The Intel Haswell-E X99 Motherboard Roundup with ASUS, GIGABYTE, ASRock and MSI
by Ian Cutress on September 25, 2014 11:30 AM ESTGaming Benchmarks
F1 2013
First up is F1 2013 by Codemasters. I am a big Formula 1 fan in my spare time, and nothing makes me happier than carving up the field in a Caterham, waving to the Red Bulls as I drive by (because I play on easy and take shortcuts). F1 2013 uses the EGO Engine, and like other Codemasters games ends up being very playable on old hardware quite easily. In order to beef up the benchmark a bit, we devised the following scenario for the benchmark mode: one lap of Spa-Francorchamps in the heavy wet, the benchmark follows Jenson Button in the McLaren who starts on the grid in 22nd place, with the field made up of 11 Williams cars, 5 Marussia and 5 Caterham in that order. This puts emphasis on the CPU to handle the AI in the wet, and allows for a good amount of overtaking during the automated benchmark. We test at 1920x1080 on Ultra graphical settings.
Bioshock Infinite
Bioshock Infinite was Zero Punctuation’s Game of the Year for 2013, uses the Unreal Engine 3, and is designed to scale with both cores and graphical prowess. We test the benchmark using the Adrenaline benchmark tool and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.
Tomb Raider
The next benchmark in our test is Tomb Raider. Tomb Raider is an AMD optimized game, lauded for its use of TressFX creating dynamic hair to increase the immersion in game. Tomb Raider uses a modified version of the Crystal Engine, and enjoys raw horsepower. We test the benchmark using the Adrenaline benchmark tool and the Xtreme (1920x1080, Maximum) performance setting, noting down the average frame rates and the minimum frame rates.
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.
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.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
Ian Cutress - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link
Usually some of the 16xx series have some leeway, but the larger 26xx are definitely locked down. I've managed 107 MHz BCLK from an E5 2697 v3, but YMMV.halcyon - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link
Is this correct:http://i.imgur.com/3AgxLfs.png
bebimbap - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link
That's probably because the 5960x runs at 3.0-3.5ghz stock while the 4790k runs 4.0-4.4ghz stockso if it is single threaded MHz limited, then the 4790k can run 14%-47% faster than the 5960x can at stock settings.
Ian Cutress - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link
Minimum frame rate results are always tricky. If the system software initiates something critical in the foreground and causes a single frame to falter, then the whole minimum frame rate is reduced. That's why I'm not always too keen on reporting them, but have them included for completeness.The single thread speed is also another aspect, also depending on the cache orientation of the CPU, it might cause a frame or two to load faster/slower than others, again causing that one frame drop.
Given that this is more common across the Haswell-E line, compared to Haswell, it might be something that fundamental.
bebimbap - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link
I had always thought MSI was a top tier vendor of MB and GPU's but after my gtx 8800 "malfunctioned," back when they were the best available, and then my z87 mpower MSI MB headers fall apart, and OC's at higher voltages compared to my z87 gigabyte ud5h and is hotter at the same voltages. It made me think about it, and MSI is very similar in marketing style as XFX. They are both usually heavy on rebates, and very cheap for the amount of product you get. But they lack quality. None of my XFX cards perform as well as their Asus/EVGA/Gigabyte counterparts. I now put them in the same tier as ECS and Biostar.The MSI board OC'd performance being less seemed more of the same, and I was expecting as much. Until something drastically changes, I'll only use Asus/Gigabyte/Asrock.
just4U - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link
That's unfortunate.. however you do have to keep in mind that these are sensitive electronic components. I've had boards fail by all the major companies. It happens.. I had 3 dead boards in the Genie Rog Asus series all out of the first batch that came in (7 in total) did it stop me from using Asus? No.. again it happens. Had loose heatsinks dead chipset fans, a capacitor that fell off.. ugh.. Still if I dropped all the companies where that had happened I'd not have any companies to turn to lol.Msi is doing a lot of good things these days and their easily right up there with Gigabyte and Asus.
CFTheDragon - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link
Why is there not the MSI X99 Gaming in the review? Is anyone really going to buy the normal version and not the Gaming one for a X99 build?Ian Cutress - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link
For review time, these are the samples we were sourced. Not every model is available for review, depending on how the manufacturer wants to focus on different titles. We asked MSI what their most popular/consumer focused board would be in terms of numbers, and they seem really pleased internally with the SLI Plus.The_Assimilator - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link
The only people who buy "Gaming" boards are the gullible who like bling and think that the KillerNIC is something desirable to have, rather than the liability it actually is.Flunk - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link
Unless the "Gaming" board happens to be cheaper, which happens a lot because I don't think they sell that great. Damn Killer NICs, just give me Intel and be done with it. Killer started off as nothing but marketing and since they've were bought out by Qualcomm they're just remarked Qualcomm parts with tweaked drivers. MSI's "Gaming" line is a really cynical take on the whole affair, it's just their regular boards with red highlights and (only on some models) a few small IC changes.