CPU Performance, Short Form

For our motherboard reviews, we use our short form testing method. These tests usually focus on if a motherboard is using MultiCore Turbo (the feature used to have maximum turbo on at all times, giving a frequency advantage), or if there are slight gains to be had from tweaking the firmware. We put the memory settings at the CPU manufacturers suggested frequency, making it very easy to see which motherboards have MCT enabled by default.

For X570 we are running using Windows 10 64-bit with the 1903 update as per our Ryzen 3000 CPU review.

Rendering - Blender 2.7b: 3D Creation Suite - link

A high profile rendering tool, Blender is open-source allowing for massive amounts of configurability, and is used by a number of high-profile animation studios worldwide. The organization recently released a Blender benchmark package, a couple of weeks after we had narrowed our Blender test for our new suite, however their test can take over an hour. For our results, we run one of the sub-tests in that suite through the command line - a standard ‘bmw27’ scene in CPU only mode, and measure the time to complete the render.

Rendering: Blender 2.79b

Streaming and Archival Video Transcoding - Handbrake 1.1.0

A popular open source tool, Handbrake is the anything-to-anything video conversion software that a number of people use as a reference point. The danger is always on version numbers and optimization, for example the latest versions of the software can take advantage of AVX-512 and OpenCL to accelerate certain types of transcoding and algorithms. The version we use here is a pure CPU play, with common transcoding variations.

We have split Handbrake up into several tests, using a Logitech C920 1080p60 native webcam recording (essentially a streamer recording), and convert them into two types of streaming formats and one for archival. The output settings used are:

  • 720p60 at 6000 kbps constant bit rate, fast setting, high profile
  • 1080p60 at 3500 kbps constant bit rate, faster setting, main profile
  • 1080p60 HEVC at 3500 kbps variable bit rate, fast setting, main profile

Handbrake 1.1.0 - 720p60 x264 6000 kbps FastHandbrake 1.1.0 - 1080p60 x264 3500 kbps FasterHandbrake 1.1.0 - 1080p60 HEVC 3500 kbps Fast

Rendering – POV-Ray 3.7.1: Ray Tracing - link

The Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer, or POV-Ray, is a freeware package for as the name suggests, ray tracing. It is a pure renderer, rather than modeling software, but the latest beta version contains a handy benchmark for stressing all processing threads on a platform. We have been using this test in motherboard reviews to test memory stability at various CPU speeds to good effect – if it passes the test, the IMC in the CPU is stable for a given CPU speed. As a CPU test, it runs for approximately 1-2 minutes on high-end platforms.

Rendering: POV-Ray 3.7.1 Benchmark

Compression – WinRAR 5.60b3: link

Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30-second 720p videos.

Encoding: WinRAR 5.60b3

Synthetic – 7-Zip v1805: link

Out of our compression/decompression tool tests, 7-zip is the most requested and comes with a built-in benchmark. For our test suite, we’ve pulled the latest version of the software and we run the benchmark from the command line, reporting the compression, decompression, and a combined score.

It is noted in this benchmark that the latest multi-die processors have very bi-modal performance between compression and decompression, performing well in one and badly in the other. There are also discussions around how the Windows Scheduler is implementing every thread. As we get more results, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Encoding: 7-Zip 1805 CompressionEncoding: 7-Zip 1805 DecompressionEncoding: 7-Zip 1805 Combined

Point Calculations – 3D Movement Algorithm Test: link

3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz, and IPC win in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. For a brief explanation of the platform agnostic coding behind this benchmark, see my forum post here.

System: 3D Particle Movement v2.1

Neuron Simulation - DigiCortex v1.20: link

The newest benchmark in our suite is DigiCortex, a simulation of biologically plausible neural network circuits, and simulates activity of neurons and synapses. DigiCortex relies heavily on a mix of DRAM speed and computational throughput, indicating that systems which apply memory profiles properly should benefit and those that play fast and loose with overclocking settings might get some extra speed up. Results are taken during the steady-state period in a 32k neuron simulation and represented as a function of the ability to simulate in real time (1.000x equals real-time).

System: DigiCortex 1.20 (32k Neuron, 1.8B Synapse)

System Performance Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

64 Comments

View All Comments

  • drexnx - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    even before I knew it was a blink 182 reference, I still read it as "all the...small things"
  • Tuxie - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    I'm still waiting for a Mini-ITX board with AM4, 2x M.2 and 10GbE. No need for WiFi, SATA, TB or onboard DP/HDMI.
  • jeremyshaw - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    The last part is what kills this board for me. It wastes space on DP and HDMI (technically, just HDMI, since the DP is an input for the TB3), when it already has a TB3/USB-C connection to handle video output. If someone insists on using a $220 board for a 3400G (and I am being extremely generous here), let them fall on their own sword. Let them spend the extra $20-30 on a DP-->HDMI adapter. Don't waste precious space on this board with a HDMI connector.

    Even worse, the Intel version of this board has all of the same outputs, PLUS two more USB ports and another M.2 slot. So no matter how I slice it, this board is down on features vs existing ASRock boards. From what I understand, ASRock didn't link the M.2 slot to the extra 4 PCIe lanes from the CPU, either, so it's sharing bandwidth from the chipset (with LAN & TB3), just like the Intel board. What a waste.
  • umano - Friday, October 11, 2019 - link

    I totally agree, let's hope in the future
  • FiveOhFour - Saturday, January 11, 2020 - link

    i agree but the hdmi part isn't fair it makes sense given how common this form factor is for use as a home theatre pc
  • FiveOhFour - Saturday, January 11, 2020 - link

    thats a major dissapointment though for sure, so whats the best option for x570 boards with thunderbolt, aside from the $1,000 white one. I don't need a certain form factor, though it would've been nice, just the best/most features and quality and price
  • Valantar - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    They're not going to make a premium ITX board without WiFi - too risky in terms of lost sales. A lot of SFF PC users move their PCs around, and not all places have Ethernet available. Also, ditching SATA seems early - people have legacy devices still (though cutting it down to 2 SATA probably wouldn't be a deal breaker for many). Likely all of this could be fit on board if they went with some sort of stacked m.2 layout like the Gigabyte or the Strix.

    Beyond that, I agree on faster networking though. Even one of those Realtek 2.5GB controllers would be a huge (well, 2.5x) improvement. Fitting a 10GbE controller might be too tight of a fit, sadly. But maybe on a daughterboard/some sort of vertical m.2 board like WiFi controllers?
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    I doubt we'll see many 2 sata boards anytime soon; but the total is dropping and starting to shift downward. Looking at newegg listings, and limiting AMD to x70 boards since the remainder of the 5xx series isn't out yet:

    x370 3x 4 ports, 29x 6 ports, 76x 8 ports, 2x 10 ports.
    x470 21x 4 ports, 147x 6 ports, 19x 8 ports
    x570 36x 4 ports, 181x 6 ports, 83x 8 ports.

    10 ports has disappeared as an option. 4 ports has grown from 3 to 11% of the total, and despite bouncing back a bit this year 8 port models are a minority of designs now vs the default in x370 boards.

    On the intel side, and sticking to Z series boards to stay with the same general market segment as AMD:

    Z170: 3x 2 port boards, 20x 4 port, 68x 6 ports, 8x 8 ports.
    Z270: 9x 4 port, 74x 6 port, 19x 8 ports.
    Z370: 43x 4 port, 129x 6 port, 1x 8 port
    Z390: 66x 4 port, 476x 6 port, 18x 8 port.

    Similar trends overall; 8 port is much less common on Intel boards because their consumer chipsets only have 6 sata ports available; 8+ requires a 3rd party controller and has been much less common for years as a result.

    With both brands I suspect the transition will be slow because consumer boards suffer from feature checkboxitis and the connectors are cheap. Reducing support on the chipset would push things faster but sata controllers are relatively small/cheap compared to top of the line USB/PCIe ones and both companies are doing variations of the flexible IO port thing so it doesn't cost them much either. It'll happen eventually, but I don't expect to see much movement until the price/GB gap narrows at lot between SSD and HDDs because of people wanting to make DIY NAS/Storage servers.
  • Heavenly71 - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    Sadly this board severly lacks USB ports. And it also doesn't have an internal header for front panel USB-C.
  • imaheadcase - Wednesday, October 9, 2019 - link

    That isn't really a issue considering all the options you can add usb to a system now-a-days.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now