System Performance

Not all motherboards are created equal. On the face of it, they should all perform the same and differ only in the functionality they provide - however this is not the case. The obvious pointers are power consumption, but also the ability for the manufacturer to optimize USB speed, audio quality (based on audio codec), POST time and latency. This can come down to manufacturing process and prowess, so these are tested.

Power Consumption

Power consumption was tested on the system while in a single ASUS AMD RX 570 GPU configuration with a wall meter connected to the Corsair AX1200i power supply. This power supply is Platinum rated, and as I am on a 230 V supply, leads to ~75% efficiency > 50W, and 90%+ efficiency at 250W, suitable for both idle and multi-GPU loading. This method of power reading allows us to compare the power management of the UEFI and the board to supply components with power under load, and includes typical PSU losses due to efficiency. These are the real-world values that consumers may expect from a typical system (minus the monitor) using this motherboard.

While this method for power measurement may not be ideal, and you feel these numbers are not representative due to the high wattage power supply being used (we use the same PSU to remain consistent over a series of reviews, and the fact that some boards on our test bed get tested with three or four high powered GPUs), the important point to take away is the relationship between the numbers. These boards are all under the same conditions, and thus the differences between them should be easy to spot.

Power Long Idle (w/RX 570)

Power OS Idle (w/RX 570)

Power OCCT (w/RX 570)

The energy consumption of the GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX is reasonable while the system is idling, resting at 66 Watts, just a little higher than that of an X370 system using a typical Ryzen 7 CPU. This changes quickly once the CPU is stressed, with the power figures jumping to 255 Watts. Although the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is not a processor designed for green computing, the huge energy consumption difference is being caused by the aggressive CPU performance boost setting that is enabled by default.

Non UEFI POST Time

Different motherboards have different POST sequences before an operating system is initialized. A lot of this is dependent on the board itself, and POST boot time is determined by the controllers on board (and the sequence of how those extras are organized). As part of our testing, we look at the POST Boot Time using a stopwatch. This is the time from pressing the ON button on the computer to when Windows starts loading. (We discount Windows loading as it is highly variable given Windows specific features.) 

Non UEFI POST Time

The GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX displays good boot time figures, with a default boot time of just 12.4 seconds. It is possible to shorten this time down to 9.2 seconds by switching the Fast Boot option to "Ultra" and preventing all of the motherboard's secondary chipsets from initiating during boot.

USB Backup

For this benchmark, we transfer a set size of files from the SSD to the USB drive using DiskBench, which monitors the time taken to transfer. The files transferred are a 1.52 GB set of 2867 files across 320 folders – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second HD videos. In an update to pre-Z87 testing, we also run MaxCPU to load up one of the threads during the test which improves general performance up to 15% by causing all the internal pathways to run at full speed.

Due to the introduction of USB 3.1, as of June 2015 we are adjusting our test to use a dual mSATA USB 3.1 Type-C device which should be capable of saturating both USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 connections. We still use the same data set as before, but now use the new device. Results are shown as seconds taken to complete the data transfer.

At this point we should also note that manufacturers nowadays advertise their motherboards as having "USB 3.1 Gen 1" and "USB 3.1 Gen 2" ports. The USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports are limited to 5 Gbps, which means that they are USB 3.0 ports. USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports are rated for up to 10 Gbps.

USB Copy Test, 2867 Files (1.52GB)

The USB performance of the GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX is good and on par with all of the AMD X399 motherboards that we have tested to this date. All motherboards produced exactly the same performance figures here, which was to be expected considering that they are all using the same chipset and USB 3.1 controllers.

DPC Latency

Deferred Procedure Call latency is a way in which Windows handles interrupt servicing. In order to wait for a processor to acknowledge the request, the system will queue all interrupt requests by priority. Critical interrupts will be handled as soon as possible, whereas lesser priority requests such as audio will be further down the line. If the audio device requires data, it will have to wait until the request is processed before the buffer is filled.

If the device drivers of higher priority components in a system are poorly implemented, this can cause delays in request scheduling and process time.  This can lead to an empty audio buffer and characteristic audible pauses, pops, and clicks. The DPC latency checker measures how much time is taken processing DPCs from driver invocation. The lower the value will result in better audio transfer at smaller buffer sizes. Results are measured in microseconds.

Deferred Procedure Call Latency

All of the AMD X399 motherboards have slightly high DPC latency settings but the GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX chose the wrong chart to be at the top. With a DPC latency figure of 379 μs, the X399 Designare EX is the worst performer that we have tested to this date. It is not high enough to cause problems but other implementations displayed figures that are nearly 40% lower.

Test Bed and Setup CPU Performance, Short Form
Comments Locked

20 Comments

View All Comments

  • Oxford Guy - Sunday, June 24, 2018 - link

    I agree. When TR 2 hits I would highly recommend Anandtech do an "undervolting Threadripper" page that compares Gen 2 an Gen 1 — on multiple boards.

    And, since this is a pro product, the overclocking stability threshold needs to ensure real stability, not the quick and dirty standard.

    ECC RAM would also be useful to look at, when analyzing TR 2.
  • azrael- - Wednesday, June 27, 2018 - link

    I was just going to point out that one of the foremost features on what is a semiprofessional motherboard for AMD's ThreadRipper should be support for ECC memory and the subsequent test thereof. Luckily, as far as Gigabyte's specification table goes the motherboard *does* support ECC memory. Now AT only needs to test it.
  • Tom S - Monday, February 24, 2020 - link

    I know that this is not a conclusive test, but with my X399 Designare EX...
    I have 4X16GB sticks of Kingston KSM26ED8/16ME - 2666GHz - ECC - CL19 - 1.2V
    When I OC'd the memory to 3600MHz @ 1.2V with very tight timings (I forget exactly what)
    it threw an ECC error that was captured by Memtest86.
    Other ECC boards I've owned, have reported ECC errors in Windows event log "Kernal-WHEA",
    or another log viewable in BIOS.
  • hansmuff - Saturday, June 23, 2018 - link

    Which program did you use for measuring DPC? There are a few different ones, and I find they all produce different results.
  • CEH - Monday, June 25, 2018 - link

    You seem a bit obsessed with AMD lately. Isn't there anything interesting in Intel-related boards?
  • oleyska - Tuesday, June 26, 2018 - link

    I'll throw this out there:
    No..

    Z170->270->Z370 is similar with minor updates to bling and the vrm circuit but nothing exciting.
    X299 apart from evga's isn't very interesting.

    The thing that makes x399 very exciting is the 64(60) pci-e lanes exposed to board manufactures while Intel have been giving 20,28,44 forever!
  • crashtech - Tuesday, June 26, 2018 - link

    Flash drive instead of DVD should really be doable at this price level for sure.
  • zukefok - Wednesday, June 27, 2018 - link

    A quick glance at the motherboard's specifications reveals that up to eight SATA drives and three M.2 drives can be connected on the GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX
  • virpuain@gmail.com - Sunday, July 15, 2018 - link

    "The second important feature of the GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX is the implementation of an International Rectifier IR35201 digital controller. What is unique about this particular controller is that it implements an algorithm that balances the load (and the heat output) across all of the power phases. This means that instead of having a couple of stages heavily loaded all of the time while the rest are idling, all eight stages are continuously sharing about the same load, greatly increasing the longevity of the circuitry. This means that the motherboard should hold up well for the upcoming Threadripper 2 launch."

    The IR35201 is not the reason any board will fulfill the power delivery needs ofa TR2, fets and phases will.
    That being said, eight real phase consisting of the IR3556 is subpar VRM for a motherboard that needs to handle cpus at the 200W range. Board is pricey, in fact the VRM on this board is weaker than what you have on the flagship AM4 boards, like the taichi or ASUS CVII.
  • Tom S - Monday, February 24, 2020 - link

    Did you run this with a special BIOS?
    I am trying to enter an offset voltage, but my BIOS F12, and every reviewer post that I've seen
    seems to have Dynamic Vcore(DVID) and Dynamic VCORE(DVID) for SOC grayed out.
    Is there some other field that I need to set in order to enter a value here? Help someone, thanks.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now