The ASUS Pro WS X570-Ace Review: x8x8x8 with No RGB
by Gavin Bonshor on August 12, 2019 9:00 AM ESTPower Delivery Thermal Analysis
One of the most requested elements of our motherboard reviews revolves around the power delivery and its componentry. Aside from the quality of the components and its capability for overclocking to push out higher clock speeds which in turn improves performance, is the thermal capability of the cooling solutions implemented by manufacturers. While almost always fine for users running processors at default settings, the cooling capability of the VRMs isn't something that users should worry too much about, but for those looking to squeeze out extra performance from the CPU via overclocking, this puts extra pressure on the power delivery and in turn, generates extra heat. This is why more premium models often include heatsinks on its models with better cooling designs, heftier chunks of metal, and in some cases, even with water blocks.
Testing Methodology
Our method of testing is going to focus on if the power delivery and its heatsink are effective at dissipating heat. We run an intensely heavy CPU workload for a prolonged method of time and apply an overclock which is deemed safe and at the maximum that the silicon on our AMD Ryzen 7 3700X processor allows. We then run the Prime95 with AVX2 enabled under a torture test for an hour at the maximum stable overclock we can, which puts insane pressure on the processor. We collect our data via three different methods which include the following:
- Taking a thermal image from a birds-eye view after an hour with a Flir Pro thermal imaging camera
- Securing two probes on to the rear of the PCB, right underneath CPU VCore section of the power delivery for better parity in case a probe reports a faulty reading
- Taking a reading of the VRM temperature from the sensor reading within the HWInfo monitoring application
Two K-Type Thermal Probes attached to the rear of the power delivery on the ASUS Pro WS X570-Ace
The reason for using three different methods is that some sensors can read inaccurate temperatures, which can give very erratic results for users looking to gauge whether an overclock is too much pressure for the power delivery handle. With using a probe on the rear, it can also show the efficiency of the power stages and heatsinks as a wide margin between the probe and sensor temperature can show that the heatsink is dissipating heat and that the design is working, or that the internal sensor is massively wrong. To ensure our probe was accurate prior to testing, I personally binned 10 and selected the most accurate (within 1c of the actual temperature) for better parity in our testing.
For thermal image, we use a Flir One camera as it gives a good indication of where the heat is generated around the socket area, as some designs use different configurations and an evenly spread power delivery with good components will usually generate less heat. Manufacturers who use inefficient heatsinks and cheap out on power delivery components should run hotter than those who have invested. Of course, a $700 flagship motherboard is likely to outperform a cheaper $100 model under the same testing conditions, but it is still worth testing to see which vendors are doing things correctly.
Thermal Analysis Results
We measured 55.5°C on PCB between the CPU socket and power delivery
The ASUS Pro WS X570-Ace is running a 12-phase power delivery for the CPU VCore and a 2-phase setup for the SoC. This is controlled by an ASP1405I which is a rebadged International Rectifier IR35201 PWM controller which is operating in a 6+1 configuration. Cooling the power delivery is a good-sized aluminium heatsink with uniformed fins which when combined with good passive airflow, should prove effective. As ASUS is running the Pro WS X570-Ace power delivery power stages in a teamed mode as opposed to doublers, this should, in theory, make the power delivery cooler. Delivering power to the CPU is a single 8-pin 12 V ATX which is more than enough power for the current Ryzen 3000 processor line-up.
As we get more results, we will endeavour to update this chart when more models have been tested
Note - The ASRock B450 Gaming ITX-ac model crashed instantly every time the small FFT torture test within Prime95 was initiated. At anything on the CPU VCore above 1.35 V would result in instant instability. The Ryzen Master auto-overclocking function failed every time it tried to dial in settings, but it does, however, operate absolutely fine at stock, and with Precision Boost Overdrive enabled. Either the firmware is the issue, or the board just isn't capable of overclocking the Ryzen 3700X with extreme workloads with what is considered a stable overclock on the X570 chipset. We will re-test this in the future.
Comparing the ASUS Pro WS X570-Ace to other models on test with our Ryzen 7 3700X processor, we found that at the time of writing, this particular model has the most efficient power delivery design so far. The teaming of the power stages from a 12+2 to a 6+1 design works well and as a result, runs around 7°C cooler than the MSI MEG X570 Godlike at maximum load. One drawback to the ASUS Pro WS X570-Ace is that this model doesn't include a VRM temperature sensor integrated into the power delivery, but our thermal probe readings and thermal imaging are consistent, and the WS X570-Ace performs superbly in comparison to both the MSI MEG X570 models we have tested so far.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
110 Comments
View All Comments
umano - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
It seems a great mb and it has a wonderful look. It is not the board for me, I'd go HEDT with an Atx board, but I like the approach based on quality, caring about details that do not shine on paper or on images but they shine on performance, reliability and why not pleasure to use. The shield and separation for the audio it is a needed touch of design elegance.I really hope this is not the last we heard from x570 boards, to me the x570 offer lacks an outstanding pro oriented Itx board.
FredeBR - Wednesday, August 14, 2019 - link
I saw comments that 3900x works very hot (high temperature). On this asus board is it possible to configure processor downclock, like lowering the cpu voltage? I will use for full load processing for more than 24 hours in a row.TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, August 22, 2019 - link
The 3900x is a 12 core CPU. It's goona need some big boy cooling. If you dont want to deal with the heat you should probably stick with an 8 core ryzen. You could turn off turbo boost, but then why bother shelling out more for the big chips if youre just gonna kneecap it?abufrejoval - Thursday, August 15, 2019 - link
As much as I like the 3x8 general option, it pains me that the first logical addition to a GPU and perhaps a RAID controller, 10GBase-T Ethernet is going to swallow 8 lanes of PCIe 4, while a single lane would be quite sufficient and actually the Ethernet IP block for that is already supposed to be inside the 'chipset'! And that price, whatever licence cost required to make use of it, should be included.Otherwise it looks like one of the sanest mainboard designs I have seen so far.
alpha754293 - Thursday, August 15, 2019 - link
"One of the key elements to this board design is the x8/x8/x8 PCIe 4.0 slot layout. This motherboard is the only one on the market that uses a full PCIe 4.0 x8 lane available from the AMD X570 chipset, enabling an array of different use cases that ASUS believes this market needs. Technically the upstream link to the CPU is still limited to PCIe 4.0 x4, however this does enable PCIe 3.0 x8 cards to have full bandwidth, which accounts for a lot of add in cards (RAID, high-end networking)."This is quite possibly one of the worst boards on the market then.
They have three PCIe 4.0 x16 physical slots, but either only run at its native x16 speeds if you only have one card installed, x8 if you have two, and really x8/x8/**x4** if you have three cards installed since the chipset to CPU interface is a PCIe 4.0 **x4** link.
That is so dumb.
Why would they bother putting in a x16 physical slot, and then because of the chipset link, only run it at x4 electrically?
Quite possibly one of the worst product development/engineering decisions ever.
A single NVMe PCIe 4.0 x4 SSD would be able to consume all of that bandwidth.
moriz - Friday, August 16, 2019 - link
i think the key here is that the third slot can *supposedly run at PCIe **3.0** x8, which allows it to give full bandwidth to any PCIe 3.0 x8 add-in card.*supposedly, because i've yet to see any confirmation that it is capable of doing the PCIe version switch.
YaroslavZ - Sunday, August 18, 2019 - link
hey! , I bought this mobo a couple of days ago, I bought it because I wanted to upgrade my old cpu to R9 3900X, I also happened to have 4 R9 390 gpus (2 390s 2 390x) , sadly I don't have the cpu yet, I do have the r5 1400 lying around but I don't feel like taking it out from completely different cpu and adding it into that costly mobo just to test things out,I bought that mobo exactly to run 4way CFX with these gpus, 8x 8x 4+4x* & 4x from m.2 to pcie adapter,
based on your words, in theory the 3rd slot should be able to use more bandwidth than a simple 4x 3.0 , is that correct? if so then that will pretty good upgrade over a simple 4x.
anyways just to give you some info, a simple 4x 3.0 uses around 70~75% power of R9 390, while 8x around 99% ,
I do know that because atm i'm sitting through 8x 8x 4x in asus z170-a , which also have m.2 at x4 so 4way is possible as well but I bought the adapter just recently and I don't really want to sit through sata ssd, as well as this mobo currently have problems with 2 ram slots because of which I can't use dual channel atm, which obviously makes 3gpus to barely outperform a single gpu so adding 4th on top of that is pointless, wish the prices on r9 3900x will fall soon.
here is stock 3way (8x 8x 4x) 3dmark (firestrike ultra) score in dual channel when I still had it, also, R9 390X performing with stream processors of R9 390's if I got it right(aka it's like 3x of R9 390 even when some of them have X's), because I was forced to use R9 390 as gpu1 to enable CFX,, https://www.3dmark.com/fs/18192586
tristank - Tuesday, August 20, 2019 - link
How does this even works? Is there some kind of translation between PCIe 4.0 x4 to PCIe 3.0 x8. I dont get it. I thought this was not possible.JKJK - Friday, August 16, 2019 - link
A card like this without 10GbE is completely idiotic.You shouldn't have to waste a pci-e port on it. And it should be intel. Let the gamers use the unstable Aquantica shit chips and drivers (been there, done that).
Tomyknee - Sunday, September 1, 2019 - link
All I hear about is the chipset fan. I have read (Buildazoid in May 2019 Gig Master review) that it is the RAID setups going through the Chipset that sets the fan off. Unfortunately the second M.2 is only PCIe x2. Other than SATA drives maxed at 6gbs, it does not make sense to run RAIDO for speed. Samsung will have PCIe 4.0 NVMe M.2 that surpase 7gbs R/W within a year and the 2x will not take advantage of that.A deal breaker for me, (I really like this board, really want to order it - looks great and no RGB!)