The MSI MEG X570 Godlike Motherboard Review: Thor's Flagship
by Gavin Bonshor on August 28, 2019 12:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- AMD
- MSI
- 10G Ethernet
- Ryzen
- PCIe 4.0
- Ryzen 3000
- X570
- X570 Godlike
- MEG
Board Features
The MSI MEG X570 Godlike is its flagship X570 model and as a result, costs a whopping $700. MSI includes a formidable accessories bundle with an Aquantia AQC107 10 G Super LAN add-on card, an M.2 Xpander-Z Gen4 dual M.2 slot adapter, as well as some classy looking red and black braided SATA cables. The highly premium controller set is heavily focused on networking and audio and includes two Realtek ALC1220 HD audio codecs, two rear-panel Ethernet ports controlled by a Killer E3000 2.5 G, and Killer E2600 Gigabit powered NIC. On top of that is a Killer AX1650 Wi-Fi 6 802.11ax wireless interface which adds BT 5.0 connectivity as well. Also on the rear panel is a 6.3 mm headphone output which is powered by an ESS 9018 DAC.
| MSI MEG X570 Godlike E-ATX Motherboard | |||
| Warranty Period | 3 Years | ||
| Product Page | Link | ||
| Price | $700 | ||
| Size | ATX | ||
| CPU Interface | AM4 | ||
| Chipset | AMD X570 | ||
| Memory Slots (DDR4) | Four DDR4 Supporting 128 GB Dual Channel Up to DDR4-4800 |
||
| Video Outputs | N/A | ||
| Network Connectivity | Aquantia AQC107 10 G (Add-on) Killer E3000 2.5 G Killer E2600 Gigabit Killer AX1650 Wi-Fi 6 802.11ax |
||
| Onboard Audio | 2 x Realtek ALC1220 ESS 9018 DAC (6.3 mm jack) |
||
| PCIe Slots for Graphics (from CPU) | 3 x PCIe 4.0 x16 (x16, x8/x0/x8, x8/x4/x4) |
||
| PCIe Slots for Other (from PCH) | 1 x PCIe 4.0 x4 | ||
| Onboard SATA | Six, RAID 0/1/10 | ||
| Onboard M.2 | 2 x PCIe 4.0 x4/SATA 1 x PCIe 4.0 x4/x2 2 x PCIe 4.0 x4 (add-on) |
||
| USB 3.1 (10 Gbps) | 3 x Type-A Rear Panel 1 x Type-C Rear Panel 1 x Type-C Header |
||
| USB 3.0 (5 Gbps) | 2 x Type-A Rear Panel | ||
| USB 2.0 | 2 x Header (four ports) | ||
| Power Connectors | 1 x 24-pin ATX 2 x 8pin CPU |
||
| Fan Headers | 1 x CPU (4-pin) 1 x Water Pump (4-pin) 7 x System (4-pin) |
||
| IO Panel | 3 x USB 3.1 G2 Type-A 1 x USB 3.1 G2 Type-C 2 x USB 3.1 G1 Type-A 2 x Network RJ45 (Realtek) 5 x 3.5mm Audio Jacks (Realtek) 1 x S/PDIF Output (Realtek) 1 x 6.3mm Headphone Jack (ESS) 2 x Intel AX200 Antenna Ports 1 x Flash BIOS Button 1 x Clear CMOS Button 1 x PS/2 Combo Port |
||
The rear panel includes a pre-installed rear IO shield and also features three USB 3.1 G2 Type-A, one USB 3.1 G2 Type-C and two USB 3.1 G1 Type-A ports, while there is also a front-panel header for a USB 3.1 G2 Type-C and two USB 2.0 headers offering up to four ports. The MSI MEG X570 Godlike is geared up for enthusiasts with nine 4-pin PWM enabled headers, with two 2-pin temperature sensors, a 14-phase power delivery for the CPU VCore, as well as 4-phases for the SoC. The storage options on offer include three PCIe 4.0 x4 M.2 slots with two including support for SATA drive, with an MSI Xpander-Z Gen4 dual PCIe 4.0 x4 M.2 slot add-on card, and six SATA ports.
Test Bed
As per our testing policy, we take a high-end CPU suitable for the motherboard that was released during the socket’s initial launch and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the processor maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC subtimings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.
While we have been able to measure audio performance from previous Z370 motherboards, the task has been made even harder with the roll-out of the Z390 chipset and none of the boards tested so far has played ball. It seems all USB support for Windows 7 is now extinct so until we can find a reliable way of measuring audio performance on Windows 10 or until a workaround can be found, audio testing will have to be done at a later date.
| Test Setup | |||
| Processor | AMD Ryzen 3700X, 65W, $329 8 Cores, 16 Threads, 3.6 GHz (4.4 GHz Turbo) |
||
| Motherboard | MSI MEG X570 Godlike (BIOS 7C34v12) | ||
| Cooling | ID Cooling Auraflow 240mm AIO | ||
| Power Supply | Thermaltake Toughpower Grand 1200W Gold PSU | ||
| Memory | 2x8GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 16-16-16-36 2T | ||
| Video Card | ASUS GTX 980 STRIX (1178/1279 Boost) | ||
| Hard Drive | Crucial MX300 1TB | ||
| Case | Open Benchtable BC1.1 (Silver) | ||
| Operating System | Windows 10 1903 inc. Spectre/Meltdown Patches | ||
Readers of our motherboard review section will have noted the trend in modern motherboards to implement a form of MultiCore Enhancement / Acceleration / Turbo (read our report here) on their motherboards. This does several things, including better benchmark results at stock settings (not entirely needed if overclocking is an end-user goal) at the expense of heat and temperature. It also gives, in essence, an automatic overclock which may be against what the user wants. Our testing methodology is ‘out-of-the-box’, with the latest public BIOS installed and XMP enabled, and thus subject to the whims of this feature. It is ultimately up to the motherboard manufacturer to take this risk – and manufacturers taking risks in the setup is something they do on every product (think C-state settings, USB priority, DPC Latency / monitoring priority, overriding memory sub-timings at JEDEC). Processor speed change is part of that risk, and ultimately if no overclocking is planned, some motherboards will affect how fast that shiny new processor goes and can be an important factor in the system build.
| Hardware Providers for CPU and Motherboard Reviews | |||
| Sapphire RX 460 Nitro | MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X OC | Crucial MX200 + MX500 SSDs |
Corsair AX860i + AX1200i PSUs |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| G.Skill RipjawsV, SniperX, FlareX |
Crucial Ballistix DDR4 |
Silverstone Coolers |
Silverstone Fans |
 |
 |
 |
 |
New Test Suite: Spectre and Meltdown Hardened
Since the start of our Z390 reviews, we are using an updated OS, updated drivers, and updated software. This is in line with our CPU testing updates, which includes Spectre and Meltdown patches. We are also running the testbed with the new Windows 10 1903 update for AMD's Ryzen 3000 series CPUs, and X570 motherboard reviews. The Windows 1903 update improves multi-core and multi-thread performance on AMD's Ryzen processors with topology awareness meaning previous issues in regards to latency have been known to affect performance. As users are recommended to keep their Windows 10 operating system updates, our performance data is reflected with the 1903 update.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
116 Comments
View All Comments
WaltC - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Not to mention an old architecture Intel's been milking for years that is full of security holes and software & bios patches, etc. Nah, the longevity argument and bang-for-the-buck argument is won by AMD this time, decisively.Oliseo - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
"Not to mention an old architecture Intel's been milking for years that is full of security holes and software & bios patches, etc. Nah, the longevity argument and bang-for-the-buck argument is won by AMD this time, decisively."Be careful of comments like this. They may come back to haunt you. Just because there seems to be no security issues in AMD does not mean they don't exist.
After all, it's not like you were screaming about spectre a couple of years ago, was you.
Oxford Guy - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Reality is that people buy what's available today. Today, there are more security problems with Intel than with AMD.Today, Intel has a worse track record for security robustness.
However, I will say that both companies embed black boxes into their chips. AMD stripped PSP for China, presumably to add a different black box.
29a - Friday, August 30, 2019 - link
Is the next Ryzen using the same socket?Qasar - Friday, August 30, 2019 - link
given AMD's track record for upgrade ability, its quite possible, it could.Threska - Saturday, August 31, 2019 - link
Future Proofing? So that means we've finally gotten something definite about 2020 forward on socket AM4, and PCI 5.Peter2k - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Or buy a solid X570 for way less and still get an all core of 4.2The difference you achieve with pricier boards is negliable really, AMD or Intel
Also I have no idea why you're bashing and then referring to Intel in this regard, you can easily buy a 700$, or even 1000$ Z390
Sweetbabyjays - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
"get an all core of 4.2" according to silicon lottery's statistics, only the top 21% of their 3700x cpu's tested could get to 4.15GHz (all core). So to get a guaranteed 4.2 you need to get a 3800x.I agree that the difference with pricier boards is negligible, really your silicon is more determinate of your max OC than your motherboard.
The reason I'm bashing (this $700 motherboard specifically) is because if you're willing to dump $700 on a motherboard in the pursuit of performance you can literally pay that $700 for a cpu and motherboard combo(the 9900k and a Z390 board) that destroys the performance of the 3700x (the one tested in the article) and any motherboard.
If you compare product level to product level you will find that the X570 price vs Z390 version of say the Gigabyte AORUS XTREME or the MSI MEG Godlike, is ~ $150 and $100 respectively more expensive for the X570 version.
If you need an 8c/16t cpu and you're after the highest performance overclocked option, why pay more for a 3700x/X570 for less performance than a 9900k/Z390?
AshlayW - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Dude where are you getting that 3700X/X570 costs more than 9900K/Z390? The CPU alone is like 150 bucks cheaper, and decent X570s are around 150-200 bucks, the same as decent Z390s. You also have to buy the cooler for the Blast Furnace 9900K to get it anywhere near those "4.8GHz" clocks you're going to need another 50 bucks on a cooler, whereas the 3700X can use its included Prism easily. By your own admission "5-10%" performance isn't worth it, so why pay 150-200 bucks more for a less efficient, dead-end, security vulnerability ridden product based on tech from 2015, when you can have 90% its performance with the latest features including PCIE4.0, for less money?I'm sorry mate but you're not making sense or you're delusional. Please don't spread misinformation, and I suggest people go to their favourite retailer/store and check prices if they want to confirm it themselves.
Sweetbabyjays - Thursday, August 29, 2019 - link
Ashlay you need to cool your jets broseph.The first section of my comment is referring to how pointless this $700 board is when you can spend that $700 and get a Z390 and 9900k that will beat the cpu tested in the article (3700x) on this monstrosity of a board.
Then I commented how X570 in general has an inflated cost that really hurts the value proposition of the Ryzen CPUs when you compare model tier to model tier.
As per PC Partpicker:(my source wasn't mentioned, so sorry for not saying that)
MSI X570 Godlike $689.99
MSI Z390 Godlike $578.86
Difference: ~$111
Gigabyte X570 AORUS XTREME $706.98
Gigabyte Z390 AORUS XTREME $549.99
Difference: ~$150
To get the 9900k to 4.8 is really very little effort at all and most can go there with 1.25V which again is pretty tame and hardly creates the "furnace" you're talking about. Yes at 5.1 GHz and say 1.4V the 9900k is probably excellent for tempering swords and casting iron. The 3700x can use it's stock cooler easily, at stock speeds, I totally agree, but once you get that overclock going, you are going to need a better cooler, note the temps above are with 240mm AIO on the 3700x.
I'm not going to argue with the efficiency, because AMD did quite well in that regard with their 7nm process, it clearly is more power efficient.
As far as security issues they have both had their own issues over the years, although Intel has had a fair amount more.
I think though you really hammer the point i am making home with your statement "...product based on tech from 2015, when you can have 90% its performance..."
Intel tech from 2015 is still 10% better performing than AMD's best and newest tech in 2019.
Then you say in another comment "they've won the performance and value games both at once." i never knew 10% less performance is better.
As for PCIE 4.0 if AMD has big Navi coming that can actually outperform a PCIE 3.0 x16 slot's bandwidth then I will be the first in line to get a 3900x and x570. But until there is a single card that is limited by PCIE x16 I personally don't see any reason for it. Sure ridiculously fast nvme drives are nice, but again, they don't do a whole lot to improve gaming or most workflows.