Z570 Gaming X) was not able to overclock 9900K.
I think CPU with 9900K consumption level (3900X) should not be used with an 8,10-phase MOSFET boards.


----------



## Nighthog

So seems the weaker 8-10 phase design with individual high/low-side mosfets like the Onsemi VRM from MSI/Gigabyte designs is bare minimum for the 12-core and that is counting on active cooling for the VRM to keep them from hitting max temperatures to throttle and such?
Passive they overheat it seems from what we can gather. 

Sure in the older boards they were meant tops for 8-core and manage but the new 12 & 16-core chips will draw more power even if TDP is 105W for these parts? PBO-settings <-- I reckon. 

It's interesting the stock 3900X power draw topped out at 144W on the Gigabyte AORUS X570 Extreme temperate test of passive PCH. But then they drew more power on the cheaper boards? 
Maybe they ran them un-gimped to get them to overheat but should be ok stock without PBO cranked up?

Seems techspot tested them all 144W stock all the way to max 195W with stock cooler and no other cooling(ok temps?). Not the same scenario as CLC or a tower cooler that I had seen above or otherwise when they overheat.


----------



## Robbært

Nighthog said:


> It's interesting the stock 3900X power draw topped out at 144W on the Gigabyte AORUS X570 Extreme temperate test of passive PCH. But then they drew more power on the cheaper boards?


When you disable AMD automatic OC it remove power draw limitations too.

Another B350 + 3900x review. With thermal images and good description of how it was tested
link
They actually measure coil temperature. MOSFET itself can be +10..15C easy inside chip.

While B350 kinda lowest option
most B450 boards _have same 4-phase VRM_, with 2 mosfet in parallel.


----------



## XZ G

Dont know about Asus but Gigabyte PCH fan is reported to run in full speed and a Giga rep post a message about a BIOS update to address the issue. It is just unbelievable. I was planning to get an Elite or Pro but now looking for a Pro Carbon since Ace does not have local stocks as well. Or I will just use my CH7 which is waiting in brand new box either to be replaced or be deployed.


----------



## Nighthog

XZ G said:


> Dont know about Asus but Gigabyte PCH fan is reported to run in full speed and a Giga rep post a message about a BIOS update to address the issue. It is just unbelievable. I was planning to get an Elite or Pro but now looking for a Pro Carbon since Ace does not have local stocks as well. Or I will just use my CH7 which is waiting in brand new box either to be replaced or be deployed.


BIOS is already out with the Fan fix/profiles.


----------



## lb_felipe

Haelous said:


> As far as I know, no one but MSI has fan stop. Asus, Asrock, and Gigabyte do not.
> 
> There are reports of Gigabyte and Asrock fans either being stuck at 100% or being noisy. In the case of Asrock, the issue happens even when you change the mode of the fan in the BIOS. It's possible these are defective fans, boards or BIOS, but if you buy now this is what you risk getting.
> 
> I haven't seen any reports of Asus fans being noisy, but they do run all the time.


Good to know. Any MSI X570 woth buying?


----------



## AlphaC

lb_felipe said:


> Good to know. Any MSI X570 worth buying?


MSI Creation , if you need 10G LAN, more M.2 ports via daughterboard, and the extra rear USB ports. Also better power delivery. For most people it isn't worth the $500 price tag. 

MSI X570 Ace , if you want a debug LED + clear CMOS+heatpiped heatsink +3x M.2. Power delivery is good as well. For most people they're better off with a $250 Aorus Pro which is nearly $130 cheaper without having to jump through hoops.



The MSI boards are rather pricey if you want a quality board , but the pain is eased a bit if you make use of their MSI loves Ryzen promotion. https://www.msi.com/Promotion/I-Love-You-3000-AMD/
The AIO that is provided is worth roughly $80-120. If you count shipping and ebay fees you can deduct maybe $80 off the MSI board after Ebay+paypal fees and shipping cost.
If you write a review then they may give an additional $25 steam card.
Total savings ~ $100


----------



## lb_felipe

AlphaC said:


> MSI Creation , if you need 10G LAN, more M.2 ports via daughterboard, and the extra rear USB ports. Also better power delivery. For most people it isn't worth the $500 price tag.
> 
> MSI X570 Ace , if you want a debug LED + clear CMOS+heatpiped heatsink +3x M.2. Power delivery is good as well. For most people they're better off with a $250 Aorus Pro which is nearly $130 cheaper without having to jump through hoops.
> 
> 
> 
> The MSI boards are rather pricey if you want a quality board , but the pain is eased a bit if you make use of their MSI loves Ryzen promotion. https://www.msi.com/Promotion/I-Love-You-3000-AMD/
> The AIO that is provided is worth roughly $80-120. If you count shipping and ebay fees you can deduct maybe $80 off the MSI board after Ebay+paypal fees and shipping cost.
> If you write a review then they may give an additional $25 steam card.
> Total savings ~ $100


Thanks!

What can I do with that AIO?

I would choose MSI just because its fan stop feature. GIGABYTE X570 AORUS XTREME is the only fanless and it is very expensive. Do you think is worth buying MSI just because fan stop, or do you recommend another hoping fan noise is not so noisy?

Off topic. If I build systems with Ryzen 3000, I would like to leave my Ryzen 7 1700 + GTX 1080 for mining. Do you think is worth it?


----------



## Heuchler

Igor Wallossek says new batches of Ryzen 3000-series CPUs will have a different HardwareIDs


----------



## AlphaC

lb_felipe said:


> Thanks!
> 
> What can I do with that AIO?
> 
> I would choose MSI just because its fan stop feature. GIGABYTE X570 AORUS XTREME is the only fanless and it is very expensive. Do you think is worth buying MSI just because fan stop, or do you recommend another hoping fan noise is not so noisy?
> 
> Off topic. If I build systems with Ryzen 3000, I would like to leave my Ryzen 7 1700 + GTX 1080 for mining. Do you think is worth it?



Asrock just rolled a fan profile out for Taichi and the whole Aorus lineup received a BIOS update for fanstop


You have two options for the AIO: use or sell.


----------



## lb_felipe

AlphaC said:


> Asrock just rolled a fan profile out for Taichi and the whole Aorus lineup received a BIOS update for fanstop
> 
> 
> You have two options for the AIO: use or sell.


I thought Aorus would never have fan stop option because it don't have heat pipe between PCH heatsink and VRM heatsink. Due to that, will Aorus fan keep stopped for shorter time?


----------



## XZ G

Nighthog said:


> XZ G said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dont know about Asus but Gigabyte PCH fan is reported to run in full speed and a Giga rep post a message about a BIOS update to address the issue. It is just unbelievable. I was planning to get an Elite or Pro but now looking for a Pro Carbon since Ace does not have local stocks as well. Or I will just use my CH7 which is waiting in brand new box either to be replaced or be deployed.
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS is already out with the Fan fix/profiles.
Click to expand...

Yes I saw it as well. Thats good. I will wait for Ace for now since it is not in stock locally. By vrm-wise giga elite is quite nice. Auros pro is the board I actually considering to buy but I really liked Ace.


----------



## AlphaC

Some more info on the PCB layers for ASUS:
https://www.coolaler.com/threads/asus-rog-crosshair-viii-formula_hero_strix-x570-e-gaming.356011/







Crosshair VIII Formula / Hero = 8 layer PCB
Crosshair VIII Impact = 8 layer PCB

Pro WS Ace = 8 layer PCB
STRIX X570-I = 8 layer PCB
STRIX X570-E = 6 layer PCB
STRIX X570-F = 6 layer PCB
Prime X570 Pro = 6 layer PCB
TUF X570 PLUS = 6 layer PCB
Prime X570-P = 6 layer PCB

The inductors on crosshair VIII Hero are 45A chokes:








--------------------------------------------------------
Some early Testing:

*Asrock Taichi*


> 4.475 GHz CPU, 3866 MHz Memory
> Load Power:93 W
> 
> VRM Temperature:41.7°C


 _R5 3600X_
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-x570-taichi/15.html

*ROG Crosshair VIII Formula*


> It seemed to function well without water too: We measured the temperature of the chokes at 47°C and the rear backplate atop the VRMs at 40°C with our own IR laser probe, while the software-reported VRM temperature was 45°C - all after a 10-minute load test.


 - https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/motherboards/asus-rog-crosshair-viii-formula-review/1/

Full load R9 3900X 44°C https://www.profesionalreview.com/2019/07/08/asus-rog-crosshair-viii-formula-review/

​ *ROG Crosshair VIII Hero*


> Fortunately, the VRM coolers remained downright cool with below 50 ° C, which, however, with a Ryzen 9 3900X (12 cores / 24 threads) or even with the appearing in the fall Ryzen 9 3950X (16 cores / 32 threads) will look quite different.


https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.p...st-der-fch-luefter-im-fadenkreuz.html?start=3

37°C Full Load R9 3900X https://www.profesionalreview.com/2019/07/07/asus-rog-crosshair-viii-hero-wi-fi-review/

*STRIX X570-E*
38 °C Full load (R7 3700X in BIOS picture) https://www.profesionalreview.com/2019/07/12/asus-rog-strix-x570-e-gaming-review/


*Gigabyte Aorus Master*


> Enough to say that the AORUS Master X570 offers very solid performance, without any problem with VRMs ranging from 39 degrees in idle to 43 degrees with the system under stress. All in front of CPU consumption of 84W in the heaviest test of Prime 95, with a maximum of 73 degrees of temperature. Everything is in order and things run smoothly even with overclocking. Pushing all the cores to 4150MHz, with the Wraith Prism heatsink as standard, the temperatures did not exceed 43 degrees for the VRM and reached a maximum of 84 degrees on the CPU, compared to a total consumption of the package of 112W.


 (_R7 3700X_)
https://multiplayer.it/recensioni/gigabyte-x570-aorus-master-recensione.html

34°C R7 3700X full load : https://www.profesionalreview.com/2019/07/07/x570-aorus-master-review/



> With the Wraith Prism RGB Cooler that comes together with the CPU, the best settings we can achieve is 4.2GHz with 1.28V. 4.3GHz is still possible, but it will quickly throttle down back to 4.2GHz the moment you hit it with a really heavy task. Just so you know, the performance throttle will kick in at the moment the CPU temperature hits 92°C.
> The VRM is doing just fine on its own and the highest recorded temperature during all the stress test is only at around 56-60°C. Unless you’re going with extreme overclocking on this board, it is very unlikely for the VRM to have any thermal issues under normal usage or minor overclocking.


https://www.tech-critter.com/gigabyte-x570-aorus-master-motherboard-review/

*MSI Creation*


> Out of the box at stock speed, the VRMs hit 56°C according to MSI's software, while out IR laser probe reported 55°C as the warmest temperature from several measurements along the tops of the chokes, and 51°C reported from the rear of the VRMs on the underside of the PCB.


https://bit-tech.net/reviews/tech/motherboards/msi-prestige-x570-creation-review/1/



> We measured no more than 48°C from the VRM heatsinks directly, way inside of the spec that today’s VRMs are rated to.


https://www.vortez.net/articles_pages/msi_prestige_x570_creation_review,22.html

*MSI Ace*


> Top radiator temperature , Load °C
> R7 3700X = 42°C
> R7 3700X @ 4300MHz = 44°C
> R7 3700X @ 4400MHz = 44°C
> R7 2700X = 45°C


https://overclockers.ru/lab/show/98...inskoj-platy-msi-meg-x570-ace-top-na-amd-x570




> Full stock 49°C


 R9 3900X
https://www.profesionalreview.com/2019/07/07/msi-meg-x570-ace-review/


Ryzen 9 [email protected] , 1.312V
https://www.expreview.com/69414.html

------
Aorus ITX full teardown














https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qn_report&wr_id=66623


-----


lb_felipe said:


> I thought Aorus would never have fan stop option because it don't have heat pipe between PCH heatsink and VRM heatsink. Due to that, will Aorus fan keep stopped for shorter time?


Not sure but Gigabyte did add fan profiles with fan stop and max fan RPM ~ 1600 so it really is moot unless you have case cooling that is outright inadequate.


----------



## dansi

WS ACE or Hero? 
Does WS ACE use the same choke and capacitor as the ROG one?


----------



## Gunderman456




----------



## Heuchler

Gunderman456 said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuyuS04lD4o



I rather read all 349 pages of this thread over again then finish that video. I tried watching it twice. 
Buildzoid is best unleashed where he can go on any tangent that he likes.


----------



## dansi

Who is buildzoid?
Is he a qualified EEE engineer to give his long view?


----------



## Spectre73

dansi said:


> Who is buildzoid?
> Is he a qualified EEE engineer to give his long view?


Does he need to be? Because he very obviously knows his stuff.


----------



## dansi

Well yes you do need a certain eee qualifications imo. Designing Stuffs like these are more complicated than we think.


----------



## Nighthog

dansi said:


> Well yes you do need a certain eee qualifications imo. Designing Stuffs like these are more complicated than we think.


No degree or PHD just a enthusiast that wants to learn more and is interested in the stuff. He usually knows enough to be worth your time but he isn't a engineer to know how to build the stuff.
Just enough to be useful for his OC addiction and do modifications for LN2 and such.


----------



## Nighthog

Just a heads up I made a different order as parts where never getting dispatched from the place I made my order from for the ASUS PRO WS X570-ACE & Ryzen 7 3800X. They never were getting the stuff to deliver.

I took from a new place that had parts arrive in stock today, but I went a little overboard on the motherboard now. Went with what I had eyed from the beginning but was appalled at the price when it was revealed. Getting the *Gigabyte X570 AORUS XTREME* instead but same cpu 3800X.
Over spec but that board will be so much easier to work with in the case I have in the end and it was a little risk with the ASUS how well it would be supported. Info still not updated on-site etc.


----------



## thegr8anand

Asus x470 Crosshair VII Hero is cheaper for me ($330) compared x570 Gigabyte Aorus Pro ($325) & Ultra ($370), x570 Msi Gaming Pro Carbon ($380), x570 Asus ROG Strix - E ($410). The crosshair seems better than all these x570 boards and the next better upgrade seems to be Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master ($445) but also $115 costlier.


Am i correct in my analysis?


----------



## AlphaC

X570 has PCIE 4.0 support and also NvMe support for over PCIE 2.0 x4 on the second NvMe drive without cutting into your GPU PCIE lanes.


Anyway http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075116296.html



> With the MSI MEG X570 ACE, even if the VRM power supply continues to be loaded for a long time with 200 W class CPU power consumption, the Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 3950 X can be operated at room temperature with passive air cooling.


Thermal image shows ~75°C with AIO (Corsair H150i PRO RGB and 3x NF-A12x25 fans)



> MSI X470 GAMING equipped with the previous generation X470 chipset using Ryzen 7 2700X's entire core of 4.2 GHz that generates the same CPU power consumption when Ryzen 9 3900X is clocked to the limit with XFR When verifying PRO CARBON, the VRM power supply temperature was slightly over 100 degrees.
> The high quality of the VRM power supply circuit and the high cooling performance of the VRM power supply cooler of "MSI MEG X570 ACE", which is designed to correspond to Ryzen 9 series and belongs to the company's high-end brand "MEG" .


X470 Gaming Pro Carbon shows 116°C using the same AIO setup

Weight: 1230g for MSI ace , 1023g for entire X470 Gaming Pro Carbon


Another review with R9 3900X:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14603/the-msi-meg-x570-ace-motherboard-review/9


-----------

Aorus Pro WIFI R9 3900X , 4.3GHz = 62°C
--- NvMe heatsink drops 20°C on SSDs



Spoiler












-----------




> When rendering in Blender, the CPU consumption was about 81 Watts, the SOC takes four Watts and the CPU temperature rose to 81 ° C, the fan on the heatsink rotated to a round 3000 rpm, even in the closed cabinet, but at least strangely it does not whine and does not produce strange sounds, which is positive. The feed cascade was quite idle, the major portion of the VRM reported 55 ° C, and the cooler surface temperature was about 43 ° C, the second portion of the VRM where the VCore phases were left, and the two VSOCs heated to 49 ° C. Processor voltage was held around 1.356V steadily.
> 
> Worse in the AVX2 load, here the processor warmed to high 90 ° C, the power cascade melted to 59 ° C and 50 ° C, but mainly the processor, the CPU consumed up to 101 Watts, but sometimes declines to 75-90 Watts. The core voltage was about 1,344-1,350V.


X370 Fatality K4 had the IR35201 PWM + 8x sinopower high/low side fets
Testing was with R7 3700X

https://diit.cz/clanek/test-asrock-...3700x-bios-540-agesa-1001/zaverecne-hodnoceni


TUF X570
R7 3700X stock = 48°C
48 ºC​ https://www.profesionalreview.com/2019/07/18/asus-tuf-gaming-x570-plus-review/


Aorus ITX 50°C with R9 3900X



Spoiler












------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


https://nl.hardware.info/artikel/9411/15-amd-x570-moederborden-review-op-de-proef-met-een-3900x


PCB temp backside:
Aorus Xtreme = 48.3°C (50.1°C front)

MSI Godlike = 54.1°C (54.2°C front)

Aorus Master = 54.4°C (56.9°C front)

Crosshair VIII Formula = 56.8°C (57.3°C front)

X570-E STRIX = 58°C (59.5°C front)

Crosshair VIII Hero = 58.2°C (58.9°C front)

Aorus Pro = 61.4°C (63.8°C front) 

X570 Taichi = 61.4°C (62°C front)

Aorus Ultra = 61.8°C (65.5°C front)

MSI X570 Ace = 63.5°C (66.1°C front)

Prime X570-Pro = 63.7°C (66.1°C front)

Aorus Elite = 64°C (66°C front)

TUF Gaming X570-Plus = 65.4°C (66.1°C front)

X570 I Aorus Pro WIFI (ITX) = 69.6°C (72.2°C front)

X570 Gaming X = *92.2**°C (90.3**°C front)
*
*B450M Steel Legend = 103**°C (106**°C front)
*
*X470 Ultra Gaming = 114**°C (106**°C front)*

*----------------------------------------------------*

*hardwareinfo shows Asus resorted to outright lying:*
https://elchapuzasinformatico.com/2019/07/asus-alardea-de-tener-las-mejores-placas-base-ataca-a-msi-y-gigabyte-para-demostrarlo/


















Also Aorus X570 Pro is 6 layer, this is public information for over a month...


-------------------------------------------------------


X570-P user review at chiphell reveals R47 inductor https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2016333-1-1.html
same for STRIX X570-E: https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2016403-1-1.html

It's in parallel so effectively ~235nH


Chiphell seems to have confirmed Phantom Gaming 4 as SM4337+SM4336 Sinopower powerpaks I guess

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2012882-1-1.html


-------------------------------------------------------


MSI X570 Pro Carbon hit 90°C VRM MOS temp:
https://news.mydrivers.com/1/637/637455_all.htm


> Five minutes after running the AIDA64 FPU, under the power consumption of 143W, the operating frequency of the R 9 3900X was maintained at 3.875GHz, and the processor temperature was 78 degrees, but the temperature of the motherboard power supply MOSFET has reached 89 degrees.
> ...
> After the PBO is turned on, due to the existence of the temperature wall, the power consumption of the baking machine can only reach 185W, the frequency of the baking machine is 4.025GHz, and the processor temperature is 95 degrees. What we need to pay attention to is that although the AIDA 64 FPU runs for 2 minutes, the temperature of the motherboard power supply MOSFET has reached 97 degrees. If the baking machine test is continued, the temperature of the power supply module will further increase, even more than 100 degrees. .


MSI X570 Ace: PBO is broken
https://g.pconline.com.cn/x/1274/12749768.html


> Is it a bit curious about why the temperature after PBO is so low? Because the PBO will automatically turn the CPU's power consumption temperature and voltage wall into a super invincible safety range when the PBO is not turned on, the CPU temperature of the baking machine is only 65 °C, and the power supply temperature of the motherboard is only 60 °C, it is not itch. The feeling of pain.


(really poor google translate)


MSI X570 Creation: teardown and test 
http://diy.zol.com.cn/721/7219679.html


Another MSI creation teardown, we can see R22 chokes as well as a Powerlogic 50mm fan used for the chipset.

https://forum.gamer.com.tw/C.php?bsn=60030&snA=526578


MSI Godlike:
61-75°C

http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075139958.html


----------



## f300

Asrock X570M Pro4 vrm photos via Reddit (note: all credit to the guy who posted on reddit, I'm just linking here).

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/chr5q0/asrock_x570m_pro4_vrm_photos_oc/


----------



## Nighthog

A review of the *Gigabyte X570 I Aorus Pro WiFi* mITX board.

https://www.sweclockers.com/test/27885-gigabyte-x570-i-aorus-pro-wifi/6#content

Doesn't even really hit 60C degrees on the VRM.
The chipset fan is from EVERFLOW Model: R123510BM.
________________________
And the ASUS bad marketing slides, for whatever their worth is. Seems original site removed them.
The thermal images are kinda neat in some contexts. 
https://videocardz.com/newz/something-gigabyte-msi-and-amd-do-not-want-you-to-see

_________________________
Thanks for confirmation on the ASRock sinopower SM3446/3447 combo. Though worse than I thought. 
They only do 1x1 for vCORE and 2x2 for vSoC.


----------



## AlphaC

Nighthog the X570I Aorus Pro hit 70°C in the hardware info NL test with R9 3900X ; the sweclockers test was with R7 3700X.

Asrock Pro4 and the Phantom Gaming 4 are both SM4337 + SM4336 , 8 total sets for CPU. Nothing amazing: they're aiming for the budget buyers.


----------



## cssorkinman

I really wish the review sites would at least take the time to understand how to use their thermal imaging equipment.

They aren't even taking the images from the same angle....


----------



## Heuchler

Hope this stunt backfires on them. Aorus Xtreme being the best X570 board was a given. But the Aorus Master VRM thermals being better than Crosshair VIII Formula ($699 for the same board as the Hero with a VRM block included, not even a monoblock) is just embarrassing. 


2133 MT/s using G.Skill DDR4 3600 kit (maybe G.Skill Sniper X F4-3600C19Q-32GSXW)


Ryzen 3000 16core, Matisse 16-core and finally Ryzen Ryzen9 3950X (get your PR team to agree to a name already)



hardware.info X570 round-up with motherboards front and back temperature test was very good to see. Hope more review sites look into thermals now.


edit: found this

Buildzoid reacts to Asus X570 marketing


----------



## n4p0l3onic

@AlphaC
any idea why the huge difference in VRM temperature between MSI ACE and Godlike? the MSI ACE even get outperformed by Taichi, and across reviews I've seen the MSI ACE VRM temp really getting north of 60 celcius, seeing that I'm now would rather spend more on Gigabyte Master (more expensive in my country)


----------



## AlphaC

MSI Ace is using 60A IR3555 x12 (similar to X570-E STRIX but with doublers) however it also has the chipset heat being dumped into the heatsink. Godlike has 14x TDA21472 70A powerstages so of course it will run cooler.

Aorus Master is a better board in terms of heat dissipation and PWM design when you consider the 50A IR3556 actually has lower thermal conductivity than IR3555. However, the MSI Ace is plenty capable. MSI Ace is actually cheaper by about $80 if you count their promotion with the 240mm AIO cooler in some countries. Taichi might have slightly better thermal dissipation than the Ace from the powerstages as Vishay SiC634 has 10.6°C/W junction to ambient and 1.6°C/W to casing. The IR3550 (older gen IR3555) had 14.3°C/W to ambient and 1.9°C/W to the casing.

https://www.vishay.com/docs/76784/sic634.pdf

Could also be the Taichi's ISL6617 doublers are faster than the MSI's IR3599 by a few ns or something to do with the default switching frequency used. Both boards (Taichi + Ace) are using 220nH inductors though the output capacitance is probably higher on the Taichi.

60-70°C is nothing to be alarmed about when you consider hwinfo NL was using a low bin R9 3900X with fixed overclock at 1.3V. The only X570 board in that review not worth buying (as reiterated many times) is the X570 Gaming X if you intend to use a R9 3900X , doubly so since USB 3.1 gen 2 is missing on it and the far better Aorus Elite is ~$30 more. The Japanese reviewer was dumping around 180-200W into their MSI Ace with zero airflow and on a Corsair 360mm AIO and it hit 75°C.


----------



## asdkj1740

dont judge the cooling performance of different mobos simply by the ir cam.
what ir cam generally shows you is the temperatures of chokes and capacitors. and asus has put thermal pads for their chokes, meaning the asus heatsink is not just covering the mosfets but also the chokes. it is a huge advantage under ir cam.


----------



## n4p0l3onic

Oh yeah I also forgot that those Temps happened under 100% stress load, aren't they? So not average daily pc usage, but how about the chipset temp and cooling? Reviewers forgot to tests those.


----------



## n4p0l3onic

Oh yeah I also forgot that those Temps happened under 100% stress load, aren't they? So not average daily pc usage, but how about the chipset temp and cooling? Reviewers forgot to tests those.


----------



## AlphaC

Probably don't want to run R9 3900X overclocked on asrock Steel Legend , as I have stated before:



















R9 3900X @4.3GHz

--------------

If for some reason you decide to run R7 2700X @ 4.31GHz on Aorus Pro, reaches around 70-75°C without any airflow:

https://3dnews.ru/991418/page-2.html#Производительность


--------------
TUF Plus tested on Japanese site , reaches 74.5°C with R9 3900X @ 40.75x multi (241W power output per Corsair Link)
http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075043022.html

same test was 68.9°C on STRIX X570-E (238W power output per Corsair Link) and 73.2°C on Crosshair VII hero http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075035479.html
74.2°C on the X570 Taichi (252W power output per Corsair Link) http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075090469.html


----------



## asdkj1740

https://youtu.be/gOSFX2tHDcE?t=481 8:01
wrong diagram of asus teamed desgin.
what hardwareunboxed shows is a general parallel desgin. 
under asus teamed design, each of two chokes / powerstages / mosfets are not wired to each other.

and the following test is set to 1.4v for comparison. 
not sure on asus c8h which type of voltage is referring to: die sense vs socket sense


----------



## ver_21

n4p0l3onic said:


> @AlphaC
> any idea why the huge difference in VRM temperature between MSI ACE and Godlike? the MSI ACE even get outperformed by Taichi, and across reviews I've seen the MSI ACE VRM temp really getting north of 60 celcius, seeing that I'm now would rather spend more on Gigabyte Master (more expensive in my country)


I've been running my 3800X at 4400+ all core, and ACE with frequency switch at 1000, run blender, and not seen VRMos temps above 41C or chipset temps above 60C.

Either bad reviews or bad boards or I have some kinda exception.


----------



## AlphaC

It's because you're running 8 cores rather than 12. That's 50% less cores = up to 50% less power consumption at same clocks (as it's same architecture and process node). What power draw are you getting for the CPU-only (hwinfo package powers and current draw)?


-----

Also @ *asdkj1740* , I would assume the hardwareunboxed test is based on what is set in BIOS.

What he did mention is 
Asrock = Level 1 (highest) LLC ; PBO = 249-251W with 1.344-1.35V
ASUS = Level 4 (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 246W with 1.338V
Gigabyte = Extreme (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 241W with 1.332V
MSI = mode 2 (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 252W with 1.375V


----------



## Bartholdi

*Subbed.*

This is a very interesting thread. If only MSI creation wasn't E-ATX. 

Anyone able to point me in the direction of the board most similar to it which is ATX?


----------



## AlphaC

If you're looking at the $500 MSI Creation (arguably the most well-priced MSI board in terms of features to price) I think you should also be looking at the $360 Aorus Master. The only major thing that you would be missing I believe is the 10G LAN (worth $80 or so) and maybe a few USB ports. The Aorus Master has 3 x M.2 but doesn't have the PCIE 4.0 M.2 expander card (which you can probably get for $20-30 if you can tolerate PCIE 3.0 x4 speed). If you don't _need_ the 10G LAN or extra 2x PCIE 4.0 M.2 slots via expansion card then it is a non-issue. 


https://www.amazon.com/Aquantia-NIC-5-speed-Ethernet-Network/dp/B07B3G4S4J
https://www.amazon.com/Aquantia-NIC-5-speed-Ethernet-Network/dp/B07C5VLVFF

4 way PCIE 4.0 adapter shown by Gigabyte:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14440/gigabyte-shows-pcie-40-x16-fourway-m2-pcie-addin-card
"The card takes a PCIe 4.0 x16 slot (can be run at PCIe 3.0 mode, for what it’s worth), and branches out into four PCIe 4.0 M.2 slots."

Dual and Quad PCIE 3.0x4 M.2 adapters (so PCIE 3.0x8 for dual, PCIE3.0x16 for quad): 
https://www.cdw.com/product/supermi...-interface-adapter-m.2-card-pcie-3/4990643#PO
https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-M-2-X16-V2-Threadripper/dp/B07NQBQB6Z/
https://www.provantage.com/gigabyte-technology-cmt4032~7GIG9174.htm
https://www.newegg.com/asrock-model-ultra-quad-m-2-card-pci-express-to-m-2-card/p/N82E16815548004
https://www.msi.com/PC-component/M.2-XPANDER-AERO <--- not for sale individually yet


MSI Ace is also worth looking at due to 3x M.2 , but the power delivery is going to be less well cooled. You can also look at the Taichi if you need Thunderbolt as it has Thunderbolt AIC card support as well as 3x M.2 , being aware that it may run warmer than the MSI Ace. I wouldn't look at the ROG Hero because getting a USB hub is far less of a hassle than trying to get a 3rd M.2 slot.


----------



## Heuchler

[PCGH] AMD X570 Kaufberatung [buyers guide] Part 1





Video has subtitles and youtube has option to auto-translate. Printed article in the new issue of PC Games Hardware [08/07/2019]

Found it very odd that they where not allowed to publish their findings on ASUS boards - starts talking about at 18:35 minuets


----------



## os2wiz

So your statement about MSI X570 MEG ACE having poorer heat dissipation is based on the use of PB technology. I can tell you there are several users in my MSI X570 MEG ACE owners thread who are reporting significantly lower temperature for vrms than what this study found. There is a heatpipe that MSI built connected to the VRM . I question these findings. I can not give my own results as my computer is located in a sunroom that even with 24,000 BTU's of air conditioning in mid day the ambient temperature in summer here is about 91 Farenheit. But I seriously doubt that it is statistically significantly higher than the other motherboards in its class. 





AlphaC said:


> It's because you're running 8 cores rather than 12. That's 50% less cores = up to 50% less power consumption at same clocks (as it's same architecture and process node). What power draw are you getting for the CPU-only (hwinfo package powers and current draw)?
> 
> 
> -----
> 
> Also @ *asdkj1740* , I would assume the hardwareunboxed test is based on what is set in BIOS.
> 
> What he did mention is
> Asrock = Level 1 (highest) LLC ; PBO = 249-251W with 1.344-1.35V
> ASUS = Level 4 (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 246W with 1.338V
> Gigabyte = Extreme (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 241W with 1.332V
> MSI = mode 2 (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 252W with 1.375V


----------



## AlphaC

hardware info NL as well as hardwareunboxed used a fixed voltage OC. I was just putting up the PBO numbers because ASUS slides had the PBO claim that they had better PBO performance.


Hardware info NL result ; R9 3900X @ 4.1 all core:
X570 Taichi $300 board = 61.4°C rear PCB , 62°C front of PCB
X570 Aorus Elite $200 board _with zero heatpipes_ = 64°C rear PCB while front is 66°C
MSI Ace rear PCB = 63.5°C while front is 66.1°C

Also it doesn't take a genius to figure out that having less fin area means higher thermals. It is also reflected in the Japanese review:
http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075116296.html
R9 3900X @ 40.5 multiplier in AVIUTL AVX load without airflow = 74.8°C


And this greek review (65°C with R9 3900X):
https://www.hwbox.gr/reviews/motherboards/42704-msi-meg-x570-ace-motherboard-review.html?start=2



I would say 3 separate datapoints is a trend.


----------



## asdkj1740




----------



## Nighthog

Seems we are getting the cheaper boards start to trickle in here and there now.

Gigabyte X570 UD https://www.gigabyte.com/se/Motherboard/X570-UD-rev-10
Seems to be cheaper version of the Gaming X board with same VRM.

Biostar X570GT https://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=957 mATX 4+3 cheap VRM
Biostar X470GTA https://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=955 ATX 4+3
Biostar X470GTQ https://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=956 mATX 4+3
Abysmal VRM on these, but hey new boards.


----------



## AlphaC

The X570 UD would be passable if they heatsinked the back of the board with a flat plate at a minimum. As it is now it just is a bad buy , it would need to be dirt cheap for someone to forgo USB 3.1 gen 2 entirely as well as Intel LAN + half decent ALC1200/ALC1220 audio for the cheapest ALC887.


P.S. Someone at ASUS should buy Bing two decent Fluke multimeters and a proper current clamp instead of the ones he's using that look like they came from a discount store. CIE 8007 spec: 0.5% for voltage. MSI toppc's Fluke 233 equipment has an accuracy of 0.25% for voltage and 1% for DC current. Measurements are only as good as the measurement devices. It's acceptable for a hobbyist or end user to be using cheap equipment to get a sanity check, it isn't acceptable for someone in R&D or the engineering department to using cheap presumably un-calibrated equipment.

It's almost as comical as the 10°C delta their VRM temp sensors are reading. That's more than 10% error vs K-type thermocouple. At the the end of the day I don't think people care about if the die sense reading is more accurate or not because reviewers should be measuring at the back of the socket to equalize between motherboards, they do care if their temp sensors are wrong and their power readings are wrong. It seems like a cop-out for an inferior design: "our voltage reading is more accurate so our voltage is actually higher than others" and other excuses. If anything it leads to more risk from end-users because every prior platform used the "inferior way" of measuring so people will overvolt their CPUs more. We've already seen this on Z390 where people claim to have 100mV less required VCORE on ASUS boards but only due to the measurement methodology.

Measurement systems 101: measurement may change the result (observer effect), factor in measurement precision/accuracy (doesn't look like his equipment has been calibrated).


----------



## VPII

AlphaC said:


> If you're looking at the $500 MSI Creation (arguably the most well-priced MSI board in terms of features to price) I think you should also be looking at the $360 Aorus Master. The only major thing that you would be missing I believe is the 10G LAN (worth $80 or so) and maybe a few USB ports. The Aorus Master has 3 x M.2 but doesn't have the PCIE 4.0 M.2 expander card (which you can probably get for $20-30 if you can tolerate PCIE 3.0 x4 speed). If you don't _need_ the 10G LAN or extra 2x PCIE 4.0 M.2 slots via expansion card then it is a non-issue.
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Aquantia-NIC-5-speed-Ethernet-Network/dp/B07B3G4S4J
> https://www.amazon.com/Aquantia-NIC-5-speed-Ethernet-Network/dp/B07C5VLVFF
> 
> 4 way PCIE 4.0 adapter shown by Gigabyte:
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14440/gigabyte-shows-pcie-40-x16-fourway-m2-pcie-addin-card
> "The card takes a PCIe 4.0 x16 slot (can be run at PCIe 3.0 mode, for what it’s worth), and branches out into four PCIe 4.0 M.2 slots."
> 
> Dual and Quad PCIE 3.0x4 M.2 adapters (so PCIE 3.0x8 for dual, PCIE3.0x16 for quad):
> https://www.cdw.com/product/supermi...-interface-adapter-m.2-card-pcie-3/4990643#PO
> https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-M-2-X16-V2-Threadripper/dp/B07NQBQB6Z/
> https://www.provantage.com/gigabyte-technology-cmt4032~7GIG9174.htm
> https://www.newegg.com/asrock-model-ultra-quad-m-2-card-pci-express-to-m-2-card/p/N82E16815548004
> https://www.msi.com/PC-component/M.2-XPANDER-AERO <--- not for sale individually yet
> 
> 
> MSI Ace is also worth looking at due to 3x M.2 , but the power delivery is going to be less well cooled. You can also look at the Taichi if you need Thunderbolt as it has Thunderbolt AIC card support as well as 3x M.2 , being aware that it may run warmer than the MSI Ace. I wouldn't look at the ROG Hero because getting a USB hub is far less of a hassle than trying to get a 3rd M.2 slot.


Hi @AlphaC I'm just going to drop this here as I think it is worth a look at. A very good, friend of mine, in charge of the "The Overclocker" online magazine will put most people in the direction of the Asrock Taichi. Now from my experience, from a C7H to an MSI Meg X570 Ace, I can tell you the cooling on this board is not an issue. AT present my chipset has maxed out at 44.8C so so the chip-set fan has not seen any action yet..... seriously I think it has not run since I got the board. Now this means that the VRM are pretty cool. But I'll put it out there just to show in the screen grab below. Now coming from a C7H board I was pretty impressed and happy with this board. At present in the screen grab below while running AIDA64 stress test at 4.29Ghz on a Ryzen 9 3900X using 1.25vcore set in bios. Now I'll be honest, my system is open a Lian-Li PC T60. I prefer open as open as can be as I know airflow will not be a problem. Now this stress test is running as I'm typing.


----------



## elmor

AlphaC said:


> At the the end of the day I don't think people care about if the die sense reading is more accurate or not because reviewers should be measuring at the back of the socket to equalize between motherboards, they do care if their temp sensors are wrong and their power readings are wrong. It seems like a cop-out for an inferior design: "our voltage reading is more accurate so our voltage is actually higher than others" and other excuses. If anything it leads to more risk from end-users because every prior platform used the "inferior way" of measuring so people will overvolt their CPUs more. We've already seen this on Z390 where people claim to have 100mV less required VCORE on ASUS boards but only due to the measurement methodology.
> 
> Measurement systems 101: measurement may change the result (observer effect), factor in measurement precision/accuracy (doesn't look like his equipment has been calibrated).



It's not really debatable which is more accurate or not, die sense is as good as it gets. Just because you're used to one way doesn't make it correct. The key here is that the error scales with output current, which has drastically increased in recent years. On the Z170/Z270 platforms people were saying Asrock boards were stable at lower voltages because they reported lower values. Getting accurate readings on all boards should be key here, no matter if it's voltage, temperature or power. Socket MLCC measurements as you say is probably the best way to normalize readings, but there are not many reviewers that would go to those lengths. Proper comparisons between boards are not being done either because the manufacturers wouldn't like it.


----------



## AlphaC

VPII said:


> Hi @*AlphaC* I'm just going to drop this here as I think it is worth a look at. A very good, friend of mine, in charge of the "The Overclocker" online magazine will put most people in the direction of the Asrock Taichi. Now from my experience, from a C7H to an MSI Meg X570 Ace, I can tell you the cooling on this board is not an issue. AT present my chipset has maxed out at 44.8C so so the chip-set fan has not seen any action yet..... seriously I think it has not run since I got the board. Now this means that the VRM are pretty cool. But I'll put it out there just to show in the screen grab below. Now coming from a C7H board I was pretty impressed and happy with this board. At present in the screen grab below while running AIDA64 stress test at 4.29Ghz on a Ryzen 9 3900X using 1.25vcore set in bios. Now I'll be honest, my system is open a Lian-Li PC T60. I prefer open as open as can be as I know airflow will not be a problem. Now this stress test is running as I'm typing.



That's not even stock power limit. I doubt it would pass [email protected] with SVM on (virtualization). I've had stuff pass Google stressapp + Prime95 + AIDA64 FPU and fail it because stress tests don't include virtualization.


----------



## VPII

AlphaC said:


> That's not even stock power limit. I doubt it would pass [email protected] with SVM on (virtualization). I've had stuff pass Google stressapp + Prime95 + AIDA64 FPU and fail it because stress tests don't include virtualization.


Hi @AlphaC why exactly would I run [email protected], I have no interest in joining to run it. Hell, my computer I primarily use to bench and sometimes run games. I've never stress tested my hardware until the tests I posted in the Official Ryzen 3000 thread as well as the MSI Meg X570 Ace thread. Sorry for my ignorance, but I don't really understand what you mean by virtualization. So as my system run at present, I don't really have a problem with it. It will only break into 70C when I run Aida64 stress test or IBT.


----------



## cssorkinman

elmor said:


> It's not really debatable which is more accurate or not, die sense is as good as it gets. Just because you're used to one way doesn't make it correct. The key here is that the error scales with output current, which has drastically increased in recent years. On the Z170/Z270 platforms people were saying Asrock boards were stable at lower voltages because they reported lower values. Getting accurate readings on all boards should be key here, no matter if it's voltage, temperature or power. Socket MLCC measurements as you say is probably the best way to normalize readings, but there are not many reviewers that would go to those lengths. Proper comparisons between boards are not being done either because the manufacturers wouldn't like it.


In the end the cpu will tattle on the motherboard's honesty as far as what it's actually getting for power vs what it reports. It won't magically need less voltage to be stable on one board vs another. Power being drawn from the wall and cpu temps will also give it away - power supply , cpu cooling and requested v-core voltage setting being equal.


----------



## elmor

cssorkinman said:


> In the end the cpu will tattle on the motherboard's honesty as far as what it's actually getting for power vs what it reports. It won't magically need less voltage to be stable on one board vs another. Power being drawn from the wall and cpu temps will also give it away - power supply , cpu cooling and requested v-core voltage setting being equal.


Most of the time the power reporting from the CPU is based on parameters the motherboard tells it (SVI2/SVID telemetry or BIOS constants). Similarly VRM controller readings can be various degrees of calibrated by the power engineers. Measuring power from the wall or at the 12V input doesn't account for efficiency and may include additional rails like SOC depending on the specific board design. There are error sources everywhere. Comparing power to core temperatures and at the same time measuring performance is a good way to tell if there's really a difference. If your 1.2V setting on one board results in a max core temperature of 70*C and on another 80*C, in the same benchmark with multiple cooling re-mounts there's probably a difference in power consumption and actual voltage/frequency or worst case some kind of throttling. Or stability as you say won't magically vary that much between boards in the same range.

For example as reported by The Stilt, ASUS had some of their X570 boards configured wrongly at launch which made the SMU think it was running at lower power and boosting higher.


----------



## AlphaC

VPII said:


> Hi @*AlphaC* why exactly would I run [email protected], I have no interest in joining to run it. Hell, my computer I primarily use to bench and sometimes run games.  I've never stress tested my hardware until the tests I posted in the Official Ryzen 3000 thread as well as the MSI Meg X570 Ace thread. Sorry for my ignorance, but I don't really understand what you mean by virtualization. So as my system run at present, I don't really have a problem with it. It will only break into 70C when I run Aida64 stress test or IBT.


Utterly offtopic so in spoiler:



Spoiler



Virtualization has been around for what seems to be ages (VMWare since 1998 , Xen in 2003, Parallels for Mac since 2006, and Virtualbox since 2007) but has become a mainstream topic with cloud computing. It allows you to have multiple OS running on your PC _concurrently_ (whether through hypervisor or host OS), test software across OS and kernel versions as well as RAM/CPU core count configurations, run software that may be problematic and basically restore a previous state before it was run/installed, run old software that isn't compatible with modern OS, and also to have containers to provide workloads to other people. Part of the whole fiasco about Intel security issues is mainly due to the hyper-threading and its interaction with virtualization (i.e. breaking out of the container and infecting the hypervisor).

See https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/virtualization , https://www.vmware.com/solutions/virtualization.html

EPYC uses: https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc-docker-containers-on-azure.pdf , https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc-docker-on-cloud-aws.pdf , https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/EPYC-7002-Containers-Leadership-Performance.pdf

Maybe use your PC idle time to be a more productive member of society instead of being akin to one of those people spam posting junk on social media like the majority of the Internet these days?

If you only run games why pay $400 for a motherboard? That makes no sense. You probably won't engage AVX outside of the Nvidia driver. It's like people buying $1000 iPhone XS to run snapchat or instagram.

If you don't care about stability as long as your PC boots up and runs and don't stress test, why bother to care about power delivery?

The main uses for HPC (high performance computing) are workloads you probably won't ever think about or care about either. Guess what, the EPYC chips that these Ryzen and ThreadRipper chips are pilfered from are made for? You know ANSYS fluent (CFD), stress analysis (thermal or structural), weather modeling, molecular dynamics, Virtual Machines (VMs), databases, etc. Ryzen chips were never made for <720p 240Hz CSGO or whatever the Intel "gaming" meme is. Efficiency is king and so is security. That's why EPYC was stressing TCO (total cost of ownership whether due to CPU cost , infrastructure, or energy cost), security, and performance per socket (memory bandwidth, PCIE lanes, or performance per core included).










https://www.amd.com/system/files/do...he-right-combination-for-weather-modeling.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc-and-ansys.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/Solving-Real-World-Problems-EPYC-7002-ANSYS-FLUENT.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc_starccm_computational_fluid_dynamics.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/EPYC-7002-Gromacs-Molecular-Dynamics-Simulation.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-epyc-with-openfoam-for-hpc.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-epyc-and-lstc-ls-dyna-powering-the-future-of-hpc.pdf
https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-epyc-esi-pam-crash-for-crash-simulation.pdf

You know those SFFTs in stress tests? Those mainly are for engineering use.




If you're going to come in saying that the MSI Ace is 100% great and show an image with <142W load aka stock power limit , then expect for that to be noticed. It isn't a bad board by any means, but your reasoning for it being a good board is _extremely_ flawed.


----------



## VPII

AlphaC said:


> Utterly offtopic so in spoiler:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Virtualization has been around for what seems to be ages (VMWare since 1998 , Xen in 2003, Parallels for Mac since 2006, and Virtualbox since 2007) but has become a mainstream topic with cloud computing. It allows you to have multiple OS running on your PC _concurrently_ (whether through hypervisor or host OS), test software across OS and kernel versions as well as RAM/CPU core count configurations, run software that may be problematic and basically restore a previous state before it was run/installed, run old software that isn't compatible with modern OS, and also to have containers to provide workloads to other people. Part of the whole fiasco about Intel security issues is mainly due to the hyper-threading and its interaction with virtualization (i.e. breaking out of the container and infecting the hypervisor).
> 
> See https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/virtualization , https://www.vmware.com/solutions/virtualization.html
> 
> EPYC uses: https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc-docker-containers-on-azure.pdf , https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc-docker-on-cloud-aws.pdf , https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/EPYC-7002-Containers-Leadership-Performance.pdf
> 
> Maybe use your PC idle time to be a more productive member of society instead of being akin to one of those people spam posting junk on social media like the majority of the Internet these days?
> 
> If you only run games why pay $400 for a motherboard? That makes no sense. You probably won't engage AVX outside of the Nvidia driver. It's like people buying $1000 iPhone XS to run snapchat or instagram.
> 
> If you don't care about stability as long as your PC boots up and runs and don't stress test, why bother to care about power delivery?
> 
> The main uses for HPC (high performance computing) are workloads you probably won't ever think about or care about either. Guess what, the EPYC chips that these Ryzen and ThreadRipper chips are pilfered from are made for? You know ANSYS fluent (CFD), stress analysis (thermal or structural), weather modeling, molecular dynamics, Virtual Machines (VMs), databases, etc. Ryzen chips were never made for <720p 240Hz CSGO or whatever the Intel "gaming" meme is. Efficiency is king and so is security. That's why EPYC was stressing TCO (total cost of ownership whether due to CPU cost , infrastructure, or energy cost), security, and performance per socket (memory bandwidth, PCIE lanes, or performance per core included).
> 
> 
> View attachment 288168
> 
> 
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/do...he-right-combination-for-weather-modeling.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc-and-ansys.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/Solving-Real-World-Problems-EPYC-7002-ANSYS-FLUENT.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/epyc_starccm_computational_fluid_dynamics.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/EPYC-7002-Gromacs-Molecular-Dynamics-Simulation.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-epyc-with-openfoam-for-hpc.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-epyc-and-lstc-ls-dyna-powering-the-future-of-hpc.pdf
> https://www.amd.com/system/files/documents/amd-epyc-esi-pam-crash-for-crash-simulation.pdf
> 
> You know those SFFTs in stress tests? Those mainly are for engineering use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you're going to come in saying that the MSI Ace is 100% great and show an image with <142W load aka stock power limit , then expect for that to be noticed. It isn't a bad board by any means, but your reasoning for it being a good board is _extremely_ flawed.[/quote @AlphaC sorry if I came off the wrong way. My general knowledge of computers is limited so excuse my ignorance. I have a little knowledge of overclocking and having come from a C7H to the Msi X570 Ace it really felt nice having a board again that works and has a qpost lcd. This board is lacking in 2d benching but great in 3d benching.
> 
> This was primarliy why I said what I did adout the Ace board. That screeny is showing my everyday clocks, thsnks for pointing out the power draw, I did not even notice.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## cssorkinman

elmor said:


> Most of the time the power reporting from the CPU is based on parameters the motherboard tells it (SVI2/SVID telemetry or BIOS constants). Similarly VRM controller readings can be various degrees of calibrated by the power engineers. Measuring power from the wall or at the 12V input doesn't account for efficiency and may include additional rails like SOC depending on the specific board design. There are error sources everywhere. Comparing power to core temperatures and at the same time measuring performance is a good way to tell if there's really a difference. If your 1.2V setting on one board results in a max core temperature of 70*C and on another 80*C, in the same benchmark with multiple cooling re-mounts there's probably a difference in power consumption and actual voltage/frequency or worst case some kind of throttling. Or stability as you say won't magically vary that much between boards in the same range.
> 
> For example as reported by The Stilt, ASUS had some of their X570 boards configured wrongly at launch which made the SMU think it was running at lower power and boosting higher.


Same tests , same cooling ( pushed close to it's limits), same chip, same supporting cast, 8 to 10 C warmer cpu temps ( 3-4 C coolant temps) one particular board vs another on AMD 990 platform at the same reported v-core tells me something was up . 

8-10C reduction in core temps = 100+ mhz added stable core clock on the cpu I was using - the result was the board sending less voltage to the cpu could actually run higher daily clocks at the same reported voltage.


----------



## Heuchler

and another channel that I unsubbed from



Affordable X570 VRM Thermal Performance
https://youtu.be/_7PkZwY9PWM?t=517


He also made the video stating Win 1903 need chipset drivers and possibly firmware updates to make Windows Schedule Ryzen Topology aware and rumors on the internet about performance improvement where wrong.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> hardware info NL as well as hardwareunboxed used a fixed voltage OC. I was just putting up the PBO numbers because ASUS slides had the PBO claim that they had better PBO performance.
> 
> 
> Hardware info NL result ; R9 3900X @ 4.1 all core:
> X570 Taichi $300 board = 61.4°C rear PCB , 62°C front of PCB
> X570 Aorus Elite $200 board _with zero heatpipes_ = 64°C rear PCB while front is 66°C
> MSI Ace rear PCB = 63.5°C while front is 66.1°C
> 
> Also it doesn't take a genius to figure out that having less fin area means higher thermals. It is also reflected in the Japanese review:
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075116296.html
> R9 3900X @ 40.5 multiplier in AVIUTL AVX load without airflow = 74.8°C
> 
> 
> And this greek review (65°C with R9 3900X):
> 
> 
> https://www.hwbox.gr/reviews/motherboards/42704-msi-meg-x570-ace-motherboard-review.html?start=2
> 
> 
> 
> I would say 3 separate datapoints is a trend.


 So the analysis is that the heat sink on the vrm is not substantial enough?


----------



## AlphaC

MSI X570 Ace is probably hotter than Taichi possibly due to the use of higher switching frequencies, the added heatpipe for the chipset , or the use of lower conductivity thermal pads along with low fin area. There's no reason why a IR3555 x12 design should be hotter than a SiC634 x12 design as both designs are using doublers. Anyhow the temperature isn't high enough for it to matter.

----------

I think that the Ryzen 9 3900X over 4.2GHz is probably dumping quite a bit of power into the TUF board:













Nearly 400W with a RX 5700XT reference (225W TDP).

What I don't understand is how the Cinebench score achieved by HWUnboxed was the same with the Gigabyte Aorus Elite at 218W and TUF Plus at 260W. Something's off there. I also think he should have mentioned it is 12K hour capacitors on the Asrock Steel Legend, so the lifetime is roughly 2x longer which sort of equalizes the temperature difference of ~10°C. Asrock needs to recalibrate their sensor though.


----------



## cssorkinman

If I can push 1.5 volts through an 1800X safely how hard should I be able to push the 12 or 16 core 3xxx's on this board?


----------



## AlphaC

6x PK616BA high side fet on X370 Xpower

http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf

So your sensors are completely wrong or you have put it under water.

For 173A output you're pushing ~29A per high side fet which is past what is considered reasonable under a normal use case (no 2000RPM fans are not a normal use case).

You could do an easy first order approximation , for 44°C you'd need 20°C ambient with below 10°C/W thermal resistance of the heatsink (the T_jc= is 4°C/W) as with switching losses alone you'd be dumping out over 2.44W each high side fet at 1.4V. That's before ~1W of conduction loss at the high side fet as well. That also doesn't count PCB Loss, inductor loss, capacitor loss, driver loss, deadtime loss, gate drive loss, etc.

In short, just because you can doesn't mean you should.


----------



## cssorkinman

AlphaC said:


> 6x PK616BA high side fet on X370 Xpower
> 
> http://www.unikc.com.cn/UploadFile/products/2015710171838-PK616BA_REV1.0_20140220.pdf
> 
> So your sensors are completely wrong or you have put it under water.
> 
> For 173A output you're pushing ~29A per high side fet which is past what is considered reasonable under a normal use case (no 2000RPM fans are not a normal use case).
> 
> You could do an easy first order approximation , for 44°C you'd need 20°C ambient with below 10°C/W thermal resistance of the heatsink (the T_jc= is 4°C/W) as with switching losses alone you'd be dumping out over 2.44W each high side fet at 1.4V. That's before ~1W of conduction loss at the high side fet as well. That also doesn't count PCB Loss, inductor loss, capacitor loss, driver loss, deadtime loss, gate drive loss, etc.
> 
> In short, just because you can doesn't mean you should.



Doing what you shouldn't is what OCN is all about .

Temps for VRM's are very close to correct as verified by a quality IR gun - those heatsinks are the beans man, just add some airflow.

I am very close to the current limit at those settings - much higher and it's a ticket to a blackscreen.

( I'd probably end up trying to run a 3950X as a 16 core w/o smt as fast as possible all core)


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> It's because you're running 8 cores rather than 12. That's 50% less cores = up to 50% less power consumption at same clocks (as it's same architecture and process node). What power draw are you getting for the CPU-only (hwinfo package powers and current draw)?
> 
> 
> -----
> 
> Also @ *asdkj1740* , I would assume the hardwareunboxed test is based on what is set in BIOS.
> 
> What he did mention is
> Asrock = Level 1 (highest) LLC ; PBO = 249-251W with 1.344-1.35V
> ASUS = Level 4 (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 246W with 1.338V
> Gigabyte = Extreme (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 241W with 1.332V
> MSI = mode 2 (second highest) LLC ; PBO = 252W with 1.375V


Hi AlphaC , I decided to put 2 spot fans with zip ties directed at my two lines of vrms on my MSI X570 ACE. Temps went down 4 to 5 degrees Celcius. I can successfully do my AIDA64 FP64 benchmark without it failing at 4.2 GHZ. If my ambient temperature in this sunroom could be brought down to a normal temp. I probably could do AIDA64 benchmarks at 4.3 GHZ.


----------



## Redwoodz

AlphaC said:


> Probably don't want to run R9 3900X overclocked on asrock Steel Legend , as I have stated before:
> View attachment 284048
> 
> View attachment 284050
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgxyXSrY9xg
> 
> R9 3900X @4.3GHz
> 
> --------------
> 
> If for some reason you decide to run R7 2700X @ 4.31GHz on Aorus Pro, reaches around 70-75°C without any airflow:
> 
> https://3dnews.ru/991418/page-2.html#Производительность
> 
> 
> --------------
> TUF Plus tested on Japanese site , reaches 74.5°C with R9 3900X @ 40.75x multi (241W power output per Corsair Link)
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075043022.html
> 
> same test was 68.9°C on STRIX X570-E (238W power output per Corsair Link) and 73.2°C on Crosshair VII hero http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075035479.html
> 74.2°C on the X570 Taichi (252W power output per Corsair Link) http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1075090469.html



Dude. That is a 3900x @4350+ going up to 4.5 running up to 1.5v. There is a water block and absolutely no fan anywhere. Plus, using the thermal radar the VRM's ran at 50c. The cell phone camera thermal image clearly shows the VRM heatsink is not making proper contact. This is no scientific proof of any defficiency other than the user.


----------



## AlphaC

It's using the same power delivery powerstages (number and type) as the X570-P with a low fin area heatsink that covers all of VCORE powerstages. I don't know what sort of convincing you need.


----------



## asdkj1740

few fun bugs about am4:

1. i cant get 2600 boot up on asus tuf b450m pro gaming coming with bios 1607 out of the box, tried 3 same mobo, same problem, while 3600 can boot it up. then i have to flash a older bios to get 2600 work on that.

2. updating bios on x570 aorus elite to the current lastest version using 1600, all fine, then after the auto reboot the bios dead. q flash plus saves my ass. then i put back the 1600 to see whether the bios is recovered, same ****.
then i try 3600 on it, it works.

above cases i tried remove the cpu from the socket from few seconds to completely shut down the micro cpu inside the ryzen cpu, it wont help.
but in general removing the ryzen cpu from the socket for few seconds solves a lot of cases of not booting up.


for more life saving kits, checks out toppc guide
https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2015385-1-1.html


----------



## AlphaC

I think the newer BIOs versions don't really support 2nd gen Ryzen well.


-------
Asrock X570 Creator was previewed at funkykit
https://www.funkykit.com/news/pc-computers/exclusive-asrock-x570-creator-motherboard-preview/



-------


> Through the AMD Ryzen Master overclocking monitoring software, the PPT (total power of the processor socket) of the X570 I AORUS Pro WiFi is 540W, the TDC (long-time supply current) is 300A, and the EDC (short-time supply current) is 360A.


https://www.techbang.com/posts/7229...view-powered-by-8-phase?from=home_news&page=3

Also Prime X570 Pro









Spoiler










Also OC3D seems to have tested Pro Carbon:
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_x570_crosshair_viii_formula_review/22



> For the VRM's we test in a case to simulate the kind of results you should expect at home both at stock but with DOCP enabled to give us 3600MHz memory speed and with our stated maximum CPU overclock which today was 4.4GHz on our 3900x. We run OCCT in linpack mode with no AVX and 90% free memory used for 30 minutes. The maximum VRM temperature shown is the result used in our graph.


 Stock was 102°C...
OC was lower at 92°C somehow so stock settings are probably overvolting


Not sure if that Crosshair VIII Hero result is correct (see HWUnbox/HW Info NL results)


----------



## Heuchler

Don't get into the Van. Spoiler: Contains no puppies nor candy. 

"All of the boards do have VRM temperature probes but on the Strix, Prime and TUF board they are actually blocked in the BIOS meaning no software can actually access the reading. Asus' only answer to this was to manually add our own probes to the board using a handheld Fluke temperature probe but to make this scientifically fair it would have required retesting all of the motherboards. This would take a couple of days to do correctly because of having to strip motherboard heatsinks down etc and really isn't going to help any of you at home when you cant actually monitor your own temps and its because of this we find it completely unacceptable." - OC3D


----------



## reqq

AlphaC said:


> MSI X570 Pro Carbon hit 90°C VRM MOS temp:
> https://news.mydrivers.com/1/637/637455_all.htm


Interesting. Tried to repliace this but VR MOS temp under HWiNFO only reached 74c after 3 min same test. I dont have that temp sensor under Aida 64, kinda of strange, tried to add the sensor but its not there.


----------



## Heuchler

[Igor's LAB] How much watts can an A320 motherboard really handle in practice and which CPU should be used maximally? | Practical test and VRM analysis
https://www.igorslab.media/en/how-m...ed-maximally-practical-test-and-vrm-analysis/

"In the office and for lighter tasks of not too large CPUs an A320 budget board may still be enough, but for a real gaming machine this is not enough even in the entry-level area. From 65 watts upwards it becomes borderline, from 95 watts even critical. That’s why I’ll never understand how some BBQ tubers proudly offer overclocking orgies, even though the hardware is already suffocating in the sweatbox. Dear children, please don’t imitate!"


65 Watt continuous load with and without active air cooling [pictured], idle and 95W with active cooling thermal images on Igor's LAB








Constant 22 °C in the room
Watercooled CPU
Power Consumption:
Non-contact direct current measurement on the PCIe-Slot (Riser-Card)
Non-contact direct current measurement at the external PCIe power connectors
Direct voltage measurement at the respective connectors and at the power supply unit
2x Rohde & Schwarz HMO 3054, 500 MHz Multichannel Oscilloscope
4x Rohde & Schwarz HZO50, Current Clamps
4x Rohde & Schwarz HZ355, Probes
1x Rohde & Schwarz HMC 8012, Digitalmultimeter

Thermal Imager:
1x Optris PI640, 2x Xi400 Thermal Imager
Pix Connect Software


edit:


----------



## Playapplepie

I am deciding between the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite Wifi (14-phase[12+2]) and the MPG X570 Gaming Pro Carbon Wifi (12-phase[10+2]) motherboards. Is there really any real world difference in the Aorus having those 2 extra CPU phases? I'm not terribly knowledgeable about power phases, I just know some basics.


----------



## elmor

Playapplepie said:


> I am deciding between the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite Wifi (14-phase[12+2]) and the MPG X570 Gaming Pro Carbon Wifi (12-phase[10+2]) motherboards. Is there really any real world difference in the Aorus having those 2 extra CPU phases? I'm not terribly knowledgeable about power phases, I just know some basics.


No, all vendors went way overkill for X570. As long as you have 8x power stages or more you're fine both in terms of thermals and power delivery. The MSI board uses discrete FETs which is cheaper and less efficient, but with 10 of them I doubt you'll notice any difference compared to say 8x power stages.


----------



## AlphaC

Playapplepie said:


> I am deciding between the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite Wifi (14-phase[12+2]) and the MPG X570 Gaming Pro Carbon Wifi (12-phase[10+2]) motherboards. Is there really any real world difference in the Aorus having those 2 extra CPU phases? I'm not terribly knowledgeable about power phases, I just know some basics.


 Aorus Elite is going to run much cooler (Hardware info NL has it at around 66°C) as it has an uncovered larger fin area with 12x Vishay SiC 634 powerstages.


The X570 Pro Carbon is more expensive and also has a worse power delivery (it's 10 Ubiq QA3111 powerblocks that don't have a Schottky diode) with worse fin area that happens to be covered by a plastic cover. From what I've seen online there's people getting 90°C on heavy loaded Ryzen 9 chips and OC3D has it at that temperature with R9 3900X at stock.


----------



## reqq

Never seen above 77c with my carbon and 3900x. That was roof temp blasting cinebench back to back. OC3D i think uses prime95, not sure how the other ones got 90c.


----------



## Playapplepie

elmor said:


> No, all vendors went way overkill for X570. As long as you have 8x power stages or more you're fine both in terms of thermals and power delivery. The MSI board uses discrete FETs which is cheaper and less efficient, but with 10 of them I doubt you'll notice any difference compared to say 8x power stages.


Thanks for the input.




AlphaC said:


> Aorus Elite is going to run much cooler (Hardware info NL has it at around 66°C) as it has an uncovered larger fin area with 12x Vishay SiC 634 powerstages.
> 
> 
> The X570 Pro Carbon is more expensive and also has a worse power delivery (it's 10 Ubiq QA3111 powerblocks that don't have a Schottky diode) with worse fin area that happens to be covered by a plastic cover. From what I've seen online there's people getting 90°C on heavy loaded Ryzen 9 chips and OC3D has it at that temperature with R9 3900X at stock.


I plan to be using the 3700X. Could I still see similar temps with the Pro Carbon?



reqq said:


> Never seen above 77c with my carbon and 3900x. That was roof temp blasting cinebench back to back. OC3D i think uses prime95, not sure how the other ones got 90c.


Maybe it was their setup? I wouldn't be surprised if I saw those kinds of temps, though I plan to run a 3700X if that matters. I don't think I have a rear exhaust fan installed, just two 120mm for the top mounted radiator, so air flow is probably not great going to the case back. Now that I think about it I should audit my fan setup cause I feel I should have a rear fan.


----------



## AlphaC

If you use a Ryzen 7 3700X on it you should be fine. I just don't think running R9 3900X on it is a good idea when other boards that are cheaper have better performance.


If it's a R7 3700X and you just want the Intel LAN + WIFI you could get something like a X570 Aorus Elite WIFI for less (ALC1200), X570 Steel Legend WIFI Ax for less (ALC1220).


----------



## nangu

Hi, I have the Aourus Master and a R9 3900X. The board came with 2x8 pin cpu power connectors. My PSU have those two connectors so I connected both. I know It's overkill because for the 3900X in stock operational mode is more than enough with only one 8 pin power connected, but anyway, I want to ask if by connecting the two 8 pin cpu power connectors there will be some kind of load balancing between the two, providing some benefit, or it's rather pointless and leave only one connected?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## criminal

reqq said:


> Never seen above 77c with my carbon and 3900x. That was roof temp blasting cinebench back to back. OC3D i think uses prime95, not sure how the other ones got 90c.


I have a 3700x(not a 3900x), but I have yet to see temps that I should be concerned about. I have been told that the VRMs are crap and no better than a B450, but I haven't had any issues. Maybe I am doing something wrong? 90C... geez these "testers" must be restricting airflow on purpose to get those temps.


----------



## AlphaC

nangu said:


> Hi, I have the Aorus Master and a R9 3900X. The board came with 2x8 pin cpu power connectors. My PSU have those two connectors so I connected both. I know It's overkill because for the 3900X in stock operational mode is more than enough with only one 8 pin power connected, but anyway, I want to ask if by connecting the two 8 pin cpu power connectors there will be some kind of load balancing between the two, providing some benefit, or it's rather pointless and leave only one connected?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


















According to MSI's toppc it's because some people are using cheap PSUs with thin wiring having more power connectors means it heats up the cables less and gives it less resistance (i.e. double the wires). As Ryzen is so efficient , any PSU that isn't absolute garbage shouldn't need the extra power connector.


(source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HU40tgGByY)


----------



## nangu

AlphaC said:


> View attachment 290854
> 
> View attachment 290856
> 
> 
> According to MSI's toppc it's because some people are using cheap PSUs with thin wiring having more power connectors means it heats up the cables less and gives it less resistance (i.e. double the wires). As Ryzen is so efficient , any PSU that isn't absolute garbage shouldn't need the extra power connector.
> 
> 
> (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HU40tgGByY)


Thank you, it has sense then to left the two power connectors plugged in. Thanks for the vid


----------



## reqq

criminal said:


> I have a 3700x(not a 3900x), but I have yet to see temps that I should be concerned about. I have been told that the VRMs are crap and no better than a B450, but I haven't had any issues. Maybe I am doing something wrong? 90C... geez these "testers" must be restricting airflow on purpose to get those temps.


Increased intake fan rpm from 750 to 1100. Now the VRM wont go over 72c with cinebench runs back to back  Im gonna stop checking this now, its stupid since these vrm can handle 125c or have according to their spec sheet recommended maximum operating abient temp at 85c. We well within margin of that under full normal load.


----------



## asdkj1740

ubiq releases a new smart power stages QD9619 and started being used by vendors.

https://www.hkepc.com/18265/平玩三風扇價錢先決__PNY_GeForce_RTX_2070_Super_XLR8_Gaming_OC


----------



## criminal

reqq said:


> Increased intake fan rpm from 750 to 1100. Now the VRM wont go over 72c with cinebench runs back to back  Im gonna stop checking this now, its stupid since these vrm can handle 125c or have according to their spec sheet recommended maximum operating abient temp at 85c. We well within margin of that under full normal load.


:thumb:


----------



## asdkj1740

i want to say sorry to gigabyte about 1600 not getting post on its x570 latest bios.
i just heart that it is all about amd taking out the support for 1600 on agesa 1003a/1003ab/1003abb.

so do not use 1600 to update bios// getting no post after updating is normal, just go ahead.


----------



## AlphaC

https://youtu.be/DVVarwLhkQA?t=155


Phantom ITX board running about 65°C at least in CB R20 , R9 3900X @ 4.3GHz




-----

X570 Creator page is up now ; lists IR3555 DrMos: 
https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570 Creator/index.asp


----------



## reqq

criminal said:


> :thumb:


Ok last one. Found Blender have longer benchmark test 40 min at constant 100% CPU load. VRM topped at 74c


----------



## AlphaC

Some overviews from PC Online CN suggest 90°C was with PBO or higher than stock power limit:

X570 Pro Carbon (with PBO) https://diy.pconline.com.cn/1274/12749768_1.html










> Let's first take a look at the control of the power supply temperature. The MSI X570 GAMING PRO CARBON WIFI has a zone with a maximum temperature of 63.2 °C during standby. This temperature is high for the standby state. Except for this area, the temperature of other modules is normal. We use Prime 95 to load the machine for more than 20 minutes, the maximum temperature of the motherboard power supply rises to 93.9 ° C, the CPU full-core BOOST 4.0 GHz, the room temperature is 25 ° C. Can make the CPU accelerate to 4.0GHz and do not reduce the frequency, the motherboard power supply temperature can be maintained at about 90 °C, the performance is already good


 X570 Ace stock https://diy.pconline.com.cn/1274/12749768_1.html







X570 Ace PBO









> Is it a bit curious about why the temperature after PBO is so low? Because the PBO will automatically turn the CPU's power consumption temperature and voltage wall into a super invincible safety range when the PBO is not turned on, the CPU temperature of the baking machine is only 65 °C, and the power supply temperature of the motherboard is only 60 °C, it is not itch. The feeling of pain


-----


B350-F GAMING https://diy.pconline.com.cn/1280/12808769_2.html



> We use a thermal imager to test the power supply temperature of the motherboard. As you can see from the figure, the temperature of a chip near the CPU has reached a high temperature of 112 °C, and it has gradually increased with time. For safety reasons, we had to terminate the test.


------

X570 Aorus Master https://diy.pconline.com.cn/1279/12799310.html









> In the final measurement, we used the Gigabyte X570 AORUS MASTER with Ryzen 9 3900X. After using the Prime 95 to load the machine for 20 minutes, the temperature of the power supply module was recorded. The maximum temperature is only 49.9 °C. The power supply of the motherboard is not covered, and the strength is amazing.


----------



## reqq

ye i dont use pbo..because no performance uplift and its outside warranty..i think i saw 1.32 all boost vcore so yeah possible it will get too hot if someone looking to run 1.4 all core boost or something.


----------



## Heuchler

[Igor'sLAB] Three X570 motherboards tested – wrong sensor values, faulty Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) and different performance (using Ryzen 5 3600X 95W)
https://www.igorslab.media/en/three...oost-overdrive-pbo-and-different-performance/

Tested with and without heatsink

"the 14 watts that Asus outputs here are rather unlikely, otherwise the voltage converters would already be almost in the 100% range in terms of efficiency. Therefore I marked the value in the table with a (*) "









"As long as none of the boards is exposed to any limitations, be it by manually setting PBO limits or reaching the limits at manual OC, all boards do “out of the box” well-behaved what they should. In the limit range, andthis also applies to overclocking, the boards with the more efficient voltage converters are logically at an advantage, because simply more power arrives at the CPU. It’s also interesting that the B350 chipset has no measurable clock disadvantages compared to the X570 chipsets, on the contrary. Despite the worst voltage converters, the board with the old entry-level chipset has a slight advantage, at least in terms of clock rate."








Asus Prime X570-P (108 W EPS Power Consmption)







ASRock X570 Pro 4 (122 W EPS Power Consmption)








[/quote]


----------



## blacklion

Hey.

Specs: https://valid.x86.fr/mjazw6

Attached the temps reported by HwInfo after CB15 run. The delta for default (without PBO) vs 4.2 overclock is 6.5% ..... and CPU temp is 10 Celsius lower on default. Does not make sense to keep it overclocked imo. However, in default (max 4.1 GHz) the VCore reaches 1.416 ....... and with the 4.2 GHz overclock reaches 1.36! That's quite strange, why does it need to go as high as 1.416 on stock and only 1.36 in overclock?

Maybe future bios releases will bring more stability to these ..... Don't get me wrong, the whole system is as stable as I can think, but things used to be much more ..... logical.


----------



## briank

reqq said:


> ye i dont use pbo..because no performance uplift and its outside warranty...


So this seems to be a common conclusion, and given the limited overclocks people are getting with Zen 2 CPUs, how much do these mega VRMs really matter? Is anyone besides people doing LN2 overclocking able to push these processors past 150W (and still get measurable performance gains)? Seems like a lot of people settle on ~4.3GHz overclock and then find the lowest voltage to run on. 

That said, there's always hope for the future, so maybe someday these monster VRMs can be put to use with future Zen2 based CPUs.


----------



## Heuchler

ASUS ROG Strix X570-E Gaming in Test
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.p...-rog-strix-x570-e-gaming-im-test.html?start=5


----------



## AlphaC

https://www.hkepc.com/18300/全港首試_CREATOR_妖板_ASROCK_X570_CREATOR_主機板


X570 Creator confirmation by HKEPC (IR35201 PWM + ir3555 powerstages) 

Intel JHL7540 TB3 is used for Thunderbolt 3


----------



## Heuchler

PC Games Hardware Magazine X570 for 200 Euro Motherboards 
https://youtu.be/SW7218F6ELQ?t=49

ASRock X570 Pro4 results VRM: 66°C / PCH: 38°C
GIGABYTE X570 AORUS ELITE result VRM: 53°C / PCH: 45°C (better than all X470 boards except Crosshair VII Hero 300 Euro board) @ 9:40 
MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge results VRM: 61°C / PCH: 47°C (PCIe 1x slots are Gen3.0 and so is 2nd M.2) was able to run with 0 RPM on chipset fan for all of testing

tested with Ryzen 7 1800X

CC -> auto translate to language of your choice

https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Main...rgleich-Intel-AMD-2066-1151-AM4-TR4-681325/4/


----------



## AlphaC

I guess HW unboxed doesn't do day 1 articles for their videos





_
Also this tweet
_
Asrock X570 Pro4 = 96°C with R7 3800X
MSI X570 Gaming Plus = 89°C
Gigabyte X570 Gaming X = 82°C
Asus X570-P = 76°C
Asrock Extreme4 = 75°C
Aorus Elite = 67°C
TUF Plus = 66°C
STRIX X570-F = 61°C
Aorus Pro = 57°C

https://twitter.com/usedpcpurchase/status/1169106709068967936?s=19


----------



## Heuchler

Transient response and ripple testing using 16-Core ES

ASUS Crosshair VIII Formula
ASUS TUF GAMING X570-PLUS
GIGABYTE X570 AORUS XTREME [LLC: Ultra Xtreme, Turbo 
GIGABYTE X570 AORUS PRO 
X570 I AORUS PRO [mini-ITX]


----------



## asdkj1740




----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.chiphell.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2058557&extra=page=1&mobile=2
msi rolls out 1003ABBA bios for improving ryzen cpu 3000 series boosting behaviour


----------



## Streetdragon

hehe ABBA xD


----------



## dansi

Strix-i vs aoruos-i, same price!
Asus have a dp1.4 and dual fans
Not sure why gigabyte went with dual hdmi 2.0, outdated.
I also guess Gigabyte true 8 phases no need the vrm fan


----------



## AlphaC

--------------


ASUS ROG impact heatsink disassembled


----------



## Kriant

I need some sane advice:

I am contemplating on jumping the Threadripper ship and getting a 3950x when it releases. I have secured an order for Gigabyte X570 Extreme, but having second thoughts. I plan on overclocking, but nothing crazy (something 27/4 sustainable under water). Any real reason to get Aorus Extreme over Master or Crosshair Hero? And if so, which one to stick with?


----------



## VeritronX

Extreme if you want no chipset fan and 10gb networking, master or hero otherwise.. or even the asus x570-p if you just want function and don't want to spend money on plastic covers and complicated lighting. x570-p has same vrm as z390 hero iirc.


----------



## Biorganic

Finally have funds to get off this sandy bridge/7950 system.

Looking to build a 3700X system. I tend to use my hardware for a long time and really don't like the idea of another chipset fan as a point of failure, not to mention noise.

I have been considering going with the Asrock X470 Taichi motherboard.

I intend to use a primary 1 TB M.2 ssd, but don't think I really need the x4 ssd options.

I like native usb-c support and maybe will eventually upgrade to better m2 drive

I have looked at asrock x570 extreme4 but really do not like M.2 slot locations, also Giga x570 elite and ASUS Tuf x570



After rereading parts of this thread I am seriously considering going for the Aorus Elite Wifi, prefer the intel LAN. 

From a longevity standpoint, do any of the 250-300$ boards have worthwhile improvement? I think I read that a bios update is out for zero fan for other vendors than MSI, is this correct?


Any and all help is appreciated!


----------



## Ramad

Biorganic said:


> Finally have funds to get off this sandy bridge/7950 system.
> 
> Looking to build a 3700X system. I tend to use my hardware for a long time and really don't like the idea of another chipset fan as a point of failure, not to mention noise.
> 
> I have been considering going with the Asrock X470 Taichi motherboard.
> 
> I intend to use a primary 1 TB M.2 ssd, but don't think I really need the x4 ssd options.
> 
> Is there any other real reason I should look into X570 chipset?
> 
> I have looked at asrock x570 extreme4 but really do not like M.2 slot locations EDIT* also Giga x570 elite and ASUS Tuf x570
> 
> 
> 
> Any and all help is appreciated!



You don't need an X570 motherboard if you are not needing PCIE gen. 4(which you don't need). The Taichi is a good motherboard.


----------



## Biorganic

Ramad said:


> You don't need an X570 motherboard if you are not needing PCIE gen. 4(which you don't need). The Taichi is a good motherboard.


I was reading about 3600 RAM being ideal for ryzen 2, not sure the x470 Tachi can accomodate this, although my understanding was the IMC on the cpu i/o die would handle this. Only other thing I could think of is the "glitchy" rgb reports of asrock software...

Now I am sort of in Limbo between the x570 Aorus elite wifi and x470 Taichi.


----------



## Nighthog

3600Mhz is ideal in that is should be easy to achieve in 99% of cases as long as your memory isn't bad.

3800 with 1900FCLK gives best performance instead. But not all motherboards and cpu:s can handle the 1900FCLK. There are cases when even 1800FCLK wasn't stable for some rare cases but most should be able to do 1800FCLK to match the 3600Mhz MEM speed.
That is unless you run 4xDR memory for 64GB etc which can limit your max clock to some extent. Seen people struggle with that to some extent.


----------



## lipefuark

Nighthog said:


> 3600Mhz is ideal in that is should be easy to achieve in 99% of cases as long as your memory isn't bad.
> 
> 3800 with 1900FCLK gives best performance instead. But not all motherboards and cpu:s can handle the 1900FCLK. There are cases when even 1800FCLK wasn't stable for some rare cases but most should be able to do 1800FCLK to match the 3600Mhz MEM speed.
> That is unless you run 4xDR memory for 64GB etc which can limit your max clock to some extent. Seen people struggle with that to some extent.





hello buddy, I saw that your previous board was x470 gt8 and i would like to know how good it is in your experience, and if its good to OC?

Its "on sale" in brazil and here is really hard to find anothers good boards like tomahawk or pro carbon for example.


----------



## lb_felipe

What are the best X470 (fanless) boards for Ryzen 7 3700X?


----------



## Elrick

lb_felipe said:


> What are the best X470 (fanless) boards for Ryzen 7 3700X?


Actually had the ROG Crosshair VII before moving onto my new X570 Gigabyte Master model.

The Asus was superb with so many bios settings so even the most hardened and experienced overclocker can burn their CPU with ease. Good thing here Asus is still delivering more bios updates for this x470 motherboard.

They haven't dropped it yet, when it comes to providing decent support for the latest Ryzen Zen 2 models.


----------



## lb_felipe

Elrick said:


> Actually had the ROG Crosshair VII before moving onto my new X570 Gigabyte Master model.
> 
> The Asus was superb with so many bios settings so even the most hardened and experienced overclocker can burn their CPU with ease. Good thing here Asus is still delivering more bios updates for this x470 motherboard.
> 
> They haven't dropped it yet, when it comes to providing decent support for the latest Ryzen Zen 2 models.


Does C7H allow BIOS flashing without CPU?


----------



## Elrick

lb_felipe said:


> Does C7H allow BIOS flashing without CPU?


Suspect you could, due to the bios usb connector. Never used it as I always had a CPU sitting in the socket when I upgraded the bios.

Maybe someone else could chime in and talk about that feature of updating their motherboard, without a CPU in place.


----------



## TELVM

lb_felipe said:


> What are the best X470 (fanless) boards for Ryzen 7 3700X?








As far as thermal performance is concerned _(relevant for high-core-count, high-wattage 3900X & 3950X CPUs)_ the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7, with 5x2 Vcore phases and massively overkill VRM heatsinks, might be the best of the X470 lot:


----------



## lb_felipe

Elrick said:


> Suspect you could, due to the bios usb connector. Never used it as I always had a CPU sitting in the socket when I upgraded the bios.
> 
> Maybe someone else could chime in and talk about that feature of updating their motherboard, without a CPU in place.


Thanks. Apparently, ASUS discontinued it.




TELVM said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71TtWwbWP-g
> 
> As far as thermal performance is concerned _(relevant for high-core-count, high-wattage 3900X & 3950X CPUs)_ the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7, with 5x2 Vcore phases and massively overkill VRM heatsinks, might be the best of the X470 lot:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTCFVoHncXk


Sadly, Aorus Gaming 7 doesn't allow CPUless BIOS flashing. Does Taichi do?


----------



## elmor

lb_felipe said:


> Does C7H allow BIOS flashing without CPU?


Yes, any Asus board with "USB BIOS Flashback". All that's needed is standby power. From the manual:


----------



## Molitro

lb_felipe said:


> Sadly, Aorus Gaming 7 doesn't allow CPUless BIOS flashing. Does Taichi do?


The 470 doens't.


----------



## briank

Elrick said:


> Actually had the ROG Crosshair VII (C7H) before moving onto my new X570 Gigabyte Master model.
> 
> The Asus was superb.....


I see the C7H is selling for $240, not much more than the midlevel X570 boards. When I build my AM4 system next month, I'm tempted to go for this board rather than a X570. The higher power consumption of that chipset doesn't seem worth it.

At one point, the 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes directly off the CPU were enabled on the C7H. Can anyone confirm this is still the case with the latest BIOS?


----------



## Nighthog

New MSI X570 board out.

MSI X570 Unify

About the same board as the Ace but better heatsinks. 

Hardware Unboxed reveal.


----------



## os2wiz

AlphaC said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d31ZO22MZEM
> 
> 
> --------------
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG impact heatsink disassembled
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxhkcvHYF1c


 I assume you are highly pleased with MSI X570 MEG Unify motherboard to be released in about 2 weeks. It has been reported on Hardware Unboxed youtube channel as having the 3rd best thermals of all X570 motherboards with its revised heatsink design. It is a slightly cutdown X570 MEG ACE board with no RGB and no Intel lan port, just 2.5 Gb Realtek lan. Otherwise identical to the ACE but has a much larger vrm heatsink not covered by plastic. Only costs $300 US.


----------



## cssorkinman

Anyone see any reported VRM failures for AM4 boards out there ?


----------



## Nighthog

cssorkinman said:


> Anyone see any reported VRM failures for AM4 boards out there ?


Just the cheaper ones with discrete mosfets. Just rare occurrences thus far.


----------



## AlphaC

Hot off the presses (figuratively)



http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1076004597.html#more


> A stress test is performed on the CPU to load the VRM power supply that supplies power to the CPU, but the verification method is based on the FF14 benchmark video (playback time 8 minutes, WQHD resolution, 60FPS, capacity 4.7GB) In Aviutl + x264, we performed two parallel encodings and continued to load over 30 minutes. At the end of this stress test, we will check the VRM power supply temperature using the FLIR ONE Pro thermography camera (review) that can be used on smartphones.
> ...
> The basic results are as shown in the table above, and any B450 motherboard can be used as long as it is a Ryzen 7 3700X or Ryzen 3 3600, which has a CPU power consumption of about 90W with a core clock of TDP65W, PB2 & XFR2. I can do it.
> The problem is when using Ryzen 9 3900X with TDP105W, ASUS TUF B450-PRO GAMING, MSI B450 TOMAHAWK MAX, and narrowly GIGABYTE B450 AORUS ELITE, ASRock B450 Steel Legend, the cooling condition of the VRM power supply is excellent It became evaluation.
> 
> First, about the ASUS TUF B450-PRO GAMING, even in a simple water-cooled CPU cooler environment where the VRM power circuit is not directly exposed to the wind, the core clock by PB2 & XFR2 will be used in the Ryzen 9 3900X, which has a CPU power consumption of about 150W in actual operation. Even when a load is applied, the VRM power supply temperature is 80 degrees or less. It was amazing performance that I couldn't think of as a 10,000-yen motherboard.
> 
> 
> The next runner is MSI B450 TOMAHAWK. Compared to ASUS TUF B450-PRO GAMING, VRM power supply temperature is over 90 degrees with simple water cooling & Ryzen 9 3900X, but I think that VRM power supply is in the range where it can be operated just by passive air cooling.
> 
> ASRock B450 Steel Legend and GIGABYTE B450 AORUS ELITE were inferior to the above two.
> As for the ASRock B450 Steel Legend, the VRM power supply temperature did not exceed 100 degrees within the range that can be confirmed by thermography, but if the load is continuously applied in an environment where the VRM power supply circuit is passively air-cooled, the VRM will take about several minutes. The phenomenon that the core clock is forcibly lowered due to overheating of the power supply, the so-called “phantom throttling”, was confirmed.
> Even if a top-flow type air-cooled CPU cooler is used, the VRM power supply temperature cannot be lowered below 90 degrees unless the fan speed is increased.


Measured with a infrared camera , Ryzen 9 3900X VRM temps with Wraith Prism 1900RPM:
MSI B450 Tomahawk Max = 82.1°C
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite = 92.1°C
Asrock B450 Steel Legend = 96.0°C


Ryzen 9 3900X VRM temps with Corsair H150i AIO @ 1200RPM:
ASUS TUF B450-PRO GAMING = 79.2°C
MSI B450 Tomahawk Max = 94.2°C
Asrock B450 Steel Legend = 98.8°C
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite = 110.2°C


_Surprising result to be honest , may have to do with measuring at front of the board (Tomahawk should be cooler than the TUF based on older testing)_

_edit: a refresher on the topology of the TUF Pro , it's Onsemi 4C10N x8 + 4C06N x8 (4 PWM phase) https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_tuf_b450-pro_gaming/?s=all
_


----------



## cssorkinman

AlphaC said:


> Hot off the presses (figuratively)
> 
> 
> 
> http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1076004597.html#more
> Measured with a infrared camera , Ryzen 9 3900X VRM temps with Wraith Prism 1900RPM:
> MSI B450 Tomahawk Max = 82.1°C
> Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite = 92.1°C
> Asrock B450 Steel Legend = 96.0°C
> 
> 
> Ryzen 9 3900X VRM temps with Corsair H150i AIO @ 1200RPM:
> ASUS TUF B450-PRO GAMING = 79.2°C
> MSI B450 Tomahawk Max = 94.2°C
> Asrock B450 Steel Legend = 98.8°C
> Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite = 110.2°C
> 
> 
> _Surprising result to be honest , may have to do with measuring at front of the board (Tomahawk should be cooler than the TUF based on older testing)_
> 
> _edit: a refresher on the topology of the TUF Pro , it's Onsemi 4C10N x8 + 4C06N x8 (4 PWM phase) https://ru.gecid.com/mboard/asus_tuf_b450-pro_gaming/?s=all
> _


Pretty much how I've seen things play out on my AM3+ Asus vs MSI boards - poor airflow over the vrm, Asus shows an advantage - given equal ( ram cooler attached to cpu vrm heatsink) airflow - I've even seen an MSI 970 gaming run cooler than my CHV-Z.


----------



## AlphaC

Forgot this test as well:


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2638205162867197&set=pcb.2503407216610220&type=3&theater
asus c7e


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.asrock.com/feature/DrMOS/
https://www.asrock.com/feature/DrMOS/img/parallax/MOSFETs.jpg


----------



## Heuchler

[Igor'sLAB] Asus TUF X570-Plus vs Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite vs MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge WiFi

Voltage Regulators and infrared measuring
https://www.igorslab.media/en/big-r...rs-fans-temperatures-and-the-onboard-sound/3/


TUF X570-Plus vs X570 Aorus Elite vs MPG X570 Gaming Edge (German Video with CC and auto-translate)


----------



## gamervivek

TELVM said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71TtWwbWP-g
> 
> As far as thermal performance is concerned _(relevant for high-core-count, high-wattage 3900X & 3950X CPUs)_ the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7, with 5x2 Vcore phases and massively overkill VRM heatsinks, might be the best of the X470 lot:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTCFVoHncXk


Where does it place in the Aorus X570 lineup, VRM+cooling combined?


----------



## rastaviper

Nighthog said:


> 3600Mhz is ideal in that is should be easy to achieve in 99% of cases as long as your memory isn't bad.
> 
> 3800 with 1900FCLK gives best performance instead. But not all motherboards and cpu:s can handle the 1900FCLK. There are cases when even 1800FCLK wasn't stable for some rare cases but most should be able to do 1800FCLK to match the 3600Mhz MEM speed.
> That is unless you run 4xDR memory for 64GB etc which can limit your max clock to some extent. Seen people struggle with that to some extent.


Well not really.
We have seen systems at 3733 with lower subtimings performing much better than other systems at 3800.


----------



## asdkj1740

new b450 form gigabyte, seems to be an atx upgrade over b450m gaming.
supprisingly there are 2 addressable rgb headers, and using alc892, but still realtek lan.
lots of usb headers on back i/o, six sata headers old man like these.
just one internal headers of usb 2.0, so pick one out of case front i/o usb 2.0 or some aio with usb cable or some argb/rgb stuff with usb cable etc.

a cheap version of b450 aorus pro and aorus elite, if vrm and gigabyte are all you need.
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B450-Gaming-X-rev-10#kf


----------



## Redwoodz

AlphaC said:


> Forgot this test as well:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0vmGHbwx1M
> View attachment 302086
> 
> View attachment 302090
> 
> View attachment 302092


 Problem with those types of reviews is we have no idea what settings were used. I guarantee I can flipflop all those results by adjusting LLC in bios.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B450M-AORUS-ELITE-rev-10#kf

new b450m


----------



## Nighthog

asdkj1740 said:


> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B450M-AORUS-ELITE-rev-10#kf
> 
> new b450m


A interesting board for it's dual M2 solution. Would be nice if similiar PCIE1x & M2 solution on more boards was possible. Gives more flexibility for end-users. 

I was kinda "disappointed" we lost so many PCIE slots on the new boards. Limits your expansion possibilities if one needs such things any more.

VRM and otherwise seems to be similar to their old design but it's good they upgraded the needed VRM heatsink for a better one.

I would have expected a B550 board by now as OEM boards come with those.


----------



## os2wiz

rastaviper said:


> Well not really.
> We have seen systems at 3733 with lower subtimings performing much better than other systems at 3800.


 You can have tight subtimings at 3800mhz 1900mhz fabric clock. My timings are CL16-16-17-16-32-48-294


----------



## rastaviper

os2wiz said:


> You can have tight subtimings at 3800mhz 1900mhz fabric clock. My timings are CL16-16-17-16-32-48-294


Tight subtimings mean 14-14-14.

And still a system at 3733 with 15-14-14 will have much better results than a system with 3800 16-16-17

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> A interesting board for it's dual M2 solution. Would be nice if similiar PCIE1x & M2 solution on more boards was possible. Gives more flexibility for end-users.
> 
> I was kinda "disappointed" we lost so many PCIE slots on the new boards. Limits your expansion possibilities if one needs such things any more.
> 
> VRM and otherwise seems to be similar to their old design but it's good they upgraded the needed VRM heatsink for a better one.
> 
> I would have expected a B550 board by now as OEM boards come with those.


b450 lane is so limited, more slots mean nothing.
for example on this new mobo, if two nvme ssd installed then there are only 2 sata ports avaliable.


----------



## os2wiz

rastaviper said:


> Tight subtimings mean 14-14-14.
> 
> And still a system at 3733 with 15-14-14 will have much better results than a system with 3800 16-16-17
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


 The timings of 14-14-14 at 3800mhz is near impossible and can only possibly happen with by spending over $500 for 32GB of highly binned
ram. There is only 1 set ofdimms that may accomplish that that is the Most Expensive 4 dimm set of G.skill Trident Z Neo single rank memory.


----------



## rastaviper

os2wiz said:


> The timings of 14-14-14 at 3800mhz is near impossible and can only possibly happen with by spending over $500 for 32GB of highly binned
> 
> ram. There is only 1 set ofdimms that may accomplish that that is the Most Expensive 4 dimm set of G.skill Trident Z Neo single rank memory.


You missed the point again.
My suggestion is to go for the 3733 15/14-14-14 setup

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


----------



## os2wiz

rastaviper said:


> You missed the point again.
> My suggestion is to go for the 3733 15/14-14-14 setup
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


No you missed my point CL can not be an odd number like 15 nor will 14 work so it will wind up being 16. Got it???


----------



## VPII

os2wiz said:


> No you missed my point CL can not be an odd number like 15 nor will 14 work so it will wind up being 16. Got it???


Hi @os2wiz if you want CL to be an odd number you have to run you memory with gear down disabled which I cannot do when running 3800 with 1900 IF.


----------



## rastaviper

os2wiz said:


> No you missed my point CL can not be an odd number like 15 nor will 14 work so it will wind up being 16. Got it???


Lol.
I like when people are so sure about the wrong reasons.

Time to start reading more buddy, as there are so many users around with the timings I am mentioning.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


----------



## cssorkinman

rastaviper said:


> Lol.
> I like when people are so sure about the wrong reasons.
> 
> Time to start reading more buddy, as there are so many users around with the timings I am mentioning.
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


Can you demonstrate improved memory performance changing only the CL from 16 to 15? 

I've always ran 14 on my first and second gen Ryzens , 16 on my 3rd. I have seen numerous articles,comments etc. that say odd cl values aren't possible on Ryzen regardless of what is set at or shown in software , it's actually running the next even value higher.

I can try it for myself, but if you have already done so , it would save me the time.


----------



## Nighthog

Memory discussion could be had elsewhere but I can add that odd CL numbers like 15 do work but they require Geardown: disabled settings that are more taxing on the stability of the system as a whole. Not all memory or motherboards are that easy to work on than others, especially running higher clocks. Bios implementation is a factor. 

Just depends on your components chosen and your capabilities to try any and all combinations to try to get it to work after all. It's not impossible as some are so insistent on. 

I could do CL15 with my memory on this motherboard of mine for example @ 3800/1900 MEM/IF if I run Geardown:disabled but it's hard to get stable and had some issues I didn't bother to try work out in the end and settled for other settings. Micron E-die can run low CL especially but the other timings can't match. You need voltage. 

I wasn't happy @ 3800Mhz MEM and wanted more so I went for the harder target to get more speed. Geardown:disabled doesn't work @ 4000+ speeds anyway for my components.


----------



## os2wiz

rastaviper said:


> Lol.
> I like when people are so sure about the wrong reasons.
> 
> Time to start reading more buddy, as there are so many users around with the timings I am mentioning.
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


 Yes by sacrificing memory stability. I really wonder if their dimms pass exhaustive stability testing and do not risk potential degradation of memory with excessive dram voltage. There is a reason gear down enabled is the recommended memory option. I used to dislike it also. But I found without it my memory was really not stable when using aggressive memory timings. And I have already gone through 4 sets of high end memory since I got my 3900X cpu. I like to experiment and push the outer limits on performance.


----------



## os2wiz

Nighthog said:


> Memory discussion could be had elsewhere but I can add that odd CL numbers like 15 do work but they require Geardown: disabled settings that are more taxing on the stability of the system as a whole. Not all memory or motherboards are that easy to work on than others, especially running higher clocks. Bios implementation is a factor.
> 
> Just depends on your components chosen and your capabilities to try any and all combinations to try to get it to work after all. It's not impossible as some are so insistent on.
> 
> I could do CL15 with my memory on this motherboard of mine for example @ 3800/1900 MEM/IF if I run Geardown:disabled but it's hard to get stable and had some issues I didn't bother to try work out in the end and settled for other settings. Micron E-die can run low CL especially but the other timings can't match. You need voltage.
> 
> I wasn't happy @ 3800Mhz MEM and wanted more so I went for the harder target to get more speed. Geardown:disabled doesn't work @ 4000+ speeds anyway for my components.


Why in the world would you use 4000 plus mhz memory speeds on Ryzen. After 3800mhz at 1900 fabric speed it is all reduced performance with the higher speed since you can't get fabric speed to exceed 1900mhz???? You know not what you speak.


----------



## reqq

os2wiz said:


> Yes by sacrificing memory stability. I really wonder if their dimms pass exhaustive stability testing and do not risk potential degradation of memory with excessive dram voltage. There is a reason gear down enabled is the recommended memory option. I used to dislike it also. But I found without it my memory was really not stable when using aggressive memory timings. And I have already gone through 4 sets of high end memory since I got my 3900X cpu. I like to experiment and push the outer limits on performance.


Have you degraded 4 sticks of memory already?? *** .. i run gear down mode off..


----------



## os2wiz

reqq said:


> Have you degraded 4 sticks of memory already?? *** .. i run gear down mode off..


 Stop pushing a false narrative. I have NEVER degraded memory through excessive dram overvolting. I asked the fellow a specific question for a specific reason. Stop deflecting my dialogue, show some respect.


----------



## reqq

os2wiz said:


> Stop pushing a false narrative. I have NEVER degraded memory through excessive dram overvolting. I asked the fellow a specific question for a specific reason. Stop deflecting my dialogue, show some respect.


Err was a serious question.. english not my natve language  sorry dude.


----------



## asdkj1740

gigabyte aorus has entered the chat!

finally a b450 from gigabyte that is capable to complete with asus b450m tuf pro gaming and msi b450m mortar max!
https://www.expreview.com/72423.html

the 5v agrb header kills mortar and tuf lol.


vrm test
https://quasarzone.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=qc_qsz&wr_id=355482


----------



## Nighthog

I've updated the first page with more VRM details for various boards.

Only really need the new B550 to arrive and add the older B350, A320 boards when if I feel like it.

There were some leaks on Gigabyte B550 but no info on what they will carry.


----------



## gerardfraser

Nighthog said:


> I've updated the first page with more VRM details for various boards.
> 
> Only really need the new B550 to arrive and add the older B350, A320 boards when if I feel like it.
> 
> There were some leaks on Gigabyte B550 but no info on what they will carry.


Maybe you may want to include these spreadsheets.

Spreadsheet for VRM on the (AM4-socket for AMD Ryzen CPUs) By Cr1318 (Reddit)
Cautilus#5912 (Discord)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...IVNyMatydkpFA/htmlview?sle=true#gid=639584818

Motherboards (AM4-socket for AMD Ryzen CPUs) Comparison by by Raison John Bassig

X570/X470/X370/B450/B350/A320 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...FnsZYZiW1pfiDZnKCjaXyzd1o/edit#gid=2112472504


----------



## Nighthog

@gerardfraser

The List by Raison John Bassig was already included for quite some time. I added the Reddit sourced one instead. Though it's not been updated for some time.


----------



## gerardfraser

Nighthog said:


> @gerardfraser
> 
> The List by Raison John Bassig was already included for quite some time. I added the Reddit sourced one instead. Though it's not been updated for some time.


Yeah I did not read any of the thread,sorry about that but 1 out of 2 was a good guess.


----------



## Nighthog

New MSI motherboard VRM analysis.

*MAG X570 Tomahawk*






Uses some interesting parts for the price when it's available.


----------



## mojolou

Nighthog said:


> New MSI motherboard VRM analysis.
> 
> *MAG X570 Tomahawk*
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2KbpmMg44M
> 
> Uses some interesting parts for the price when it's available.


The VRM looks awesome on this board.
Don't know when it'll be available on the shelf.


----------



## Schmuckley

mojolou said:


> The VRM looks awesome on this board.
> Don't know when it'll be available on the shelf.


Vaporware is just that.


----------



## mojolou

Hardware Unboxed VRM review on MSI X570 Tomahawk.
Impressive!


----------



## rares495

mojolou said:


> Hardware Unboxed VRM review on MSI X570 Tomahawk.
> Impressive!
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD65w5RVmtY


Perhaps too impressive. One is left wondering if they could have just used the Unify/Ace VRM and got the price even lower ($175-ish?)


----------



## Nighthog

I've added preliminary leaked boards for B550 to the list, also added in the older B350/A320 boards.


Here is a leaked list (55pcs):
https://www.techpowerup.com/267344/55-amd-b550-chipset-motherboard-model-names-revealed

Many more boards than I thought are coming out. They are replacing all older B350/B450 with this launch for B550.

I'm speculating some of the MSI B550 boards will all use the same VRM X570 TOMAHAWK was revealed to have. I'm basing it on the Z490 from Intel side. They all basically used those Intersil components throughout the line-up


----------



## Nighthog

B550 motherboards:

ASRock release:
https://videocardz.com/press-release/asrock-launches-amd-b550-motherboards

BIOSTAR release:
https://videocardz.com/press-release/biostar-announces-amd-b550-gta-and-gtq-motherboards

MSI release:
https://videocardz.com/press-release/msi-announces-amd-b550-motherboards

Will be updating the lists of VRM as I figure out the components and configurations.


----------



## dansi

Is it me or Gigabyte B550 lineup has better VRM than their X570?
B550 even have hdmi2.1 and higher ram OC! 

Damn X570 am cry.


----------



## Nighthog

Asus release:
https://edgeup.asus.com/2020/b550-motherboard-guide-asus-rog-strix-tuf-gaming-prime/

https://videocardz.com/press-release/asus-launches-amd-b550-motherboard-series

Not on their site yet.

Haven't seen the Gigabyte yet myself but will take a look after I update ASUS.


----------



## Nighthog

dansi said:


> Is it me or Gigabyte B550 lineup has better VRM than their X570?
> B550 even have hdmi2.1 and higher ram OC!
> 
> Damn X570 am cry.


The Gigabyte B550 AORUS Master comes with 14+2 phase 70A stages from direct 16-phase controller.
https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B550-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf

It doesn't state the components but if they are the same as The X570 AORUS Xtreme I'm gonna laugh.
TDA21472 70A & XDPE123G5C.

You now get the previous top tier at a much cheaper price.

MSI have improved their game somewhat: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/MPG-B550-GAMING-CARBON-WIFI

MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI 14-phase[12+2]* | Infineon TDA21462 60A, PWM: Infineon IR35201(8-phase)

ASRock Taichi is ok. https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/B550 Taichi/index.asp
16-phases with Dr.MOS 50A powerstages. probably 14+2. No idea on controller though.


----------



## dansi

Nighthog said:


> The Gigabyte B550 AORUS Master comes with 14+2 phase 70A stages from direct 16-phase controller.
> 
> It doesn't state the components but if they are the same as The X570 AORUS Xtreme I'm gonna laugh.
> TDA21472 70A & XDPE123G5C.
> 
> You now get the previous top tier at a much cheaper price.


oh dear..it is the same as Xtreme lol :h34r-smi

Look under power architecture tab

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B550-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf

And B550 comes with 32mb bios rom! X570 owners rekt


----------



## Nighthog

dansi said:


> oh dear..it is the same as Xtreme lol :h34r-smi
> 
> Look under power architecture tab
> 
> https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B550-AORUS-MASTER-rev-10#kf
> 
> And B550 comes with 32mb bios rom! X570 owners rekt


I don't know if that will matter as only the Ryzen 3000-series are supported on B550 yet it seems if you look into cpu-support lists & specifications.

Well just a detail, more future proof nonetheless.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...bQ9skDNmLmhdXnpSnaB0EuZ1Xs/edit#gid=449426075
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/gnzktg/aorus_and_gigabyte_b550_motherboard_cheatsheet/


----------



## Nighthog

asdkj1740 said:


> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...bQ9skDNmLmhdXnpSnaB0EuZ1Xs/edit#gid=449426075
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/gnzktg/aorus_and_gigabyte_b550_motherboard_cheatsheet/


Thanks just what I needed!

Full details for Gigabyte B550 VRM here!


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> Thanks just what I needed!
> 
> Full details for Gigabyte B550 VRM here!


btw attention to sic651 "55a".


----------



## AlphaC

With the garbage economy I think the B550 range will have great uptake , especially since they are well featured and are missing the long term noise/reliability concerns of a chipset fan.

From Asrock's site
Taichi is "16 phase" DrMos 50A (this includes SOC side so it's either 2 PWMs or it's inflated in some other way , typically doubled or parallel/teamed), 12k hr Nichicon caps and heatpipe , debug LED/ Power & reset , Intel 2.5G LAN (i225-V) , USB 3.2 front panel header
B550 PG Velocita -- "14 phase" (12+2 or 10+4) DrMos 50A with heatpipe , debug LED/Power & reset , USB 3.2 front panel header
B550 Extreme4 -- "14 phase" (12+2 or 10+4) debug LED/Power & reset 
B550 Steel Legend -- "14 Power Phase Design" (12+2 or 10+4) DrMos , debug LED
B550 Pro4 --- "8 power phase design" (6+2?) , no mention of DrMos so it's likely Sinopower , NIKOs or something like that Asrock has used before
B550 Phantom Gaming 4 --- "8 power phase design" (6+2?) , no mention of DrMos so it's likely Sinopower , NIKOs or something like that Asrock has used before
B550 Phantom Gaming-ITX/ax --- 8 Power Phase Design, Digi Power, 90A Dr.MOS ; Intel 2.5G LAN , USB 3.2 front panel header
B550M Steel Legend (mATX) --- 10 Power Phase Design, Dr. MOS
B550M Pro4 (mATX) --- 8 Power Phase Design (6+2?) , no mention of DrMos so it's likely Sinopower , NIKOs or something like that Asrock has used before
B550M-HDV --- 6 Power Phase Design with no heatsinks whatsoever  ... low end board on low end chipset so don't expect miracles especially with one look at the board itself : you'd probably use it for a Ryzen APU or a quadcore <65W that isn't stressed 

From ASUS' site
ROG Strix B550-E Gaming --- "14+2 power stage VRM" (very likely 7+1 teamed or doubled) + debug LED (Intel I225-V 2.5Gb) + TB3 internal header + USB 3.2 front panel header, supposedly $279 per Toms HW USA (the unreliable site)
ROG Strix B550-F Gaming --- "12+2 power stage VRM" (very likely 6+1 teamed or doubled) ; Intel I225-V 2.5Gb + TB3 internal header
ROG Strix B550-I Gaming --- "8+2 DrMOS" supposedly $229 per Toms HW USA (the unreliable site) ; Intel I225-V 2.5Gb + TB3 internal header , USB 3.2 front panel header
TUF Gaming B550-Plus --- "8+2 DrMOS" 
TUF Gaming B550M-Plus (Wi-Fi) --- unlisted
Prime B550-Plus --- unlisted , don't expect miracles with that flange heatsink and similar layout to the B550 lowend from them
Prime B550M-A (Wi-Fi) --- expect Vishay Powerpaks --- expected price $134
Prime B550M-K --- basically low end board on low end chipset , 4x Vishay Powerpaks with doubled low side

From Gigabyte's site
B550 Aorus Master - 14 CPU phases direct from Infineon PWM heatpiped , 70A powerstages , debug LED + dual BIOS 
B550 Aorus Pro - 12+2 DrMos but picture has a doubler from Intersil so it might be something with ISL6617 doubler
B550 Aorus Elite - might be doubled design 12+2 DrMos claiming 700A total, Apaq caps (like ASUS), no heatpipe (the X570 version was ~$200)
B550 GAMING X - low end board on low end chipset , don't expect miracles (the X570 version is $170)
B550I AORUS PRO AX - 8x90A powerstage "direct", right off their site
B550 VISION D - no info on their site about the existence of it , Two Intel i211AT per Toms HW US (2x TB3 per the spreadsheet)

Someone PMed me the list directly : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...bQ9skDNmLmhdXnpSnaB0EuZ1Xs/edit#gid=449426075

From MSI's site (they really need to redeem their X570 midrange/low end , even if X570 Tomahawk was released as a bandaid)
MPG B550 Gaming Carbon WIFI -- 12+2+1 Digital Power with Doubler Design : image shows IR3599 or similar IR doubler , IR35201 controller and 12x CPU phases with TDA21462 60A phases
MPG B550 Gaming Edge WIFI -- 8+2+1 
MPG B550I Gaming Edge WIFI -- 8+2+1 
MPG B550 Gaming Plus
MAG B550M Tomahawk -- "10+2+1 Duet Rail Power System"
MAG B550M Mortar WIFI -- 8+2+1 Duet Rail
--- see https://storage-asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/B550M/MORTAR/MORTAR-VRM.jpg , the WIFI version has a image labeled Z490

MAG B550 Bazooka
B550-A Pro -- 10+2+1 Powerpaks



Spoiler











see https://storage-asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/B550/A-Pro/power.jpg


 B550M Pro-VDH WIFI - low end board on low end chipset

*TL;DR: more of the same thing for the most part except flagships / ITX and MSI's need to fix their low end lineup.*




Nighthog said:


> The Gigabyte B550 AORUS Master comes with 14+2 phase 70A stages from direct 16-phase controller.
> 
> It doesn't state the components but if they are the same as The X570 AORUS Xtreme I'm gonna laugh.
> TDA21472 70A & XDPE123G5C.
> 
> You now get the previous top tier at a much cheaper price.


It's an early adopter tax as with anything like PCIE 4.0 / Adaptive sync / 4K / RTX / DX12 capable GPUs / etc. If the technology is able to be brought to mainstream, how is that not a win for the average consumer? Also since it's in a volume product the cost is amortized. 

It's still missing the value adds of X570 such as multiple PCIE 4.0 add-in cards at full speed , front panel USB 3.2 10Gb/s, a physical BIOS switch, power/reset , right angle power connectors, and 10G LAN even if that isn't relevant for over 90% of the consumer base. For compatibility reasons , Aquantia 10G + 1G Intel LAN is a higher tier than a Realtek LAN even if it is 2.5G Realtek LAN instead of a 1G Intel LAN.

You have to take into account from a ROI point of view it is doubtful the Xtreme even was going to ROI even with the high cost. It also had the tooling for custom metal overlays and heatsinking rolled into the cost, not just the power delivery. For waterblocks and such with a higher volume than a one time board it already exceeds ~$100 per piece.

If you look at the feature-set , for non overclockers the Aorus range is okay but then there are things other vendors do better. For example the entire B550 lineup uses Realtek LAN and is missing front panel USB 3.2 gen2 or whatever you want to call it that is 10Gbps (it's a B550 limitation probably needing added chips i.e. more expenses on the Bill of Materials if it was added). 

Anyone worth their salary over at ASUS marketing is probably going to be plastering the fact that they have 2.5G LAN from Intel rather than Realtek because Gigabyte and MSI aren't using Intel. Since Intel acquired Rivet Networks recently (i.e. Killer LAN) there's only two main players other than Aquantia: Intel + Realtek.

----

Also, this is probably one of the only posts I will be putting here about this matter. My efforts in the past were because nobody bothered and just spouted out the marketing spiel from the reviewers' guides, I'm not going to duplicate efforts for no good reason. VRM topics are quite mainstream now (on every single tech site , even by people with zero engineering background) so if people actually put in maybe 10 minutes of research instead of complaining about boards after they buy them on a impulse buy then maybe this would not be a problem. HWinfo NL typically does testing , even if full settings are not provided. Techspot even did a full stack overview in video form for the youtube generation, so if people can't find that don't bother to read that I don't know what to say.

You should be able to find full lineup information _with part numbers_ from Gigabyte Matt or toppclin from MSI. Don't expect any full disclosure from ASUS, they even rebrand their PWMs to connive people into thinking their boards have something special that makes them magic.


----------



## Nighthog

I think the *B550 AORUS Master* is coming to be a top seller with that VRM configuration. 

There seems to be improvements in regard to Memory Layout throughout the Gigabyte Line-up. We have XMP 5000 support. I hope it's more than just marketing.

In regard to the topic of VRM, we got it going good now. No longer something forgotten to consider for most. Was another matter when this thread was started.

Gigabyte Matthew is no longer around, no representative here on the forums as I've seen as of late. There is one active on reddit though. *GBT_Brian*

I've been busy updating the first page lists.


----------



## asdkj1740

AlphaC said:


> With the garbage economy I think the B550 range will have great uptake , especially since they are well featured and are missing the long term noise/reliability concerns of a chipset fan.
> 
> From Asrock's site
> Taichi is "16 phase" DrMos 50A (this includes SOC side so it's either 2 PWMs or it's inflated in some other way , typically doubled or parallel/teamed), 12k hr Nichicon caps and heatpipe , debug LED/ Power & reset , Intel 2.5G LAN (i225-V) , USB 3.2 front panel header
> B550 PG Velocita -- "14 phase" (12+2 or 10+4) DrMos 50A with heatpipe , debug LED/Power & reset , USB 3.2 front panel header
> B550 Extreme4 -- "14 phase" (12+2 or 10+4) debug LED/Power & reset
> B550 Steel Legend -- "14 Power Phase Design" (12+2 or 10+4) DrMos , debug LED
> B550 Pro4 --- "8 power phase design" (6+2?) , no mention of DrMos so it's likely Sinopower , NIKOs or something like that Asrock has used before
> B550 Phantom Gaming 4 --- "8 power phase design" (6+2?) , no mention of DrMos so it's likely Sinopower , NIKOs or something like that Asrock has used before
> B550 Phantom Gaming-ITX/ax --- 8 Power Phase Design, Digi Power, 90A Dr.MOS ; Intel 2.5G LAN , USB 3.2 front panel header
> B550M Steel Legend (mATX) --- 10 Power Phase Design, Dr. MOS
> B550M Pro4 (mATX) --- 8 Power Phase Design (6+2?) , no mention of DrMos so it's likely Sinopower , NIKOs or something like that Asrock has used before
> B550M-HDV --- 6 Power Phase Design with no heatsinks whatsoever  ... low end board on low end chipset so don't expect miracles especially with one look at the board itself : you'd probably use it for a Ryzen APU or a quadcore <65W that isn't stressed
> 
> From ASUS' site
> ROG Strix B550-E Gaming --- "14+2 power stage VRM" (very likely 7+1 teamed or doubled) + debug LED (Intel I225-V 2.5Gb) + TB3 internal header + USB 3.2 front panel header, supposedly $279 per Toms HW USA (the unreliable site)
> ROG Strix B550-F Gaming --- "12+2 power stage VRM" (very likely 6+1 teamed or doubled) ; Intel I225-V 2.5Gb + TB3 internal header
> ROG Strix B550-I Gaming --- "8+2 DrMOS" supposedly $229 per Toms HW USA (the unreliable site) ; Intel I225-V 2.5Gb + TB3 internal header , USB 3.2 front panel header
> TUF Gaming B550-Plus --- "8+2 DrMOS"
> TUF Gaming B550M-Plus (Wi-Fi) --- unlisted
> Prime B550-Plus --- unlisted , don't expect miracles with that flange heatsink and similar layout to the B550 lowend from them
> Prime B550M-A (Wi-Fi) --- expect Vishay Powerpaks --- expected price $134
> Prime B550M-K --- basically low end board on low end chipset , 4x Vishay Powerpaks with doubled low side
> 
> From Gigabyte's site
> B550 Aorus Master - 14 CPU phases direct from Infineon PWM heatpiped , 70A powerstages , debug LED + dual BIOS
> B550 Aorus Pro - 12+2 DrMos but picture has a doubler from Intersil so it might be something with ISL6617 doubler
> B550 Aorus Elite - might be doubled design 12+2 DrMos claiming 700A total, Apaq caps (like ASUS), no heatpipe (the X570 version was ~$200)
> B550 GAMING X - low end board on low end chipset , don't expect miracles (the X570 version is $170)
> B550I AORUS PRO AX - 8x90A powerstage "direct", right off their site
> B550 VISION D - no info on their site about the existence of it , Two Intel i211AT per Toms HW US (2x TB3 per the spreadsheet)
> 
> Someone PMed me the list directly : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...bQ9skDNmLmhdXnpSnaB0EuZ1Xs/edit#gid=449426075
> 
> From MSI's site (they really need to redeem their X570 midrange/low end , even if X570 Tomahawk was released as a bandaid)
> MPG B550 Gaming Carbon WIFI -- 12+2+1 Digital Power with Doubler Design : image shows IR3599 or similar IR doubler , IR35201 controller and 12x CPU phases with TDA21462 60A phases
> MPG B550 Gaming Edge WIFI -- 8+2+1
> MPG B550I Gaming Edge WIFI -- 8+2+1
> MPG B550 Gaming Plus
> MAG B550M Tomahawk -- "10+2+1 Duet Rail Power System"
> MAG B550M Mortar WIFI -- 8+2+1 Duet Rail
> --- see https://storage-asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/B550M/MORTAR/MORTAR-VRM.jpg , the WIFI version has a image labeled Z490
> 
> MAG B550 Bazooka
> B550-A Pro -- 10+2+1 Powerpaks
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 347964
> 
> see https://storage-asset.msi.com/global/picture/image/feature/mb/B550/A-Pro/power.jpg
> 
> 
> B550M Pro-VDH WIFI - low end board on low end chipset
> 
> *TL;DR: more of the same thing for the most part except flagships / ITX and MSI's need to fix their low end lineup.*
> 
> 
> 
> It's an early adopter tax as with anything like PCIE 4.0 / Adaptive sync / 4K / RTX / DX12 capable GPUs / etc. If the technology is able to be brought to mainstream, how is that not a win for the average consumer? Also since it's in a volume product the cost is amortized.
> 
> It's still missing the value adds of X570 such as multiple PCIE 4.0 add-in cards at full speed , front panel USB 3.2 10Gb/s, a physical BIOS switch, power/reset , right angle power connectors, and 10G LAN even if that isn't relevant for over 90% of the consumer base. For compatibility reasons , Aquantia 10G + 1G Intel LAN is a higher tier than a Realtek LAN even if it is 2.5G Realtek LAN instead of a 1G Intel LAN.
> 
> You have to take into account from a ROI point of view it is doubtful the Xtreme even was going to ROI even with the high cost. It also had the tooling for custom metal overlays and heatsinking rolled into the cost, not just the power delivery. For waterblocks and such with a higher volume than a one time board it already exceeds ~$100 per piece.
> 
> If you look at the feature-set , for non overclockers the Aorus range is okay but then there are things other vendors do better. For example the entire B550 lineup uses Realtek LAN and is missing front panel USB 3.2 gen2 or whatever you want to call it that is 10Gbps (it's a B550 limitation probably needing added chips i.e. more expenses on the Bill of Materials if it was added).
> 
> Anyone worth their salary over at ASUS marketing is probably going to be plastering the fact that they have 2.5G LAN from Intel rather than Realtek because Gigabyte and MSI aren't using Intel. Since Intel acquired Rivet Networks recently (i.e. Killer LAN) there's only two main players other than Aquantia: Intel + Realtek.
> 
> ----
> 
> Also, this is probably one of the only posts I will be putting here about this matter. My efforts in the past were because nobody bothered and just spouted out the marketing spiel from the reviewers' guides, I'm not going to duplicate efforts for no good reason. VRM topics are quite mainstream now (on every single tech site , even by people with zero engineering background) so if people actually put in maybe 10 minutes of research instead of complaining about boards after they buy them on a impulse buy then maybe this would not be a problem. HWinfo NL typically does testing , even if full settings are not provided. Techspot even did a full stack overview in video form for the youtube generation, so if people can't find that don't bother to read that I don't know what to say.
> 
> You should be able to find full lineup information _with part numbers_ from Gigabyte Matt or toppclin from MSI. Don't expect any full disclosure from ASUS, they even rebrand their PWMs to connive people into thinking their boards have something special that makes them magic.


no more gigabyte matt, he is now in amd as far as i know.


----------



## Nighthog

I wonder what ASUS uses on the STRIX for power stages, they don't mention Dr.MOS so not Vishay, maybe Infineon IR powerstages or have they gone with Intersil? They don't mention doublers or direct drive so their usual 2x per phase stuff which indicates some IR power stages, no idea on Amperage rating. ASP14015I as controller if IR power stages.

IR3555 60A as they have used before? But the STRIX B550-F & STRIX B550-E have different kinds. the B550-E are larger. 
They aren't IR3553 40A ones at least. Those are smaller.

AS usual they aren't forthcoming with data sheets. Only Gigabyte provided a spreadsheet for their better boards. Most images aren't good enough to read the parts.


----------



## dansi

seems like B550 was rushed to take some heat off comet lake.
No prices (except Assus), no reviews, nothing.
B550, 4000 APU and 3000XT, all pre-announced with 3-6 weeks away. 
That sucks.


----------



## elmor

Nighthog said:


> I wonder what ASUS uses on the STRIX for power stages, they don't mention Dr.MOS so not Vishay, maybe Infineon IR powerstages or have they gone with Intersil? They don't mention doublers or direct drive so their usual 2x per phase stuff which indicates some IR power stages, no idea on Amperage rating. ASP14015I as controller if IR power stages.
> 
> IR3555 60A as they have used before? But the STRIX B550-F & STRIX B550-E have different kinds. the B550-E are larger.
> They aren't IR3553 40A ones at least. Those are smaller.
> 
> AS usual they aren't forthcoming with data sheets. Only Gigabyte provided a spreadsheet for their better boards. Most images aren't good enough to read the parts.



Are there any pictures available?


----------



## Nighthog

elmor said:


> Are there any pictures available?


Only the official product page images. But you only get a general look on how the power stages look like, not part numbers. Asus is kinda vague in their descriptions.

STRIX B550-F
https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/fdpqq6pwrv2dok9c/img/performance/show-5.png

STRIX B550-E
https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/fkufhp8oogo9exki/img/performance/show-5.png


----------



## rdr09

MPG B550 Gaming Carbon WIFI at 250$ would be good?


----------



## Nighthog

rdr09 said:


> MPG B550 Gaming Carbon WIFI at 250$ would be good?


You get:
MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI 14-phase[12+2]* | Infineon TDA21462 60A, PWM: Infineon IR35201(8-phase), PCB: 2oz 6-Layer, *doubler(IR3591)

Seems kinda decent enough if you ask me. Only the Gigabyte Aorus Master seems better with 70A stages instead at the moment and 16-phase controller.
B550 AORUS MASTER 16-phases[14+2] | Infineon TDA21472 70A, PWM: Infineon XDPE132G5C(16-phase), PCB: 2oz 6-Layer


----------



## rdr09

Nighthog said:


> You get:
> MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI 14-phase[12+2]* | Infineon TDA21462 60A, PWM: Infineon IR35201(8-phase), PCB: 2oz 6-Layer, *doubler(IR3591)
> 
> Seems kinda decent enough if you ask me. Only the Gigabyte Aorus Master seems better with 70A stages instead at the moment and 16-phase controller.
> B550 AORUS MASTER 16-phases[14+2] | Infineon TDA21472 70A, PWM: Infineon XDPE132G5C(16-phase), PCB: 2oz 6-Layer


Thanks for the info. Really have no idea how these two compare to a similarly priced X570s, which do not seem to exist anymore. Looking at 250$ max for a board that might be one time use. Just need to update one more rig for another family member still using Sandy.

Rep to you and op.

EDIT: Also it will come down to BIOS support. MSI seems to win in that dept.


----------



## elmor

Nighthog said:


> Only the official product page images. But you only get a general look on how the power stages look like, not part numbers. Asus is kinda vague in their descriptions.
> 
> STRIX B550-F
> https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/fdpqq6pwrv2dok9c/img/performance/show-5.png
> 
> STRIX B550-E
> https://dlcdnimgs.asus.com/websites/global/products/fkufhp8oogo9exki/img/performance/show-5.png


Those are pretty good pictures. I don't think not mentioning Dr MOS means anything, it's an Intel spec. Any power stage is pretty much Dr MOS. Most likely SiC631/NCP302155 or a different current spec in the same series on -F. The -E does indeed seem to have slightly larger packages, you could be right about IR3555 there. Both are probably teamed as all other Asus solutions.


----------



## asdkj1740

msi this time follows the trick used by asus--covering up the chokes with pads.
dont know what makes msi changed, in the past they said ithey wanted customers to be able to count how many chokes there visually.
asus does push so hard on x570 and b450 using ir image to show vrm temps. cant wait to see their b550 figthing guide.


and msi claims their 4pin aio pump header could controll the speed of aio pump..
as far as i know at least in the past this kind of header with larger current capabililty still cannot control the aio pump speed like asetek aio.
lots of aio with 3/4 pin header to plug to mobo 4pin fan headers are just for pump speed reading...





elmor said:


> Those are pretty good pictures. I don't think not mentioning Dr MOS means anything, it's an Intel spec. Any power stage is pretty much Dr MOS. Most likely SiC631/NCP302155 or a different current spec in the same series on -F. The -E does indeed seem to have slightly larger packages, you could be right about IR3555 there. Both are probably teamed as all other Asus solutions.


hello elmor, do you know why gigabyte claims sic620a on z490 ultra and aorus pro ax to be 55a drmos on official sites instead of 60a rated in the spec sheet?
their latest vrm cheatsheet of b550 even states sic651 to be 55a rated.


----------



## elmor

asdkj1740 said:


> hello elmor, do you know why gigabyte claims sic620a on z490 ultra and aorus pro ax to be 55a drmos on official sites instead of 60a rated in the spec sheet?
> their latest vrm cheatsheet of b550 even states sic651 to be 55a rated.



My best guess would be that there has been some error in the communication from engineering to marketing. Happens very frequently at all vendors.


----------



## Nighthog

MSI reveal of B550 motherboards:






Starts around 6min mark. 

@ 2hours pricing and features per board:

MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI *219$/249€* 12+2 IR 60A 6-Layer
MPG B550 GAMING EDGE WIFI *189$/209€* 10+2 Intersil 60A 6-Layer
MPG B550I GAMING EDGE WIFI *199$/219€* 6+2 Vishay Dr.MOS 60A 8-Layer
MPG B550 GAMING PLUS *149$/169€*
MAG B550 TOMAHAWK *179$/199€* 10+2 Intersil 60A 6-Layer
MAG B550M MORTAR WIFI *169$/189€* 8+2 Intersil 60A 4-Layer
MAG B550M MORTAR *159$/179€* 8+2 Intersil 60A 4-Layer
MAG B550M BAZOOKA *139$/155€*
B550-A PRO *139$/155€* 10+2 [1x1+2x2] Mosfets 4-Layer
B550M PRO-VDH WIFI *129$/139€*
B550M PRO-DASH *119$/129€*

MPG X570 TOMAHAWK WIFI *209$/229€* 12+2 Intersil 60A 6-Layer

All have 2oz copper pcb for gen4 PCIE requirements. 
BIOS flash buttons on all.


----------



## LiquidHaus

As an X570 Aorus Xtreme owner, I can't help but chuckle while shaking my head. That B550 Aorus Master will be a very nice board for the price. 

Guess I'll have to hold on to this board until it's not worth anything anymore. Especially because now whatever kind of resale value it had is gone.


----------



## Nighthog

Gigabyte has announced prices!

Cheatsheet from GBT_Brian

B550 AORUS Master *279.00$* 14+2 TDA21472 70A 6-Layers
B550 AORUS PRO AC *189.00$* 12+2 SiC651 55A 6-Layers 
B550 AORUS PRO *179.00$* 12+2 SiC651 55A 6-Layers
B550 AORUS ELITE *159.00$* 12+2 SiC651 55A 4-Layers
B550 GAMING X *139.00$* 10+3 PPAk [1x1] 4-Layers
B550M AORUS PRO *129.00$* 10+3 PPak [1x1] 4-Layers
B550M AORUS ELITE *109.00$* 5+3 PPak [1x2] 4-Layers
B550M GAMING *99.00$* 5+3 PPak [1x2] 4-Layers
B550M DS3H *94.00$* 5+3 PPak [1x2] 4-Layers
B550I AORUS PRO AX *179.00$* 6+2 Intersil Dr.MOS 90A 8-Layer
B550 VISION D *259.99$* 12+2 SiC651 55A 6-Layer


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.digikey.cn/products/zh/integrated-circuits-ics/pmic-full-half-bridge-drivers/746?v=742

sic652 55a
sic651 50a


um....


----------



## Nighthog

asdkj1740 said:


> https://www.digikey.cn/products/zh/integrated-circuits-ics/pmic-full-half-bridge-drivers/746?v=742
> 
> sic652 55a
> sic651 50a
> 
> 
> um....


Well not like it's unusual they get the part numbers and specifications for them wrong. Question becomes is the part number wrong or the Amperage rating. 
They should be around the corner soon enough for release.


----------



## Heuchler

LiquidHaus said:


> As an X570 Aorus Xtreme owner, I can't help but chuckle while shaking my head. That B550 Aorus Master will be a very nice board for the price.
> 
> Guess I'll have to hold on to this board until it's not worth anything anymore. Especially because now whatever kind of resale value it had is gone.



only X570 AORUS Master owners will laugh at this


----------



## Nighthog

Seems the release date is June 16th for B550.

ASUS have preliminary listing on sites for sale on that day on their boards now, but no prices though. 

These boards are listed for release 2020-06-16:
ASUS ROG STRIX B550-E GAMING
ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING (WI-FI)
ASUS ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING
ASUS TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS (WI-FI)
ASUS TUF GAMING B550M-PLUS
ASUS PRIME B550M-A (WI-FI)
ASUS PRIME B550M-A
ASUS PRIME B550M-K


----------



## asdkj1740

MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI
12+2, IR35201 (6+2), 12*TDA21462 60A=720A, 6*IR3599 DOUBLER

MPG B550 GAMING EDGE WIFI
10+2, RAA229004 (5+2)?, 10*ISL99360 60A=600A, PARALLEL/TEAMED

MPG B550 GAMING PLUS
10+2, IR35201 (5+2), 10*(1H+1L)(4C029+4C024), 5*IR3598 DOUBLER

MPG B550I GAMING EDGE WIFI
8+2, MPS MP2855 (?), 8*MP86936 (60A?****)=480A, PARALLEL/TEAMED(NO DOUBLER)
(google said MP86936 is 70a)

MAG B550 TOMAHAWK
10+2, RAA229004 (5+2)?, 10*ISL99360 60A=600A, PARALLEL/TEAMED

MAG B550M MORTAR (WIFI)
8+2, RAA229004 (4+2)?, 8*ISL99360 60A=480A, PARALLEL/TEAMED

MAG B550M BAZOOKA 
4+2, RT8894 (4+2), 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024), DIRECT 4 PHASES///PARALLEL 8 WITH 4 CHOKES ONLY

B550-A PRO
10+2, IR35201 (4+2), 10*(1H+1L)(4C029+4C024), 5*IR3598 DOUBLER

B550M PRO-VDH WIFI 
4+2, RT8894 (4+2), 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024), DIRECT 4 PHASES///PARALLEL 8 WITH 4 CHOKES ONLY

B550M PRO-DASH
4+2, RT8894 (4+2), 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024), DIRECT 4 PHASES///PARALLEL 8 WITH 4 CHOKES ONLY

source: toppc from msi



XEX B550 XXXXX
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
would be arrived in june/july



btw i have seen ppl saying RAA229004 or RAA229001 to be X+Y=7 which should be wrong.




combined with NIGHTHOG DATA
MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI 219$/249€ 12+2 TDA21462 60A 6-Layer
MPG B550 GAMING EDGE WIFI 189$/209€ 10+2 ISL99360 60A 6-Layer
MPG B550I GAMING EDGE WIFI 199$/219€ 8+2 (MP86936??) 60A 8-Layer
MPG B550 GAMING PLUS 149$/169€ 10+2 10*(1H+1L)(4C029+4C024)
MAG B550 TOMAHAWK 179$/199€ 10+2 ISL99360 60A 6-Layer
MAG B550M MORTAR WIFI 169$/189€ 8+2 ISL99360 60A 4-Layer
MAG B550M MORTAR 159$/179€ 8+2 ISL99360 60A 4-Layer
MAG B550M BAZOOKA 139$/155€ 4+2 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024)
B550-A PRO 139$/155€ 10+2 [1x1+2x2] Mosfets 10*(1H+1L)(4C029+4C024) 4-Layer
B550M PRO-VDH WIFI 129$/139€ 4+2 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024)
B550M PRO-DASH 119$/129€ 4+2 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024)


----------



## Nighthog

asdkj1740 said:


> btw why NIGHTHOG said the itx mosfets are from vishay? any source?


It was the B550 MSI video, Though they might have only mentioned Dr.MOS just drew a conclusion it was Vishay, but I'm aware there are Intersil Dr.MOS as well but more than that I know not who makes "Dr.MOS". They are the usual suspects for these boards overall. If there is another manufacturer my guess was then wrong.

As you have a better source as "toppc" from MSI should be I'll go with that information and add it into the list.

It's good you had the parts numbers there. Was missing and found no source yet for it.


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> It was the B550 MSI video, Though they might have only mentioned Dr.MOS just drew a conclusion it was Vishay, but I'm aware there are Intersil Dr.MOS as well but more than that I know not who makes "Dr.MOS". They are the usual suspects for these boards overall. If there is another manufacturer my guess was then wrong.
> 
> As you have a better source as "toppc" from MSI should be I'll go with that information and add it into the list.
> 
> It's good you had the parts numbers there. Was missing and found no source yet for it.


oic i didnt go throught the whole livestream.

the info of the mps stuffs on itx edge cant be found online. thats the part i am confused. and it is not listed as MPXXXX model in the source, i just tried to find the most likely ones, although it is explicilty stated to be MPS stuffs.
we shall wait and see the actual unbox/reviews later to verify them in case there are some typo.


----------



## Nighthog

asdkj1740 said:


> oic i didnt go throught the whole livestream.
> 
> the info of the mps stuffs on itx edge cant be found online. thats the part i am confused. and it is not listed as MPXXXX model in the source, i just tried to find the most likely ones, although it is explicilty stated to be MPS stuffs.
> we shall wait and see the actual unbox/reviews later to verify them in case there are some typo.


The Livestream was a mess to go through, only at the 2hour mark was more comprehensive information presented I wanted from it where they mentioned actual specs to a degree.

About RAA229004. It this a Intersil part? Gigabyte uses ISL229004 and they are 5+3 controllers (8-phases total) going through their data.

EDIT: RAA = RENESAS?


----------



## asdkj1740

btw the mortar and tomhawk got upgraded from discret mofets to drmos/sps.
however the BAZOOKA stays unchanged, i was hoping it at least to be upgraded to 5*(2H+2L) just like gaming plus without doublers and ir controller.
the b450m bazooka plus is great.



Nighthog said:


> The Livestream was a mess to go through, only at the 2hour mark was more comprehensive information presented I wanted from it where they mentioned actual specs to a degree.
> 
> About RAA229004. It this a Intersil part? Gigabyte uses ISL229004 and they are 5+3 controllers (8-phases total) going through their data.
> 
> EDIT: RAA = RENESAS?


they even didnt post the price chart just like what they shown at z490 livestream, i was waiting that for a hour and i gave up lol. 

yes RAA = RENESAS

RENESAS bought intersil.
"RAA" should be renesas stuffs, intersil with "isl".

some controllers (X+Y) can be rearragned between vcore and vccgt/soc, some cant or it needs to be custom made for mobo manufactures.


----------



## Nighthog

Biostar uses Intersil parts on their B550 boards. Both have the same Dr.MOS design with doublers used for SoC side.

B550GTA 10-phase[6+4] | ISL99360?, PWM: ISL229004
B550GTQ 10-phase[6+4] | ISL99360?, PWM: ISL229004

You find the parts on the product page photos, though a little hard to read but with a little effort you figure it out. 
I figured it was the ISL993*?*0.

https://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=985 (best pictures)


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> Biostar uses Intersil parts on their B550 boards. Both have the same Dr.MOS design with doublers used for SoC side.
> 
> B550GTA 10-phase[6+4] | ISL99360?, PWM: ISL229004
> B550GTQ 10-phase[6+4] | ISL99360?, PWM: ISL229004
> 
> You find the parts on the product page photos, though a little hard to read but with a little effort you figure it out.
> I figured it was the ISL993*?*0.
> 
> https://www.biostar.com.tw/app/en/mb/introduction.php?S_ID=985 (best pictures)


check the pm please


----------



## mojolou

asdkj1740 said:


> MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI
> 12+2, IR35201 (6+2), 12*TDA21462 60A=720A, 6*IR3599 DOUBLER
> 
> MPG B550 GAMING EDGE WIFI
> 10+2, RAA229004 (5+2)?, 10*ISL99360 60A=600A, PARALLEL/TEAMED
> 
> MPG B550 GAMING PLUS
> 10+2, IR35201 (5+2), 10*(1H+1L)(4C029+4C024), 5*IR3598 DOUBLER
> 
> MPG B550I GAMING EDGE WIFI
> 8+2, MPS MP2855 (?), 8*MP86936 (60A?****)=480A, PARALLEL/TEAMED(NO DOUBLER)
> (google said MP86936 is 70a)
> 
> MAG B550 TOMAHAWK
> 10+2, RAA229004 (5+2)?, 10*ISL99360 60A=600A, PARALLEL/TEAMED
> 
> MAG B550M MORTAR (WIFI)
> 8+2, RAA229004 (4+2)?, 8*ISL99360 60A=480A, PARALLEL/TEAMED
> 
> MAG B550M BAZOOKA
> 4+2, RT8894 (4+2), 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024), DIRECT 4 PHASES///PARALLEL 8 WITH 4 CHOKES ONLY
> 
> B550-A PRO
> 10+2, IR35201 (4+2), 10*(1H+1L)(4C029+4C024), 5*IR3598 DOUBLER
> 
> B550M PRO-VDH WIFI
> 4+2, RT8894 (4+2), 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024), DIRECT 4 PHASES///PARALLEL 8 WITH 4 CHOKES ONLY
> 
> B550M PRO-DASH
> 4+2, RT8894 (4+2), 4*(2H+2L)(4C029+4C024), DIRECT 4 PHASES///PARALLEL 8 WITH 4 CHOKES ONLY
> 
> source: toppc from msi


Update: MPG B550I GAMING EDGE WIFI is direct 8 phase for Vcore. SOC 2 phase teamed.
MOSFET MP86936 is rated 60A


----------



## Nighthog

mojolou said:


> Update: MPG B550I GAMING EDGE WIFI is direct 8 phase for Vcore. SOC 2 phase teamed.
> MOSFET MP86936 is rated 60A


Is the controller 9-phase then or they used a separate one for SoC?


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.kitguru.net/components/...b550-f-gaming-wifi-motherboard-reviews/all/1/
b550 rog strix e & rog strix f

B550m tuf wifi





biostar b550gta, isl99390 90a.......................
https://news.xfastest.com/review/review-03/81718/biostar-racing-b550gtq-review/

taichi
https://news.xfastest.com/review/review-03/81715/asrock-b550-taichi/


----------



## Nighthog

A little different from earlier conjecture on the ASUS, never thought *MPS* would be used. They are not the same as the MSI used on the ITX board.

Better than expected on the Biostar going with 90A versions and specs say 10K caps but the board came with 5K caps?


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> A little different from earlier conjecture on the ASUS, never thought *MPS* would be used. They are not the same as the MSI used on the ITX board.
> 
> Better than expected on the Biostar going with 90A versions and specs say 10K caps but the board came with 5K caps?


taiwanese 5k only, biostar lists 10k on z490 too, but they are 5k actually.

maybe asp2006 is from mps


----------



## AlphaC

Launch day B550 post:





Aorus Master = 59°C with OC 3900X @ 1.4V , no airflow
Tomahawk = 67°C with OC 3900X @ 1.4V, no airflow
Aorus Pro = 69°C with OC 3900X @ 1.4V, no airflow
Mortar (mATX) = 80°C with OC 3900X @ 1.4V, no airflow


ASROCK

B550 Taichi = ~69.5°C with OC 3950X (287W output power per Corsair Link) http://blog.livedoor.jp/wisteriear/archives/1077595601.html
^ seems Taichi is let down by its heatsinks somewhat , it's more in line with a midtier B550 from ASUS/Gigabyte/MSI in terms of temps
B550 Taichi teardown at xfastest shows 50A Dr.MOS SiC654 (https://news.xfastest.com/review/review-03/81715/asrock-b550-taichi/)

B550 Steel Legend shows RAA229004 PWM from Renesas: https://www.gdm.or.jp/review/2020/0616/351421/2
---> on page 9 there is a test with CB R20 pushing ~200W using a closed loop liquid cooler and it reached 55°C (board temp) with the 3700X https://www.gdm.or.jp/review/2020/0616/351421/9

ASUS
https://www.kitguru.net/components/...ifi-motherboard-reviews/8/?PageSpeed=noscript
STRIX B550-E = 62°C with 272W system power OC 3950X
STRIX B550-F = 61°C with 271W system power OC 3950X 

STRIX B550-E = 58°C with OC 3900X (https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews...trix_b550-f_gaming_wifi_and_strix-e_review/19)

STRIX B550-F = 62°C with 225W power OC 3900X (https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-rog-strix-b550-f-gaming-wifi/15.html)
STRIX B550-F = no sensor (https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews...trix_b550-f_gaming_wifi_and_strix-e_review/19)

TUF B550M PLUS (mATX) = no sensor https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/asus_tuf_b550m-plus_wifi_review/15

 Gigabyte

Aorus Master = 54°C with OC 3950X (258W System power): https://www.kitguru.net/components/...ster-motherboard-review/8/?PageSpeed=noscript
Aorus Master = 48°C with OC 3900X https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gigabyte-b550-aorus-master/4
Aorus Master = 50°C with OC 3900X https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_b550_aorus_master_review/19
Aorus Master = 61°C with OC 3900X @ 4.35GHz in blender https://www.quasarzone.com/bbs/qc_qsz/views/432397

Aorus Pro (RAA 229004 PWM , SIC651 50A power stages) = 57°C with 3900X OC to 223W load power https://www.techpowerup.com/review/gigabyte-b550-aorus-pro/4.html
Aorus Pro = 50°C with 3900X OC https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_b550_aorus_pro_review/17

B550I Aorus Pro (ITX) = 62°C with 3900X OC to 215W load power https://www.techpowerup.com/review/gigabyte-b550i-aorus-pro-ax/15.html

B550I Aorus Pro (ITX) = 55°C with 3900X OC (https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/gigabyte_b550i_aorus_pro_ax_itx_review/16)

MSI 

https://www.unikoshardware.com/2020/06/msi-mag-b550-tomahawk-review.html
^ B550 Tomahawk uses Renesas RAA229004GNP PWM and 10x of the ISL993601C "DrMos" , using a 3700X the board temp is below 40°C (no surprise)
B550 Tomahawk = 48°C with 3900X OC (https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/msi_mag_b550_tomahawk_review/16)

B550M Mortar = 49°C with 3900X OC (https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/msi_mag_b550m_mortar_review/17)


----------



## asdkj1740

what a joke about z490 steel legend.........


anyways

msi b450m mortar 4*(2H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550m mortar 8*drmos (60a) with 8 chokes

msi b450 tomahawk 4*(2H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 tomahawk 10*drmos (60a) with 10 chokes

msi b450 gaming pro carbon 8*(1H+1L) with 8 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 gaming pro carbon 12*drmos (60A) with 12 chokes

msi b450 a pro 4*(2H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 a pro 10*(1H+1L) with 10 chokes and 5 doublers (10 drivers built in)

no msi b450 gaming edge wifi-->b550 gaming edge wifi 10*drmos 60a with 10 chokes





asus b450m tuf plus 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550m tuf plus 8*drmos (50a) with 8 chokes

asus b450m tuf pro 8*(1H+1L) with 8 chokes and 4 drivers-->no b550m tuf pro

asus b450 tuf plus 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 tuf plus 8*drmos (50a) with 8 chokes

asus b450 tuf pro 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->no b550 tuf pro

asus b450 rog strix e 8*(1H+1L) with 8 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 rog strix e 14*drmos (60a?) with 14 chokes

asus b450 rog strix f 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 rog strix f 12*drmos (50A) with 12 chokes

asus b450 prime plus 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 prime plus 8*(1H+2L?) with 8 chokes





asrock b450m steel legend 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550m steel legend 8*drmos (50a) with 8 chokes

asrock b450 steel legend 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 steel legend 12*drmos (50a) with 12 chokes

asrock b450m pro4 6*(1H+1L) with 6 chokes and 3 drivers-->b550m pro4 8*(1H+1L)? with 8 chokes and 4 drivers?

asrock b450 pro4 6*(1H+1L) with 6 chokes and 3 drivers-->b550 pro4 8*(1H+1L)? with 8 chokes and 4 drivers?





gigabyte b450m aorus elite 4*(2H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550m aorus elite 5*(1H+2L) with 5 chokes and 5 drivers

gigabyte b450 aorus elite 4*(1H+2L) with 8 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 aorus elite 12*drmos (50a) with 12 chokes

gigabyte b450 aorus pro 4*(1H+2L) with 8 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 aorus pro 12*drmos (50a) with 12 chokes

gigabyte b450 aorus pro wifi 4*(1H+2L) with 8 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550 aorus pro ac 12*drmos (50a) with 12 chokes

no gigabyte b450m aorus pro-->b550m aorus pro 10*(1H+1L) with 10 chokes and 5 doublers and 10 drivers

gigabyte b450m gaming 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550m gaming 5*(1H+2L) with 5 chokes and 5 drivers

gigabyte b450m ds3h 4*(1H+2L) with 4 chokes and 4 drivers-->b550m ds3h 5*(1H+2L) with 5 chokes and 5 drivers





biostar b450gt (matx) 8*(1H+1L)? with 8 chokes and 4 drivers?-->b550gta (matx) 6*drmos (90A) and 6 chokes





upgraded from discret mosfets to drmos, in matx

msi mortar, asus tuf plus, asrock steel legend, biostar gta, NO GIGABYTE



upgraded from discret mosfets to drmos, in atx

msi tomahawk, msi gaming pro carbon, asus tuf plus, asus rog strix e, asus rog strix f, asrock steel legend, gigabyte aorus elite, gigabyte aorus pro


matx tends to be cheaper than atx-->the most competitive models: 
mortar VS tuf plus VS steel legend VS biostar gta VS gigabyte aorus pro (still using discret mosfets) VS gigabyte aorus elite (still using discret mosfets)

tier1 b450matx fight: mortar 4*(2H+2L) // tuf pro 8*(1H+1L) // aorus elite 4*(2H+2L)
tier1 b550matx fight: mortar 8*drmos 60a // tuf plus 8*drmos 50a // steel legend 8*drmos 50a // GTA 6*drmos 90A // aorus pro 10*(1H+1L) (tier 2?)




very dissapointed to the vrm of gigabyte b550m aorus elite. cant even treat this (5*1H+2L) as an upgrade over b450m aorus elite (4*2H+2L). but rather a little boost over b450 aorus elite atx (4*1H+2L).
not to mention the vrm heatsink on b550m aorus elite is probably worse than that on b450m aorus elite.
b550m aorus elite should never be existed and the current b550m aorus pro should be renamed as elite.
asus msi asrock biostar upgrade their matx models a lot.
there is only one way out for gigabyte-->to release b550m aorus ultra 10*50a drmos or even 10*60a drmos


----------



## Nighthog

A list someone is updating with data not seen elsewhere:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PuUWroxA0HvSSipsXlB8hnYkshxD8LdeO5EA6WLdOQw/edit#gid=0

In particular the Asus PRIME boards, they are mentioned to have SiRA14DP/SiRA12 parts.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.pctestbench.com/asus-rog-strix-b550-i-gaming-am4-motherboard-review/3/
ASP1106 SiC639


----------



## Nighthog

I'm generally happy with the upgrades we are receiving on these boards to parts neglected if one wanted to consider budget overclocking. Even memory OC is quite decent on most boards rather than what happened with earlier boards other than a few outliers. 
Took a while to get here but I can't see people complain about the features given.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.coolpc.com.tw/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=269978&sid=fb79fe7692128d9e3af84a2cbeca12fa
PRIME B550M-A(Wi-Fi)


----------



## Tryas90

*GIGABYTE B550 AORUS ELITE vs GIGABYTE B550M AORUS PRO*

Hello everyone,

I am new to this forum and this is my first message.

I would like to ask you for your opinion on these two Gigabyte boards: GIGABYTE B550 AORUS ELITE vs GIGABYTE B550M AORUS PRO

- The prices for these two boards in my country are : B550M pro 120€, B550 Elite 144€.

- Originally, my budget was 100€. So with either boards I am above my budget.

- I do not care about USB Type-C, nor do I care about 2.5Gbit ethernet.
- Both boards have Realtek 1200 sound chip.

- VRM wise: 
1. B550M Pro has 10 Vcore phases (configuration looks like to be Mosfets: OnSemi 1H : 4C06 / 1L : 4C10N, Controller: Renesas RAA 229004 5+3, doubler: ISL6617A) 

2. B550 Elite has 12 Vcore phases (configuration_ Mosfets: Vishay SiC651C 50A, Controller: Renesas RAA 229004 (6+2), Doubler: ISL6617A)

My goal is to get the best board for the least amount of money.

My questions are:
1. Is B550M Pro sufficient for running 3950X (without manual OC, just PBO and similar boosting tech) ?
2. According to the specs it looks like that the difference between these two boards (from the VRM perspective), is just in different mosfets and two more phases (one doubled phase). Is the price premium for Elite justified by these better mosfets ?
3. In future I would like to use Zen 3 CPU (4950X?), Which of these two boards would be more future proof?

Thank you


----------



## Nighthog

Tryas90 said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I am new to this forum and this is my first message.
> 
> I would like to ask you for your opinion on these two Gigabyte boards: GIGABYTE B550 AORUS ELITE vs GIGABYTE B550M AORUS PRO
> 
> - The prices for these two boards in my country are : B550M pro 120€, B550 Elite 144€.
> 
> - Originally, my budget was 100€. So with either boards I am above my budget.
> 
> - I do not care about USB Type-C, nor do I care about 2.5Gbit ethernet.
> - Both boards have Realtek 1200 sound chip.
> 
> - VRM wise:
> 1. B550M Pro has 10 Vcore phases (configuration looks like to be Mosfets: OnSemi 1H : 4C06 / 1L : 4C10N, Controller: Renesas RAA 229004 5+3, doubler: ISL6617A)
> 
> 2. B550 Elite has 12 Vcore phases (configuration_ Mosfets: Vishay SiC651C 50A, Controller: Renesas RAA 229004 (6+2), Doubler: ISL6617A)
> 
> My goal is to get the best board for the least amount of money.
> 
> My questions are:
> 1. Is B550M Pro sufficient for running 3950X (without manual OC, just PBO and similar boosting tech) ?
> 2. According to the specs it looks like that the difference between these two boards (from the VRM perspective), is just in different mosfets and two more phases (one doubled phase). Is the price premium for Elite justified by these better mosfets ?
> 3. In future I would like to use Zen 3 CPU (4950X?), Which of these two boards would be more future proof?
> 
> Thank you


The VRM on the B550M Pro will get hot with a 3950X if running outside stock configuration in a simple look. We have seen other boards with discrete mosfets struggle to maintain good temperatures or not to overheat in a OC configuration. 
The parts aren't just good enough in comparison to others like the SiC651 50A.

So the B550 Elite is considerably better matched for a 3950X. You have to consider if the higher price is justified or if you want to OC at all on the B550M Pro board which could be done but will be much harder to do, you will need a VRM fan I would guess. 
Running stock any board should do within reason. It's the PBO & OC settings that have more requirements. Though you could limit your PBO settings to be managble even on a B550M Pro VRM, just won't get the same headroom to play around.

I used a B350 board with 4+3 4C06/4C10N [1x2] combination, the B550 10+3 [1x1] isn't really that much better but make it marginally more acceptable to handle. You will need a fan on the VRM if you want to OC non the less. It's a hassle to do.


----------



## Tryas90

Really appreciate your answer.

So on stock settings B550M pro should be OK, but any tuning would make it hot. The cpu cooler I will be using is be quiet Dark Rock Pro 4, where the middle fan is positioned little below the heatsink so it should provide some air for VRM heatsink but I suppose that it will not be enough. It looks like that the Elite is more robust and it will have more headroom in case of experimenting with OC. B550 Elite has the same VRM like B550 Pro AC, which according to the HUB video runs pretty cool even with 3900X OCed. But Pro AC has better heatsink, so it will be interesting how this different heatsink on Elite will handle heat output of the VRM.

Thank you, I hope there will be some more reviews


----------



## Nighthog

When I mean a VRM FAN, I mean a literal FAN attached directly to the VRM heatsinks, not in close proximity like a CPU cooler, a separate fan on the VRM only there to cool the VRM, older AMD 50-60mm sized fan's are decent enough to cool if you place them right above.

I used such a solution on my older B350 with 4+3 4C06/4C10N [1x2] parts when OC:ing my Ryzen 1700 to ~4.0Ghz. You could reach 100C+ on VRM with ease if pushing Prime95 smallFFT. You want that FAN on there. Stock there isn't a issue. OC with 140W is a issue. 
And a 3950X can pull close to 200watts if pushed to the limits, but maybe normal usage is 160-180 maximum for most people... You see it's not enough. It's not designed for that high wattage/current. 

3950X has a 142watt limit in stock configuration. It's barely able to manage that in passive mode I would guess, it will get hot 10+3 4C06/4C10N [1x1].


----------



## Tryas90

Thank you for your answer,

Yes I understand what you mean by additional Fan for VRM heatsink. I just said that this big CPU cooler I have can provide some airflow, but that airflow is insufficient. I think that underneath my CPU cooler there is no room for additional VRM Fan. I will wait for reviews and then decide. 

How efficient was your setup with that Fan over VRM heatsink ? Was temperature drop significant ?


----------



## Nighthog

Tryas90 said:


> Thank you for your answer,
> 
> Yes I understand what you mean by additional Fan for VRM heatsink. I just said that this big CPU cooler I have can provide some airflow, but that airflow is insufficient. I think that underneath my CPU cooler there is no room for additional VRM Fan. I will wait for reviews and then decide.
> 
> How efficient was your setup with that Fan over VRM heatsink ? Was temperature drop significant ?


I would not have been able to OC my Ryzen 1700 on that board at all without it. Maybe something 3.8-3.9Ghz would have worked with a low voltage. I just wanted 4.0Ghz and pushed my voltage to ridiculous on that board. It's not meant to push more than 100-120Watts generally.

The 10+3 4C06/4C10N [1x1] I would rate 110-140Watts in comparison. With regard to the bigger heatsinks. In general it would be easier to keep in check.


----------



## Nighthog

I would like to compare the *B550M Pro* to the *X570 GAMING X 12-phase[10+2]*






This video should be good enough, the "better" X570 of same components, reached 86C with a 3900X for VRM.


----------



## Tryas90

Thank you for your tips. 

It looks like I am going with Elite, hope it will last long.


----------



## chitos123

B550 Support 

1700,2700x,2400G,3400G !



https://www.chiphell.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2232160


----------



## Nighthog

They can boot but you can't change anything in BIOS with the unsupported processors. At least on the ASRock board with that BIOS version.
This will be pretty much up to the board makers if they will allow it or not, Just "unsupported" but might work or not. 

X570 as far as I know could boot with Ryzen 1000 series even if not explicitly supported. Depended on the AGESA version if they could do it.


----------



## Nighthog

Some 320A boards, to bad he never takes a good picture of the parts, all a blur.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.asus.com.cn/Motherboards/TUF-GAMING-B450M-PRO-S/overview/
new b450m from asus

upgrades over b450m pro gaming
1. m.2 heatsink for the pcie2.0x4 m.2 slot only, but not the pcie3.0x4 directly from cpu.
2. more USB on back i/o
3. realtek 8125B 2.5g lan
4. 8 drmos power stages (H+L+D) instead of 4 power stages (8H+8L+4drivers only)
5. 2oz copper for better pcb cooling of mosfets
6. one more fan headers, total 4 headers (2 is suck, 3 is minimum, 4 is average)
7. bios flashback button 
8. 10a solid pin (procool I with no metal shroud)
9. 32mb bios

==>probably the strongest vrm on b450
this heatsink is proved to be good enough even handling 300w on tuf z490 on greentechreview


"downgrade"
m.2 pcie3.0x2-->pcie2.0x4, however same pcie2.0x4 between chipset and cpus

and still no 5v argb 3pin header


----------



## dansi

Strangely why are they still making b450? Excess of chips. Pcie4 validation is more expensive than thought?


----------



## asdkj1740

dansi said:


> Strangely why are they still making b450? Excess of chips. Pcie4 validation is more expensive than thought?


because b450 chipset is still on going. amd hasn't stop providing b450 chipset yet. 
gen4 requires lots of things like good pcb material (mid/low loss grade), gen4 slots of pcie and m.2, switches/redrivers/clock generator etc.


----------



## edd60

Hello everyone,

Almost new to overclock, I'm basically upgrading from a i5 4570 to ryzen 5 3600 or probably waiting for ryzen 5 4600.
I'm in search of a good bang for buck MATX motherboard. I'm not too into manually overclocking I think I'll do just PBO.
What would be the best board between price, quality and performance for a ryzen 5 4600/3600.

PS. I've watched some reviews and one that catched my attention was from bulldzoid choosing the b550m aorus pro as best bang for buck.

Thanks for your help!


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-2242021-1-1.html
tuf b450m pro s


----------



## asdkj1740

edd60 said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> Almost new to overclock, I'm basically upgrading from a i5 4570 to ryzen 5 3600 or probably waiting for ryzen 5 4600.
> I'm in search of a good bang for buck MATX motherboard. I'm not too into manually overclocking I think I'll do just PBO.
> What would be the best board between price, quality and performance for a ryzen 5 4600/3600.
> 
> PS. I've watched some reviews and one that catched my attention was from bulldzoid choosing the b550m aorus pro as best bang for buck.
> 
> Thanks for your help!



some b550m vrm temp comparision, tested by thermocouple, with watercooled 3700x 1.6v 140w, on open test bench, no airflow
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1mD4y1S7yy?from=search&seid=11004534119356521408

biostar gta 6*90a sps, mosfet 72c; heatsink 67c

Asus tuf 8*50a drmos, mosfet 47c; heatsink 46c

msi mortar 8*60a sps, mosfet 42c; heatsink 42c

asrock steel legend 8*50a, mosfet 62c; heatsink 57c

gigabyte aorus pro 10*(1H+1L); mosfet 63c; heatsink 64c



for 6c12t I think lots of b550m are capable to handle it.
not sure the prices in your country, so make your own choice.


----------



## eymerich56

Interested in the ASrock B550 Steel legend, but it seems the B550 MAG Tomahawk is far better...?


----------



## asdkj1740

a review seriously complains about b550m aorus elite, despite it is on sales at ~$86usd from msrp $109usd on china.
https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1E54y1S7yB
gigabyte b550m aorus elite
vcore vrm 5*1H+2L
however, there are 5 low side mosfets on the back pcb without any heatsink, same thing what gigabyte did on x570 gamingx.

other shortcomings:

1*usb 9pin internal header only, instead of 2 on b450m elite.

any gpu thicker than 2 slots will take some space over the bottom pcie x16 slot, namely this mobo support no other pcie device/card when >2 slots gpu is installed. 
good thing is then supporting 22110 m.2 and that m.2 avoids hot exhaust air from gpu and no height limitation of m.2 heatsink.

the second m.2 slot is pcie3.0x2 only instead of x4, same as b450m elite.
but it should still be faster because of the pcie3.0x4 between b550 chipset and cpu, rather than pcie2.0x4 between b450 chipset and cpu. 

3 fan headers only instead of 4 on b450m elite.

poor sata headers placement just like b450m gaming, worse than b450m elite.
have to use L shape sata header cable for headers under 2 slots gpu. 
sadly there is only 1 L shape sata header cable included in the box, another included one is with both side vertical headers. 

wired bios flashback button location on the pcb rather than on the i/o side.

vrm temp of the back low side mosfets, 
118c and black screen eventually @ 3900x 1.4v 4.4ghz fpu ; 
109c @ 3800x 1.4v 4.4ghz fpu 145w ; 
105c for stock 3900x @ 3.95ghz only.
(room temp 25c, aio cooling, open test bench)
=>140w seems to be the max "safe" level before black screen/reboot/drop frequency on this mobo.





eymerich56 said:


> Interested in the ASrock B550 Steel legend, but it seems the B550 MAG Tomahawk is far better...?


what cpu are you going to use


----------



## eymerich56

asdkj1740 said:


> what cpu are you going to use



Ryzen 3300x or 3600


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/ROG-STRIX-B550-A-GAMING/
strix b550 a is officially launched




eymerich56 said:


> Ryzen 3300x or 3600


both are good enough to handle these two cpus.
btw please note that the steel legend second m.2 is pcie3.0x2 only instead of x4.
i would choose tomahawk if the prices are close.


----------



## asdkj1740

https://www.monolithicpower.com/en/...et/lang/en/sku/MP86992-C787/document_id/8166/
MP86992 70A


----------



## Nighthog

Seems I can no longer EDIT the main page since the site upgrade...

New MSI motherboard is MAG B550 TORPEDO, seems like a cut down version of Tomahawk.


----------



## asdkj1740

Nighthog said:


> Seems I can no longer EDIT the main page since the site upgrade...
> 
> New MSI motherboard is MAG B550 TORPEDO, seems like a cut down version of Tomahawk.


nice to have you back again. your duty has not yet finished





TUF GAMING B450M-PRO II｜Motherboards｜ASUS Global


TUF Gaming series distills essential elements of the latest AMD and Intel® platforms, and combines them with game-ready features and proven durability. Engineered with military-grade components, an upgraded power solution and a comprehensive set of cooling options, this motherboard delivers...




www.asus.com


----------



## Nighthog

Seems someone fixed the edit issue at some point.

Could start updating again.

Either way I only added more Gigabyte for now and it looks like they have decided to forego the doublers on their boards and do direct "twin design" that the other board partners have done earlier. 
Seems the doublers did nothing and only added cost at this point in time when using the DrMOS components. 
They are refereed to V2 in their line-up. 

They updated some B450, A320 & B550 motherboards in general what looks like cost cutting measures on the VRM otherwise if not doing V2 boards.
Like changing the VRM from older 4+3 [1x2+1x1] to a new 4+2 [1x2+2x2] design.
I'm not sure what is the controller used on the new 6-phase boards on the older chipset.


----------



## Nighthog

ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero






ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero | ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


AMD Ryzen 3000 series ATX motherboard with Aura Sync, SupremeFX, ROG Audio, Dual M.2, Realtek LAN, Wifi , M.2 heatsink and USB 3.2 Gen 2



www.asus.com





14+2 TI power stages rated for 90A, passive chipset heatsink.

Otherwise ASUS has done some updates on their older B450 motherboards and released several *II* versions. 








ROG STRIX B450-F GAMING II | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ROG Strix B450-F Gaming II ATX motherboard features a robust power delivery, optimal cooling controls, AI Noise-Canceling Microphone, AI Networking and cyberpunk-inspired aesthetics.



www.asus.com









TUF GAMING B450M-PLUS II｜Motherboards｜ASUS Global


TUF Gaming series distills essential elements of the latest AMD and Intel® platforms, and combines them with game-ready features and proven durability. Engineered with military-grade components, an upgraded power solution and a comprehensive set of cooling options, this motherboard delivers...




www.asus.com


----------



## rares495

That Dark Hero is the most pointless upgrade possible.


----------



## Nighthog

rares495 said:


> That Dark Hero is the most pointless upgrade possible.


To be honest I would have probably bought this version if if was available at launch rather then the expensive Aorus Xtreme. 
I really didn't want any fans on the motherboard.


----------



## rares495

Nighthog said:


> To be honest I would have probably bought this version if if was available at launch rather then the expensive Aorus Xtreme.
> I really didn't want any fans on the motherboard.


Yeah, true, it's better than the regular Hero, but it's not much of an upgrade for people who already own a Hero or better.


----------



## Nighthog

ROG STRIX B550-XE GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ROG Strix B550-XE Gaming ATX motherboard is PCIe® 4.0-ready and features a robust power design, comprehensive cooling controls, AI Networking and cyberpunk-inspired looks.



www.asus.com





Another one B550 this time. 14+2 phase something.

With active fan cooling on VRM...


----------



## Nighthog

MSI shows off *B550 Unify* & *B550 Unify-X*









MSI Teases AMD Ryzen 5000 "Zen 3" CPU Ready MEG B550 Unify-X & MEG B550 Unify Motherboards


MSI has unveiled its latest motherboards, the B550 Unify series, which are fully prepped to support AMD's next-gen Ryzen 5000 Desktop CPUs




wccftech.com





14+2 90A on the Unify-X, only 2 dimm-slots for 5800Mhz MEM OC.


----------



## Nighthog

The MSI B550 Unify-X VRM breakdown. Unify regular should have the same features, but with 4 memory slots.











MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi




www.msi.com









MSI MEG B550 UNIFY AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Connect to ultra-fast networks with 2.5G LAN and Wi-Fi AX. Move bulky files faster with USB 3.2 Gen 2. On




www.msi.com





TDA12490 90A & XDPE132G5C 16-phase controller. Infineon parts.


----------



## Nighthog

Biostar B550M-SILVER Ver. 5.x









Best motherboard manufacturers. Biostar provides various high quality motherboard gaming series, including am4 motherboa


Best motherboard manufacturers. Biostar provides various high quality motherboard gaming series, including am4 motherboard amd,



www.biostar.com.tw





6+4 VRM?

Biostar A520MH Ver. 6.1









Best Gaming Motherboards Recommend, Computer Components Manufacturers


Best gaming motherboards recommend - BIOSTAR. Computer components manufacturers provide INTEL AMD sockets, various INTEL motherboards, etc.



www.biostar.com.tw





4+3 VRM.


----------



## Hamy

Hello
I really need advice in choosing a motherboard, I can not decide, please tell me.
There are two options that differ in the element base of the vrm power supply, as far as I can judge from the subtracted, I would like to understand which is better (wifi, in principle, is not needed) Maybe there are some alternative options, but the choice is predominantly from these two based on the data below










GIGABYTE B550 AORUS PRO \ V2 \ AC \ AX
MSI MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI

I would also like to understand which is preferable to Gigabyte B550 Pro or Gigabyte B550 Pro v2


----------



## Nighthog

Hamy said:


> Hello
> I really need advice in choosing a motherboard, I can not decide, please tell me.
> There are two options that differ in the element base of the vrm power supply, as far as I can judge from the subtracted, I would like to understand which is better (wifi, in principle, is not needed) Maybe there are some alternative options, but the choice is predominantly from these two based on the data below
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GIGABYTE B550 AORUS PRO \ V2 \ AC \ AX
> MSI MPG B550 GAMING CARBON WIFI
> 
> I would also like to understand which is preferable to Gigabyte B550 Pro or Gigabyte B550 Pro v2


The gigabyte V2 is a newer version. But otherwise not much different, should perform identical. 

MSI or Gigabyte, just your preference on vendor & features offered if they are similar price. 

Wi-Fi 6 offers Bluetooth in-built, if you have wireless headphones, it can be a useful feature rather than the Wi-Fi directly. But you always add cost with the Wi-Fi versions. Depends on your budget.


----------



## Hamy

Nighthog said:


> The gigabyte V2 is a newer version. But otherwise not much different, should perform identical.
> 
> MSI or Gigabyte, just your preference on vendor & features offered if they are similar price.
> 
> Wi-Fi 6 offers Bluetooth in-built, if you have wireless headphones, it can be a useful feature rather than the Wi-Fi directly. But you always add cost with the Wi-Fi versions. Depends on your budget.


Thank you for answering, if you do not look at wifi modules and the differences in sound cards, what would you personally prefer based on the quality of these motherboards and the features of vrm? (I've always used only motherboards from Gigabyte, I wanted to try something else, but I can't choose and I'm afraid to be disappointed)


----------



## Nighthog

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ltjool

ASUS ProART B550-CREATOR

12+2 VRM twin-design

About a month for release.


----------



## PJVol

Nighthog said:


> Could start updating again


Fix ASRock B550 Extreme4 info. It has *RA229004* PWM controller (6+2), not *ISL69138*
(most likely Steel Legend and Velocita as well )








And power stages info incorrect as well. There are 12 *SiC654* (core 6x2 phases) and 2 *SiC654A* (soc 2 phases), not *SiC634*.


----------



## Nighthog

PJVol said:


> Fix ASRock B550 Extreme4 info. It has *RA229004* PWM controller (6+2), not *ISL69138*
> (most likely Steel Legend and Velocita as well )
> View attachment 2484428
> 
> 
> And power stages info incorrect as well. There are 12 *SiC654* (core 6x2 phases) and 2 *SiC654A* (soc 2 phases), not *SiC634*.


Good that you have new information.

Might it be a cause of they have updated the design since launch? New board revision?
Was some time ago that I added the information for this specific board and can't recall where I had it from first.
Most likely some other boards might have this design also but will wait to update until I find some confirmation that they do.

Thanks for the image!

EDIT: Found another confirmation to your data


----------



## Nighthog

NZXT has made their first AMD AM4 motherboards:

White:








N7 B550 Motherboard | Wireless Gaming Motherboards | NZXT | NZXT


Love your gaming PC | We meticulously design a curated suite of premium products to make extraordinary gaming experiences achievable and fun.



www.nzxt.com




Black:








N7 B550 Motherboard | Wireless Gaming Motherboards | NZXT | NZXT


Love your gaming PC | We meticulously design a curated suite of premium products to make extraordinary gaming experiences achievable and fun.



www.nzxt.com





No idea on VRM.


----------



## Nighthog

A DC 19V motherboard from Gigabyte. May be interesting to you doing SFF builds. This requires only a 19V brick to run.









GA-A520I-DASH (rev. 1.0) Key Features | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Sweden


Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




www.gigabyte.com





Should work well with the APU's, as the board only has 4+1 VRM? 55A Dr.MOS.
SO-DIMM slots for memory.


----------



## Mad Kat

Hello, I wanted to ask you if here on the forum there is a similar discussion with all the vrm of Intel cards listed, like the first post of this discussion that I find very useful and I congratulate those who created it .. thanks a lot


----------



## PJVol

*@Nighthog*
Here is Veii's new toy, asked him for VRM spec's there (just for this thread's header - b550 ProArt)








[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


Well in my 51.2ns entry i clearly write its done in safemode under the "proof" tab. And i did just get a 0.2ns difference between safemode and my everyday bloated windows. Would say very few people takes the time to make a "bench-only" OS install, and for all others safemode is the best...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Nighthog

6-Layer PCB mATX board from Gigabyte.
B550M AORUS PRO AX.









B550M AORUS PRO AX (rev. 1.0) Key Features | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Sweden


Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




www.gigabyte.com





10+2 VRM with 50A Dr.MOS.


----------



## noizemaker

according to this post the PWM controller for ASUS A320M-K is ASP1106ggqw (_RT3667BE?)_









btw this barebone motherboard was 35% cheaper 2 years ago 
X570 is out of stock and B550 is ultra expensive recently


----------



## Nighthog

*X570S* boards are getting launched:

*X570 XTREME rev.2.0* (Active OC tuner added)

*X570S AORUS MASTER* (Active OC tuner)

*X570S AERO G* (Active OC tuner)

*X570S AORUS PRO AX* (Active OC tuner)

*X570S AORUS ELITE AX*

*X570S AORUS ELITE*

*X570S GAMING X*

*X570S UD*


----------



## Nighthog

ASRock X570S PG Riptide






Using 10-phase [8+2] Vishay Dr.MOS SiC654 50A, uP9505S controller, doubler: uP1911RQDD


----------



## Nighthog

*ASUS X570 ROG Crosshair EXTREME*






ROG Crosshair VIII Extreme


AMD X570 EATX gaming motherboard with 18+2 power stages, five M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 front-panel connector with PD 3.0 60 W support, USB 3.2 Gen 2 front-panel connector, dual Thunderbolt™ 4, Marvell® AQtion 10 Gb Ethernet, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, PCIe® 4.0, onboard WiFi 6E and Aura Sync RGB...



rog.asus.com





20-phase 18+2 90A. passive PCH heatsink.


----------



## Nighthog

MSI released a bunch of new X570 motherboards with passive heatsinks for PCH.

MEG X570S ACE MAX *18-phases[16+2] | 90A*

MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX 2dimm OC board, *18-phases[16+2] | 90A* PCB: 2oz 6-layer

MPG X570S CARBON EK X EK VRM/CPU waterblock, *16-phases[14+2]*' | 75A*

MPG X570S CARBON MAX WIFI *16-phases[14+2]*' | 75A*

MPG X570S EDGE MAX WIFI *14-phases[12+2]*' | 75A*

MAG X570S TOMAHAWK MAX WIFI *14-phases[12+2]*' | , PWM: ISL88247?*

MAG X570S TORPEDO MAX *14-phases[12+2]*' | , PWM: ISL88247?*


----------



## Nighthog

Asus adds Dynamic OC Switcher to the* ROG STRIX X570-E GAMING WIFI II*


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/powlr4

12+4 VRM, passive PCH heatsinks.


----------



## Nighthog

A ITX board from Gigabyte has been added to their new passive X570 line-up.

X570SI AORUS PRO AX *10-phases[8+2]*' | 90A* PCB: 2oz 10-Layer


----------



## Elrick

Nighthog said:


> A ITX board from Gigabyte has been added to their new passive X570 line-up.
> 
> X570SI AORUS PRO AX *10-phases[8+2]*' | 90A* PCB: 2oz 10-Layer


Still no optical audio connector, which I desperately need for my future build  .

Have to wait for MSI and Asrock here, for their x570S releases in ITX.


----------



## jvidia

X570S boards are being release to slowly !


----------



## Nighthog

I haven't seen any of the new passive motherboards in any retailer thus far. Seems they would be arriving for winter if anything.


----------



## kairi_zeroblade

Nighthog said:


> I haven't seen any of the new passive motherboards in any retailer thus far. Seems they would be arriving for winter if anything.


the X570S Aorus Pro AX is being sold here already for 320-330$..the Asrock Riptide's were out a few months back but we all know its mehh..


----------



## mojolou

MSI X570S VRM:









MSI_X570S_VRM_0915.xlsx


Z590 CPU VRM list MSI X570S Motherboard VRM Marketing Name,MEG X570S ACE MAX,MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX,MPG X570S CARBON MAX WIFI,MPG X570S EDGE MAX WIFI,MAG X570S TOMAHAWK MAX WIFI,MPG X570S TORPEDO MAX Phase (VCORE + SOC),16+2 (Direct),16+2 (Direct),14+2 (7 to 14, DRPS**),12+2 (6 to 12, DRPS**),12...




docs.google.com


----------



## kairi_zeroblade

its funny how boards get iterated on AMD, nice business strategy..we'll probably see B550 being iterated again next year..lol


----------



## Elrick

jvidia said:


> X570S boards are being release to slowly !


YES indeed. Still no ITX with Toslink 😡 😡 😡 😡 .

All they need to do right now is just release ONE single motherboard with that connection for the ITX size. *Is it too much to ask for in 2021*?


----------



## Nighthog

You can extract HDMI AUDIO into Toslink if you want to go that route, though requires a little extra work with extra parts.


----------



## Peanuts4

So after running a medium/ lower medium (depending where you are) priced motherboard for a year I thought I'd chime in since this was a new platform for me and I didn't want to say anything too early.

I've had a MSI MPG B550 GAMING PLUS paired to a 3800X. Some people questioned how this thing would do with an 8 core processor but this has been fine. I've been benching it a lot over the last cpl weeks. If those 2 extra FPS are worth an extra $100 or something that's up to you. I'm definitely not saying this is the greatest board ever but it gets the job done just fine.

Either way I'd say if the mobo you are looking at has the same VRM as mine or better 6-8 cores no problem. 12-16 cores I can't say I don't have one but this thing is a decent baseline. There is definitely a point of diminishing returns and you're going to be mostly paying for marketing or bragging rights.


----------



## Gassaray11

From where is the information that the MSI B550 Gaming Plus is 6 Layer PCB? I could not find anything and most people say it is 4 Layers


----------



## PJVol

@Nighthog
From the user's TUF GAMING B450-PLUS II breakdown:













His post on a local forum:


AMD APU 5000 серии (Cezanne) информация и опыт пользования. • Конференция Overclockers.ru


----------



## Nighthog

PJVol said:


> @Nighthog
> From the user's TUF GAMING B450-PLUS II breakdown:
> View attachment 2537319
> View attachment 2537320
> 
> His post on a local forum:
> 
> 
> AMD APU 5000 серии (Cezanne) информация и опыт пользования. • Конференция Overclockers.ru


Thanks for the information. 
O'm suprised Asus didn't use their own re-branded VRM controller here. They using the uP9505P now?


----------



## Nighthog

Seems Asus has released several *Ver. II* boards of their earlier ones.

This one is one of the more intersting releases in the bunch:









PRIME B550-PLUS AC-HES｜Motherboards｜ASUS Global


ASUS Prime series is expertly engineered to unleash the full potential of AMD and Intel processors. Boasting a robust power design, comprehensive cooling solutions and intelligent tuning options, Prime series motherboards provide daily users and DIY PC builders a range of performance tuning...




www.asus.com





You get several x16 PCIE slots on this one which is rare if you need that. 5X in total for x16slots on the board for those expansion cards.


----------



## Nighthog

I have hit the maximum character Limit for the VRM list post on front page... Can't add more to the initial post from now on. Have to delete stuff.

Will need to link to another page for new entries or split the list up.


----------



## PJVol

Time to put 3xx boards to archive? )


----------



## Nighthog

PJVol said:


> Time to put 3xx boards to archive? )


A320 boards are still in use and sold with new BIOS @ 5000 series support.
So they should stay around for a while.

I don't expect too many extra board releases before we go to AM5 in a year. So might manage. Otherwise will have to split the list up into other posts.


----------



## PJVol

Nighthog said:


> O'm suprised Asus didn't use their own re-branded VRM controller here. They using the uP9505P now?


Yeah, it seems so, but I also wanna point to the same VRM's as on the 1st gen, i.e. 4C06/10 OnSemi (not the RA... smth)


----------



## bersy

@Nighthog Hi,

B550M AORUS PRO-P --- SIC649A 50 A (according to vendor website - no datasheet found)



https://overclockers.ru/st/legacy/blog/375036/226258_O.jpg





https://overclockers.ru/blog/IvvyLab/show/46075/obzor-materinskoj-platy-gigabyte-b550m-aorus-pro-p


----------

