ASUS Z97-DELUXE (NFC & WLC) Review: With Two Thunderbolt 2 Too
by Ian Cutress on May 16, 2014 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- Asus
- NFC
- 802.11ac
- Thunderbolt 2
- Z97
- Wireless Charging
Gaming Benchmarks
Sleeping Dogs
Sleeping Dogs is a benchmarking wet dream – a highly complex benchmark that can bring the toughest setup and high resolutions down into single figures. Having an extreme SSAO setting can do that, but at the right settings Sleeping Dogs is highly playable and enjoyable. We run the basic benchmark program laid out in the Adrenaline benchmark tool, and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.
| Sleeping Dogs, 1080p Max | ||
| NVIDIA | AMD | |
| Average Frame Rates |
|
|
| Minimum Frame Rates |
|
|
Company of Heroes 2
Company of Heroes 2 also can bring a top end GPU to its knees, even at very basic benchmark settings. To get an average 30 FPS using a normal GPU is a challenge, let alone a minimum frame rate of 30 FPS. For this benchmark I use modified versions of Ryan’s batch files at 1920x1080 on High. COH2 is a little odd in that it does not scale with more GPUs with the drivers we use.
| Company of Heroes 2, 1080p Max | ||
| NVIDIA | AMD | |
| Average Frame Rates |
|
|
| Minimum Frame Rates |
|
|
Battlefield 4
The EA/DICE series that has taken countless hours of my life away is back for another iteration, using the Frostbite 3 engine. AMD is also piling its resources into BF4 with the new Mantle API for developers, designed to cut the time required for the CPU to dispatch commands to the graphical sub-system. For our test we use the in-game benchmarking tools and record the frame time for the first ~70 seconds of the Tashgar single player mission, which is an on-rails generation of and rendering of objects and textures. We test at 1920x1080 at Ultra settings.
| Battlefield 4, 1080p Max | ||
| NVIDIA | AMD | |
| Average Frame Rates |
|
|
| 99th Percentile Frame Rates |
|
|
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
45 Comments
View All Comments
Pri - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
Was this a real review or just an overview? No testing of its AC WiFi, NFC, Wireless Charging or Thunderbolt 2. All the main features of this board that differentiate it from other boards.You give us a graph that shows us DPC Latency, very few people even know what that is but don't test the Thunderbolt 2 add-in cards performance its WiFi performance or if the NFC accessory works properly?
Usually I applaud your reviews but this is really poor.
Ian Cutress - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
Yes, it is a full review. The benchmark results take a good 30-40 hours alone, along with a proper spectrum of overclocking tests and writing 10k+ words going through all the BIOS and software features.DPC Latency takes less than a minute to test and I often get emails glad that I do so from the users who find it relevant. I have added a description next to the benchmark results in case people do not know what DPC Latency is or why it matters.
As stated in the review, this motherboard is available as a stand-alone ($290) or as the combination with the WLC/NFC/TB2 ($400). I don't have the facilities to test most of what you ask, which is solely for the $400 version and my conclusion is split accordingly to both versions. I have an AC router but being in a central London location surrounded by APs makes my results inconsistent. As mentioned in the review, I have no Wireless Charging or TB2 devices, given that like all editors at AT I work from home and not in a central office because we are dotted around the world.
If you have constructive criticism, please feel free to email me. I am always open to suggestions.
Pri - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
I must apolagize for questioning if this was a real review. I know it must have taken considerable time to write what was in the review as it is.I was merely disappointed at not seeing the accessories that come with the board tested as the Thunderbolt 2 card was of most interest to me with it being quite new. For example I would have liked for it to have been tested with a dedicated graphics card.
I was unaware that the editors for the site work from home with only the hardware they have available at their own expense, I was under the incorrect impression that the editors on the site are paid employees working from offices, this is based on my own ignorance.
Please accept my sincere apologies for the curt way I dismissed the review as an overview, it clearly is a review that you put a lot of work in to.
Ian Cutress - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
Hi Pri, no worries. If I had the equipment in to test I would do for sure, that's the way AnandTech works. If any time you have a question about our testing or suggestions, shoot me an email (click my name up top), a number of people do :)-Ian
sajara - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
Yep I have to second this too. Maybe a follow up of the features in the near future, Ian?sajara - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
this commentary is rubbish i don't know how i missed a full page of the review, but that what has occurred. Apologies to Ian.DanNeely - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
My first thought is that at the $400 price point, a PLX instead of toggling features on/off should be mandatory. Picking and choosing what to actually use on an inexpensive feature grab bag board is justifiable to keep the cost down; but this board is priced as luxury item and shouldn't be loaded down with obnoxious gotchas and limitations.Something else I'm wondering is why two different Intel NIC controllers instead of either 2 of the same model or one Intel controller and a second from a low cost vendor.
PixyMisa - Saturday, May 17, 2014 - link
Exactly my thought. On a low-end board that would be a no-go for me; on a top-of-the-line board it's just unacceptable.I'm very glad I read this review, though, because I was considering buying this exact board.
munkle - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
I'm confused on whether this has a plx chip or not? Your review states it doesn't, Hardocp's review states it uses PLX PEX8747, the pictures of the motherboard would make me assume that it does use the chip as only this mobo and the WS mobo have that center heatsink and you state the WS mobo uses a plx chip.Ian Cutress - Friday, May 16, 2014 - link
A quick look at the specifications on the website shows:"2 x PCIe 3.0/2.0 x16 (x16 or dual x8)"
With this, and the fact that we can account for all the chipset lanes including the switches, dictates that no PLX chip is present. Without doing a quick headcount of PCIe lane allocation, one could be fooled by the heatsink in the middle of the board.
That and the fact that ASUS has said that the PLX8747 variant for Z97 is limited to the WS motherboard for now.