Review: X570 Aorus Master

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Aug 8, 2019.

  1. waltc3

    waltc3 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,009
    Likes Received:
    300
    GPU:
    AMD 50th Ann 5700XT
    HH, what follows is 100% constructive--the review was OK, but it lacked some perspective, I thought--probably because I own the Master. First, have you seen the x570 mboards selling for $269? Doesn't matter who makes them--imo, they suck, every one. And an x470, definitely, is not a substitute--one big difference there is that this mboard supports PCIe4, and the x470 mboards will not be doing that for obvious reasons. In fact, these x570 motherboards are the only ones on Earth that support PCIe4--no Intel mboard does, as of yet. While you seemed enamored of MSI's $700 Godlike--even gave it a rating, as I recall, even though no one here will buy one, likely--you called this one too expensive...? I could buy two of these for the price of the Godlike--or the Aorus Xtreme, for that matter--both mboards are too expensive--and they are EATX, as well. Also, you didn't mention the steel backplate on the bottom, which greatly reinforces and protects the motherboard and according to GB, also aids in cooling the board as well. It was very noticeable to me right off. Your gaming conclusion that keeps putting the ancient-architecture 9900k ahead of Ryzen by "5-25%" in frame rates @ 1080P just doesn't jive with the great majority of opinion as I've read it elsewhere. There are several games I've seen reported in which the 9900k can't keep up, at all--but they didn't make your test list. I'd provide links, but starting an argument is not my purpose here. Try QHD or UHD resolutions--that's what most "serious" gamers use today, imo. 1080P is so "yesterday"--literally, I haven't used it in years.

    But I did agree with with most of your complimentary remarks about the board, and the one about not being able to hear the chipset fan was right on the money--I can't hear it, either--thankfully! Just can't figure your comments about the price, and of course I cannot understand at all why you rated the Godlike but not the Master, which costs half as much. Also..in the photographs of the mboard--what's with the comments about the chipset heatsink being so "bright"? It's not, actually, it's a much darker gray-silver, with an Eagle motif--your image capture seems over-exposed--or maybe it was the angle--it seems to be reflecting the white background. At any rate, the mboard doesn't look like that. Thought you should have known that. Still can't get over the fact that you didn't even rate the board! What about the VRM situation? No doublers used in the Master, etc. The extra motherboard layering and copper used in the board to achieve signal integrity for PCIe4-lane communication doesn't get a mention, for some reason.

    Why on Earth would anyone want to spend an equal amount or slightly more money on Intel solutions so old they creak, @ 14nm, and riddled with security holes and flaws--if they can go to AMD and get a *modern* 7nm CPU designed so much better that it has almost no security flaws by comparison? What's the attraction? Can't figure it. Let Intel get off its monopolistic duff and field some new architecture cpus instead of milking the past, constantly--then they'll be worth another look, imo. But not until.

    This is the first GB product I've ever owned--and I have to say that it's by far the best ATX motherboard I've ever owned--and I've owned a lot of them. If ever I am tempted to think that the Master might have been too expensive, all I have to do is think of the utter cheapness of the two MSI x370/x470 mboards I purchased since Ryzen debuted @ $190 each--and my confidence in the x570 Master purchase is totally renewed!

    Last, the really baffling thing for me is why some folks will spend several hundred dollars on their CPU, as much as $1400 on a GPU--but want to go dirt cheap on the motherboard. The motherboard is the logic glue and electrical circuitry that holds everything together--including the CPU and the GPU, etc. Yes, $369 is the most $ I've ever spent on a motherboard--but it just happens that this motherboard is also the best one I've owned to date. I hear that previous GB motherboards weren't so hot, to put it mildly--but with this product launch it looks like GB has turned a corner...Couldn't you at least see fit to award them a "Most Improved" rating....? ...;) The product is excellent and is certainly deserving, imo.
     
  2. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,976
    Likes Received:
    1,326
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    @ waltc3 , not sure why you are so worked up about a mobo review, but personally feel all x570 boards are a joke when it comes to overclocking capabilities or potential. Since Ryzen 3000 cpus are best left at stock, so any $200-250 board can do that while retaining most of the useful features.

    Therefore, anyone looking to buy a x570 board, forget about robust power stages, phases or VRMs, as no point in OC'ing Ryzen 3000 series. But I can see people buying higher priced boards for features they may need or are useful to them. Lastly, the only thing I find a bit pointless in mobo reviews are benchmarks. I mean come on, they are all within 1% (or less) of each other, so why bother when the only results we see are due to the different CPUs used.
     
  3. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,458
    Likes Received:
    5,482
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA

    Walt, good post. First off, if you feel that the 399 EUR price tag for the Aorus Master is warranted then that proofs my argument wrong. However, over the years (much like graphics cards) we are seeing a price influx that IMHO is not always warranted. You purchased about 50 bucks worth of components at eight times the price. Now I have no problems with build quality or looks (aside from the red WIMA caps for audio). It's a good board but sticks close to reference chipset features aside from the Realtek 2.5 Gbps jack. Does that warrant an award? Well, no .. if I assign an award then the products need some sort of x- or value factor.

    Price is an upwards trend that I see with ROG boards as well. However, with 400~600 EUR boards, you see at least 5 or 10-gigabit jacks, OLED info screens, add-in M2 boards, liquid cooling blocks etc. embedded (thus extra stuff). For the master, I cannot see where the extra money going to, yes the PCB and VRM designs are a notch better, but does that warrant the pricetag?

    I mean the Gigabyte X470 Aorus Ultra Gaming you can purchase for 139,- EUR which gives you a better understanding of what the bill of materials cost is for a mobo (and they still make good money). There yes, yes you will lack WIFI and the 2,.5 Gbps LAN jack. That leaves PCIe 4.0 (for which we all can argue the validity in the year 2019). You get the same performance for CPU and memory. That's a 260 buck difference and herein lies the conundrum, I am fighting the price tags more and more as of late. For it to warrant that price tag, it needs something more/special.

    Regardlessly I am not writing articles to step on anyone's toes, I am happy to hear you like the board and as stated in the review it's a good one. However, I cannot get past that 399 EUR price tag for what you get back in return of 'additional' features. But if you feel it is warranted, then I cannot argue that as for you it's worth it.
     
    PrMinisterGR, ZXRaziel and Mpampis like this.
  4. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,458
    Likes Received:
    5,482
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    I think I am using a very representable suite of games that many people play, I mean I could sherry pick games that favor AMD but what would that say about me as a reviewer?
     
    ZXRaziel likes this.

  5. ZXRaziel

    ZXRaziel Member Guru

    Messages:
    137
    Likes Received:
    47
    GPU:
    Nvidia
    :)I am trying to find a decent review of the passively cooled X570 aorus extreme , i know its expansive but it looks like the best MB for the 16 core that will arrive in September , Hilbert what are the chances that gigabyte will send you one for testing ?:D
     
  6. IchimA

    IchimA Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    81
    GPU:
    G1 1070
    @waltc3 ... HH is testing UHD and QHD ... you said that 1080p is so yesterday but I think that QHD is like 5% ( can't really find a survey now ) ... So if you are in that 5% ELIT .... good for you ... but some mortals still game on 720p and 1080p
     
  7. waltc3

    waltc3 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,009
    Likes Received:
    300
    GPU:
    AMD 50th Ann 5700XT
    Please, just ignore me here--I had some bad indigestion that day...;) I think you do a fine job, as you know...!
     
  8. waltc3

    waltc3 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,009
    Likes Received:
    300
    GPU:
    AMD 50th Ann 5700XT
    I don't know why I got so worked up, either...;) I would try and blame it on a sudden attack of indigestion brought on by looking at my credit card bills....grrrrrr-r-r-r-r-rrrr. (Not really!)

    Also, after working with this board and my cpu (3600X) a lot, I've settled on an all-core overclock of 4.325 GHz @ 1.362v. System is 100% stable, still idles well below 1v, and the cores still sleep and barely run when idling. My temps are paralleling stock clock & boost exactly. Even after the newest x570 chipset driver install (yesterday), I find I still prefer this to stock 3.8GHz defaults & boost. Performance in benchmarks and applications is markedly better @ 4.325GHZ & no boost, to standard clock & boost. Frankly, this is the way I will keep things unless something happens to force me to rethink. Kind of surprised, really, that AMD didn't do it this way to start. Performance differential is fairly significant--while none of the cores ever see > 1.362v, and all see < 1.v when idling and sleeping. There just doesn't seem to be any downside to overclocking all the cores sans boost of any kind.
     

Share This Page