GIGABYTE X99-UD7 WiFi Conclusion

GIGABYTE and ASUS are locked in a battle with each other to sell the most motherboards this year. Despite a few recent quarters of lower sales, the upswing in the gaming PC market driven by high resolution gaming and renewed interest sees both manufacturers aiming well above 20 million units each, despite a global motherboard sales number about 75-80 million expected for 2014. Each of these companies has a different tactic – ASUS goes for fewer SKUs and focuses on each one, whereas GIGABYTE offers more SKUs to appeal to more users. There are certain challenges in both lineups, and it reflects in the fact that ASUS had two motherboards at the launch of X99 and GIGABYTE aimed at eight.

The X99 UD7-WiFi sits at the top of GIGABYTE’s Ultra Durable line at $310, followed by the similar UD5, then UD4 and UD3. For overclocking there is the X99-SOC Force (and SOC Force-LN2 for extreme overclockers) with gaming relying on the Gaming 5, the Gaming 7 and the Gaming G1. This encompasses a price range from $245 (UD3) to $350 (SOC Force), so while we are aiming at the cheaper end of X99, the more $400 oriented products might be further down the line.

For the X99-UD7 WiFi, GIGABYTE certainly did a number of things right. Supplying WiFi via M.2 is a nice touch, giving a new way to introduce WiFi and then stacking another M.2 for storage on top. By placing the extra circuitry needed, GIGABYTE also ensures that every motherboard across its range can support full-bandwidth four-way GPU configurations. Things like the 30 micron gold pins and extra space for mounting holes also helps reduce issues from screwdrivers that stray or corrosion oriented climates.

Despite all this, my biggest WOW moment with the GIGABYTE X99-UD7 WiFi was the bundled sleeved cables. Perhaps I spend too much time indoors reviewing CPUs and motherboards, but it is a nice touch that needs to be commonplace across all $150 and up motherboards. A positive about the PCIe area is the VGA power being provided by a SATA cable in the right area. The USB 3.0 layout is also good, giving two PCH headers and two Renesas hubs for eight ports on the rear to free up PCIe lanes.

There are some issues to take with the design, such as PCIe storage still being an issue depending on which route you take meaning that only one type can be used. While M.2 WiFi is a cool idea, and our sample had the WiFi antenna kept close to the motherboard by a plastic tool, it is not always wise to have those cables about on the motherboard. 

On the benchmark front, the GIGABYTE suffers a little similar to the ASUS by not implementing a totally aggressive MultiCore Turbo throughout any hardware setup. So at stock we had a few numbers lower than expected, although when overclocked this no longer mattered so much. Peak power consumption under load was very good, along with USB speeds, although there was an issue with the audio. Similar to Z97, there is some feature on GIGABYTE boards that causes software-detectable distortion at high volume levels. However if the volume is decreased, peak range is lowered. POST times were also around 25 seconds, matching the X99 WS.

Similar to my Z97 conclusions on GIGABYTE, the BIOS still needs work into making it the interactive tool we need. Fan controls are still lacking in depth, and all we end up with is a glorified menu with relatively few new features. The software is a plus point, making it easy to select the options the user needs however there is room for improvement, especially when it comes to Live Update.

The GIGABYTE X99-UD7 WiFi ends up being a nice motherboard to use with a decent technical portfolio. Delving into the features on an intricate level could come easier to hand, but it won’t stop users plugging in a Haswell-E for a high end gaming system.

ASUS X99-Deluxe Conclusion ASRock X99 WS Conclusion
Comments Locked

62 Comments

View All Comments

  • The Von Matrices - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    Ian never said the MSI board wouldn't overclock, just that an unidentified bug causes its overclocked performance to be significantly lower than the other boards. based upon the results, putting your same CPU in the other boards would make it perform CPU 4.5% faster; alternatively, you would have to clock your CPU to 4.8GHz in the MSI board to match the 4.6GHz overclocks in the other boards.
  • woj666 - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    This review had the opposite result. The MSI board was able to perform even better than the others overclocked. It's disappointing but sometimes we just get bad boards.

    http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/09/09/x99-mo...
  • The Von Matrices - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    The bit-tech review has the CPU in the MSI board overclocked higher than the other boards, which would reasonably would make it perform better. The problem that Ian experienced is not that the board couldn't overclock the CPU; it's that at the same clock speed, the MSI board is significantly slower than its competitors, and the bit-tech results do not replicate Ian's circumstances since they have different overclocks on each CPU on each board.
  • just4U - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link

    From the article "I have had failures in the past (Bluetooth adaptor shorting out, DRAM or PCIe slots not working, PSU going BANG… twice) "

    ----

    I was half-cut trying to install ram at 4am.. in near darkness, the combination turned into a epic fail..
  • owcraftsman - Thursday, September 25, 2014 - link

    Very unfair to MSI to select top of the line boards for the other manufacturers and a bottom of the stack from MSI. The SLI Plus is a value edition at best so spare me an explanation.
  • bigboxes - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    "Due to the way the motherboard manufacturers were sampling for X99, we were unable to align several motherboards of a similar price." If you had actually read the article you may have not come across as a love struck fanboy.
  • The_Assimilator - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    Apparently you failed to notice (no doubt because you didn't read the article) that the MSI was gicven a "Recommended" award. Explanation: you are a tool.
  • Laststop311 - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    Once again Asus is on top. Their bios is the best designed with the best features. It's why my x58 board is an asus rampage formula. I'm gonna stay with x58 tho rather get a 55" LG oled TV
  • The Von Matrices - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    For the price of the ASUS board plus a 5820K CPU you could have any of the other boards plus a 5930K CPU, which would negate any performance advantage of the ASUS board. The ASUS board is only worth considering if price is no object, which from my experience seems to describe most LGA2011 buyers.
  • Dadunn1700 - Tuesday, August 25, 2015 - link

    Or u can save up for alittle while longer and get the Asus board AND the 5930k AND be faster yet again. Round and round we go. Although it's much easier to chg a CPU rather than a whole motherboard.

    Point is No matter what better is better....but not necessarily at the same price point. Tho I don't think $500 is a lot of money for enthusiasts to spend on PC parts. Especially essential ones. Being a flagship motherboard it's not exactly geared toward budget builders anyway....ie ppl concerned with performance per dollar. They want the best....period.

    Personally I don't think $500 is a lot of money myself for a part i probably won't be replacing anytime soon.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now