In the pursuit of sheer performance, a user should aim to combine the ultimate CPU with the ultimate everything else – motherboard, memory, and so on. The latest enthusiast platform to hit our streets is Intel’s latest Sandy Bridge-E and X79 chipset, released today.

So to start a series of X79 reviews, we are going to have a look at what the X79 chipset brings to the table over other Intel chipsets, and the first motherboard under our microscope is the ASUS P9X79 Pro, coming in at an RRP of $329.99. Needless to say, this is fairly expensive in the land of motherboards, even when pairing it with a $1000 CPU. However, if previous Intel chipsets are anything to go by, ASUS Pro boards get a lot of attention. So the question becomes ‘Is it worth it?’

Overview

ASUS are impressive – as an innovator and as a product producer. Any company can stick an Intel chipset together on a board and sell as-is. It takes a large amount of highly skilled, consumer and technically oriented people to produce top level products, and ASUS have succeeded with aplomb on what seems to be their entire range.

One of the major plus points for the ASUS boards, including the Pro, is the implementation on X79 style SSD Caching. By a hardware/software combination, users can implement SSD caching via a specific pair of SATA 6 Gbps ports on the board. There is also ASUS USB 3.0 boost, which overcomes Windows’ USB protocol limitations to improve USB 3.0 speed. As expected on such an enthusiast board, an Intel NIC is used for improved performance and lower CPU usage.

The ASUS boards also include a feature called BIOS Flashback. This allows a user to write a new BIOS to the board via a USB stick without the need for CPU or DRAM being installed. In my opinion, this is a great idea, especially if the board shipping BIOS does not support a future processor being released.

Power delivery is completely digital in the form of DIGI+, and adjustable to both the CPU and now the memory. On the Pro, six fan headers are provided onboard with high quality fan adjustment (both BIOS and software) thanks to their more expensive fan controller solution. The graphical BIOS is the typical ASUS fare we are used to, and I was impressed by the automatic overclocking functions which perform well, giving significant boosts in performance.

Points requiring a little adjustment on the Pro, at least from my point of view, start with the PCIe layout. While having three spaces between the main PCIe slots does wonders for GPU cooling, a lot of GPU manufacturers only put triple slot length connectors on board for SLI/CrossfireX, not quad length. This may cause extra expense for the consumers if their particular model did not come with the right cable, which surprises me when ASUS include SLI cables with the Pro, but not CrossfireX (ed: AMD has suppliers to bundle cables with cards instead of boards). Perhaps also expected is dual Gigabit Ethernet on such a board, given that there is plenty of I/O panel space. Even if this was a simple Realtek solution, if software was provided to enable Teaming, there would be users who would love the option. Lastly, I would have liked a USB 3.0 front panel addition in the box. All that said, ASUS states the Pro has an RRP of $329.99 and a standard 3 year warranty.

Visual Inspection

If you have never read any of AnandTech’s pre-X79 coverage articles before, the thing that will strike you most on any of these motherboards is the size of the socket. While the CPU die is only 20.8 mm x 20.9 mm, it supposedly requires 90lbs per square inch of pressure, up from 70lbs per square inch on previous platforms. As a result, we have a new CPU bracket holding the socket together, which uses two latches rather than one to hold the CPU in place. The mounting holes themselves are of similar ilk to Intel’s recent platforms in terms of spacing; however the screw size is reduced from previous platforms. Due to the extra pressure requirement, Intel are moving away from push-pin type coolers, and are aiming more at those that screw into the bracket directly. This means a move away from backplate type arrangements, and a step towards screw-ins. This is evident on the Intel all-in-one liquid cooler, which requires manual adjustment of the screws into the bracket, then tightening with a screwdriver.

The mass of DIMM slots is also of note, as this takes an obscene amount of PCB space either side of the socket. As mentioned before, there could perhaps be a call for motherboards with 2 DIMMs in a dual channel mode, in order to free up this real estate. Nevertheless, ASUS handily color codes the DIMM slots, where the blue ones should be filled first, then the black, for optimum performance. All these DIMM slots get in the way of the power delivery of course, and the Pro uses an 8-phase digital VRM for CPU power delivery. The relatively small heatsink above the CPU has a large surface area, and is connected via a heatpipe to another heatsink to the left of the DIMMs.

I like a board with a lot of fan headers – and ASUS have put six on this board, all under the control of their Q-Fan/Fan Xpert technology. These fan headers are located such that two 4-pin CPU headers above the right hand side DIMMs, one 4-pin chassis header beside the IO panel, two 4-pin chassis headers beside the 24-pin ATX power supply, and a final 4-pin chassis header on the bottom of the board. All of the fans can be adjusted in the BIOS and the OS via software – this level of detail is testament to how well ASUS listens to users wanting these fan controls.

The PCH is hidden underneath a low profile heatsink, also connected via a heatpipe to another heatsink in the middle of the board. The SATA ports here on offer come in three flavors – two SATA 6 Gbps via a Marvell 9128 controller, four SATA 3 Gbps from the PCH, and two SATA 6 Gbps from the PCH. These final SATA 6 Gbps are the ones used in ASUS’ SSD Caching, explained later.

Along the bottom of the board are features of interest: a 2-digit Debug LED panel; large power/reset buttons; a small Clear CMOS; ASUS’ TPU (Turbo) and EPU (Power Saving) switches; and a standard variety of USB and front panel headers. I’m glad that the Clear CMOS button is of a different style to the power/reset buttons and not next to them – there are some boards which have it next to them, which makes for interesting expletives when the wrong button is pressed.

PCIe layout is not that intuitive, though a user should fill up the blue x16 slots first from top to bottom, then the white. As a result, we have a PCIe x16, x1, x8, x8 (non-GPU), x16, x1. The second blue x16 reduces to x8 when the first white x8 is populated. This layout also means that any PCIe x1 users will have to use the white PCIe lanes when two dual-slot GPUs are being utilized. As I mentioned previously, having such a large gap between the blue x16 slots can be an issue, when GPU manufacturers do not provide long enough cables with their cards. While ASUS provide a long enough SLI cable for this, they do not give any CrossFireX cables.

The back panel feels slightly empty here, but that may be indicative of X79 as a whole with some legacy connectors now no longer being used. From left to right, we have four USB 2.0 ports (including one in white for BIOS Flashback), a BIOS Flashback button, two USB 3.0 ports below an Intel Gigabit Ethernet port, an optical S/PDIF output, two ‘Power’ eSATA 6 Gbps ports, two USB 3.0 ports, two USB 2.0 ports below a Bluetooth v2.1 module, and standard audio headers. Personally, I see room for another Gigabit Ethernet port, hopefully with the option of Teaming.

X79 – The Chipset ASUS P9X79 Pro - BIOS and Overclocking
POST A COMMENT

55 Comments

View All Comments

  • ASUSTechMKT - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    No problem i will look into it and let you know. Reply
  • bradcollins - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    I've bought the Asus P9X79 Deluxe board now and it works perfectly. I can force the multiplier up to the 33x max of the cpu but no matter what settings I try, I can not get the 1.25x multiplier to work, the board does not post after setting it to 1.25 or 1.66. Even with the multiplier set to 20x. I updated the bios to the new version on your site and it hasn't made a difference.

    Can you get the right person to email me at otama@ihug.co.nz? Maybe an update needs to be made to support Xeons at 1.25x or 1.66x base clock?

    Other than that, the board is brilliant :)
    Reply
  • ASUSTechMKT - Saturday, November 26, 2011 - link


    This is not a UEFI limitation or bug the Xeon CPUs do not support strap changes.
    Reply
  • msroadkill612 - Tuesday, November 15, 2011 - link

    am i missing something - why would an enthusiast give up 1/3 of the silicon for crap intel graphics - wouldnt they go an I7 & discrete gpu

    SB just doesnt make sense to me - the mainstream market it targets can live w/ a slower cpu but must have decent graphics. Ignorance aside, they want a lot more for a lot less.

    when this hits the shelves in quantity - llano mobos & apuS will be mature, cheap & better - my pick anyday.
    Reply
  • jecs - Tuesday, November 15, 2011 - link

    I upgraded to SB 2600k/ASUS MOBO/Quadro from day one this year and I am not ready to upgrade again maybe until next year. But as I use this machine for 3D modeling/rendering almost exclusively I am interested in a Xeon class workstation as my next machine. With this SB-E platform I wonder if this is a new class of entry Xeon workstation. But what are the advantages and disadvantages? I mean isn't it overlapping with single socket Xeon workstations? Fortunately I can wait until next year to compare side by side what I will get from each. I can think on ECC memory on a Xeon, but what else?

    SSD catching on a workstation machine will be solved with at least an 128 SSD for the system and important applications, so I see no real problem there. USB3 could be a problem next year as more devices may be available. So I can see some confusion in what really is this platform target if the price in the same as a Xeon workstation.

    Please Anand I would like to see a system to system comparison in the future.
    Reply
  • RegGam - Tuesday, November 15, 2011 - link

    "Please Anand I would like to see a system to system comparison in the future."

    Yes! Spec reviews and pictures are nice and all, but real system to system comparisons for different workloads would be hella more useful. And, when you do so, please enable the max feature set that one system is capable of.

    For example, enabling the use of the differentiating features like RAM cache during your benchmarks would give readers a good idea of how ASUS' system outperforms (or not) Gigabyte's board. Also, soup it up with ASUS SSD cache and overclock.
    Reply
  • abeeftec - Friday, November 18, 2011 - link

    "The XMP profile was easy enough to enable with the XMP mode. For more performance, I pushed the board on to the 2400 MHz strap, which booted at auto values of 10-11-10 2T, and was completely stable. Moving towards the 2666 MHz strap caused failed boots. The nearest strap while on the 1.25x ratio was only at 2333 MHz, suggesting that 2400 MHz on the 1.00x strap is a safe memory overclock. "

    What? 1600Mhz Memory overclocked to 2400Mhz?

    Also, I have a Gigabyte Assassin board and the Strap appears to coincide with the Bclk and PCIe. Not memory!

    So any upping the gear ratio over 1.00x causes Boot failure.

    Does anyone know if the K series is the cause of this. What I mean is, Does the 3930K strap the Bclk/PCIe and the X series Straps the Bclk/ Memory? Not having purchased the 3960X causes a bit of confusion because this area on my board is all Bclk/PCIe related.

    Bclk/PCie Clock Control - Manual
    Host Clock Frequency - 100.00Mhz
    Processor Base Clock (Gear Ratio)- 1.00x
    Bclk/PCie Clock Evaluation-100.00Mhz

    Changing the Processor Base clock(Gear Ratio) to 1.25x Changes the Bclk/PCIe Clock Evaluation to- 125.00Mhz which causes a 3930K CPU to change to a Frequency of 4.0Ghz from 3.2Ghz with a Multiplier of 32.

    My confusion is that Anand said that one touch OC overclocks this way. And that he was able to boot using the 1.25x Gear Ratio and that it has to do with Memory! Well you can clearly see by my board layout that it doesnt have anything to do with Memory.
    Reply
  • ASUSTechMKT - Saturday, November 26, 2011 - link


    CPU Strap adjustment ( BCLK ) does affect memory dividers. While you have a GB board for more information check out our OC guide which details information on how the strap affect dram scaling and the dividers that are present.

    CPU has 4 straps: 100, 125, 167, 250: 1:1, 1:1.25, 1:1.67, 1:2.5 respectively
    When you select 125MHz BCLK with 125 strap, 125mhz is given to cpu and internally it gives it’s own PCIE/DMI Controller 125 / 1.25 = 100MHz.
    When you select 129MHz BCLK with 125 strap, 129mhz is given to cpu and internally it gives it’s own PCIE/DMI Controller 129 / 1.25 = 103.2MHz.
    When you select 122MHz BCLK with 125 strap, 122mhz is given to cpu and internally it gives it’s own PCIE/DMI Controller 122 / 1.25 = 97.6MHz.

    In regards to the memory divider if you look at the memory dividers applied ( once the board has reposted with the new strap you will see your dividers are different.

    In regards to the K part it works exactly the same way.
    Reply
  • markgerazzi - Saturday, November 19, 2011 - link

    I'm having a hard time deciding between this and the GA X79 UD5

    The machine I'm having will be running the 3930k processor, with 32gigs of ram for audio production.

    Strongpoints:

    Asus:

    -Better soundcard apparently, which may not matter in the long run
    -Better fan control
    -More USB 3.0

    Gigabyte:

    -Great OC button right on the mobo for when I wan't to switch things off before booting up
    -3D bios

    Other than those things everytthing looks to be the same...
    Any pointers?

    Thanks!
    Reply
  • ASUSTechMKT - Saturday, November 26, 2011 - link

    We offer the TPU switch ( which offers an actual higher default quick OC option ) this can be executed directly on the board, in the UEFI or within windows so flexibility is superior for whenever you feel you want to execute this OC.

    How is the 3D UEFI superior? Their range of adjustments are considerbly reduced compared to our UEFI and in regards to recovery options like our USB Bios Flash back they do not offer anything. If you really take a look at the small features and big features I feel our baords offer superior value plus I do n ot see GB providing feedback. I welcome any questions you may have.

    Additionally keep in mind that in the first year of ownership our warranty does offer APS service ( advanced replacement ) meaning if you did have an RMA we would provide a board before you sent in your faulty board.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now