GIGABYTE Z97X-UD5H Review: Choose Your Storage Option
by Ian Cutress on May 14, 2014 9:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- Gigabyte
- Z97
GIGABYTE Z97X-UD5H In The Box
When we made the jump from Z77 to Z87 chipsets, behind the scenes we were informed that this switch increased the price of the chipset quite considerably. We were unable to find out exact numbers, but one would assume that as the Z87 and Z97 chipsets are relatively similar (I have seen Z97 referred to as Z87 rev.2), I would assume that high price to still be present. This means that for a competitive motherboard manufacturer trying to produce a highly functional product and in a lower price point than expected, something might have to give way. Usually that means the in-the-box contents, especially for mainstream products like the UD5H. If this was a gaming motherboard, or an overclocking motherboard, there would be scope for customization.
Nevertheless, the Z97X-UD5H contains the following:
Driver Disk
Rear IO Shield
Manual
Four SATA Cables
Flexi-SLI Bridge
With features like SATA Express and M.2 now taking center stage with the larger motherboards, I wonder if the smaller motherboards with fewer connectors will start to become more worthy recipients for in-the-box additions and out-compete the larger models. However, these additional contents are perhaps apt for the UD5H: with only one USB 3.0 header, there was never going to be a USB 3.0 bracket, and other brackets for COM/USB 2.0 headers are left for EVGA to play with. More SLI bridges are not required – this motherboard (like most Z97) supports only two NVIDIA cards, although they can support three AMD GPUs. At $190, I imagine that some of the other motherboards around this price point will carry WiFi connectivity, which GIGABYTE has redirected that investment into the dual network capabilities.
GIGABYTE Z97X-UD5H Overclocking
Experience with GIGABYTE Z97X-UD5H
Because we are using our i7-4770K sample from the first Haswell launch, unless motherboard manufacturers have found a trick I was highly doubtful that basic overclocking headroom would change. Haswell processors are characteristically warm, and the temperature becomes the limit before the voltage does on most forms of PC system cooling. The main difference might be at the high end, where extreme overclockers use liquid nitrogen for world records, but GIGABYTE has motherboards for that purpose (such as the Z97X-SOC Force).
Overclocking on the Z97X-UD5H actually mirrored the experiences with the Z87 counterparts, especially with our sample. Auto-overclocking options used a lot of voltage to ensure compatibility with more CPUs, however some strong cooling is needed for the higher options. Auto tuning was also aggressive, to the point where it failed our stability tests at 4.6 GHz. Manual overclocking gave a 4.6 GHz peak, in line with some of our Z87 motherboards, while reaching a toasty 95C during an OCCT load.
Methodology:
Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows. We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with PovRay and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads. These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.
For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed. The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (100ºC+). Our test bed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.
Automatic Overclock:
Manual Overclock:
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
silenceisgolden - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
So I think I might be a few PCIe lanes off, but would it be feasible to get rid of the PCI, one LAN slot, the D-SUB (because why is that still useful with DVI available), the PCI Express/M.2/SATA6 switch but keep the M.2? Then either add in another USB3, SATA6, or if possible in the future, another M.2 stacked on top of the first. I would think this would be the best combination of connectivity that the mainstream to enthusiast range of PC builders are looking for, and would stop the continuation of older standards or these choices that people have to make that might not be obvious when they are plugging stuff in to the motherboard.Chil - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
The BIOS screenshots of both HD and Classic Mode show a BCLK of 99.79 MHz. Isn't the standard 100.0? Can anyone comment on if this is a bug or expected behavior and how it affects performance?The_Assimilator - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
It's possible that AnandTech had Spread Spectrum enabled, but I have that option disabled on my Asrock Z77 Extreme6, and its BCLK fluctuates between 99.97MHz and 99.99MHz at boot (I have never seen it do a flat 100.00MHz).Chil - Thursday, May 15, 2014 - link
99.97 is right around what I expect, but 99.79 (0.21 off the mark) is a different story. I did a big of searching and this appears to affect Gigabyte's entire "ultra durable" lineup.maecenas - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
Given that you've run a few articles explaining how modern games are GPU dependent, and very rarely is the CPU the bottleneck in single-card applications, I'm really not clear on how a motherboard is going to have a significant impact on gaming performance, holding the GPU and CPU constant.extide - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
It doesnt. The only thing is really the PCIe lane allocation, and if it possibly uses a PLX chip. Also, the feature set may be different, but the motherboard doesn't really affect performance.Ian Cutress - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
PCIe lane allocation is important if you are not limited by the CPU first (see our Haswell refresh). There are some weird and wonderful chipset lane allocations when you move into the world of the PLX chip, or some server boards miss out lanes altogether. If/when I move to 4K gaming benchmarks (2015? depends on 24"/27" 60Hz monitor pricing) we might see a greater effect there.The_Assimilator - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
Flex IO is a step in the right direction from Intel. That said, it could be so much more; in fact it would make the most sense if ALL Flex IO ports were switchable between PCIe/USB3/SATA3. That would allow motherboard manufacturers to provide e.g. native 10 SATA ports without having to purchase and integrate additional standalone SATA controllers, which are slower and add to the BOM. I'd be pretty happy with a motherboard that did a 2/8/8 split for PCIe/USB3/SATA3.Additionally, the 14 USB 2.0 ports are ridiculous; I don't think I've ever seen a motherboard that provides that many. Intel should aggregate 10 of those ports into an additional Flex IO port, which would leave 4 USB 2.0 ports. Anyone who needs more than a minimum of 8 USB ports (4 USB2 + minimum of 4 USB3) can buy a USB hub.
DanNeely - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
8 back panel ports and 3 mobo headers for 6 more was a relatively common config a few years ago. I think I've seen 6 back panel and 4 headers a few times too. 3 mobo headers covers a case with 4 front panel ports and a card reader in a drive bay. Other than being mostly USB3 this board has the same 8 back panel and 3 header configuration.I'm not sure why Intel didn't cut the number of 2.0 ports down when they added USB3 to the chipset, but IIRC a USB2 controller is tiny compared to a USB3/PCIe lane/Sata6 controller. It's entirely possible that it came down to the 2.0 controllers being a small enough chunk of the chip that it wasn't worth fiddling with them because it couldn't affect enough space to matter for anything else.
repoman27 - Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - link
Well A: the USB 2.0 controllers, hubs, ports were already there, so it's easier to just let them be, and B: every USB 3.0 port uses a USB 2.0 port as well. Thus you really have a maximum of 14 USB ports total, up to 6 of which can be USB 3.0.