ASUS X99-Deluxe Conclusion

A lot of positive remarks have been made about the styling of the X99-Deluxe. There has been no modern attempt to style white and black properly on the motherboard, and when taking the product out of the packaging it does feel like there is a touch of finesse to the product. This may be derived purely from the white strip down the left hand side covering some of the PCB and the rear panel and the consistency in the visual aesthetic. On closer inspection, it does come to realize that the white strip is plastic and only there for the aesthetic value, but to ASUS’ credit it does look smooth and proud.

The X99-Deluxe is the most expensive X99 motherboard in our first set of reviews at $400, and actually sits near the top of the entire X99 stack. As a result, it has new or exciting features coming out of every corner. We discussed the new features such as the OC Socket to help with overclocking, the vertical M.2 x4 slot for drives and the multi-GPU switch that lights up the PCIe slots where GPUs should be placed for 2/3-way gaming. Also included in the box are a Hyper M.2 x4 PCIe card for more storage and an antenna for the 3T3R 802.11ac module – the X99-Deluxe is currently the only motherboard with a tri-stream 802.11ac solution integrated into the platform.

The more usual bonus features include dual SATA Express ports, dual Intel network connections and Crystal Sound 2 which translates as an improved ALC1150 codec with EMI shields, de-pop circuits, PCB separation and impedance detection. ASUS has also introduced a fan extension PCB, supporting another three four-pin headers alongside the six already on the motherboard. This comes with an adhesive strip, allowing system designers to place the fan PCB near where it is needed. All the fans are DC and PWM controllable as well.

The performance of the ASUS X99-Deluxe is a little mixed. Overclocking results give it 4.6 GHz under 95C load temperatures, and audio results put it at the top of our X99 charts. DPC Latency is in the middle but still very good, with POST times around the 21 second mark similar to the other motherboards. Power consumption is also in the middle.

Unfortunately though the CPU performance at stock seems a little down compared to the others. We have tackled the issue of MultiCore Turbo previously at AnandTech, and the i7-5960X is odd that while it has a base frequency of 3.0 GHz, the 3.5 GHz turbo mode is quite rare and the CPU sits more happily at 3.3 GHz. It would seem that the ASUS X99-Deluxe does implement a form of MultiCore Turbo, although slightly less aggressive than some of the other motherboards. As a result, CPU performance at stock is a little down (1145 in 3DPM-MT vs 1271 for MSI). But, when overclocked, the ASUS seems to perform better than other motherboards (PovRay at 4.0 GHz, ASUS 3223 vs MSI 3121) so it does not come across as big worry – just place the system in TPU mode one and away you go.

It is easy to be impressed with the ASUS X99-Deluxe. Not only the design, but the BIOS, software and extra features all give it a boost above most of the X99 products on the market right now. Simple things like the XMP switch and the multi-GPU light-up LEDs improve the experience, while the bundled Hyper M.2 x4 PCIe card and 802.11ac 3T3R WiFi module give tangible benefits to spending over the average.

For the X99 launch, ASUS launched only two models to the North American market – this X99 Deluxe and the $500 Rampage V Extreme. The X99-A, X99-Pro and X99-WS are all in the pipeline, but it still means ASUS is focusing more on fewer motherboards giving time to improve each one. The argument from other manufacturers is that having more motherboards offers more choice, although if you want something like the X99-Deluxe, it is a polished product and hits the market it needs to with a wake-up call.

I enjoyed the X99-Deluxe. Most X99 users will too. Out of the motherboards tested today, it certainly deserves to be recommended for an i7-5960X build.

ASUS X99-Deluxe

Gaming Benchmarks GIGABYTE X99-UD7 WiFi Conclusion
Comments Locked

62 Comments

View All Comments

  • gostan - Friday, September 26, 2014 - link

    feel like I'm transported back to 2001

    good job AT!
  • xunknownx - Saturday, September 27, 2014 - link

    what settings on povray is being used in this article? i would love to compare my results against theirs.
  • todo1 - Tuesday, September 30, 2014 - link

    X79 supports TRIPLE CHANNEL DDR3, not quad!
    I don't how it is even possible to make such a mistake?!?
  • tyaiyama - Wednesday, October 1, 2014 - link

    After reading the following:
    http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-x99-motherboard-...
    Is it worth recommendation from Anadtech? Almost 1 month has passed without Asus solving the problem. What's good about this M/B unable to certain hours operations(^^)
  • tyaiyama - Wednesday, October 1, 2014 - link

    BTW, MSI M/B also has an issue.
    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&...
    Both of these M/B happened to be recommended by Anand over the other two: AsRock & Giga. What does it mean? I personally likes AsRock X99 WS which seems Asus X99-E WS w/o PLX.
  • Haravikk - Thursday, October 2, 2014 - link

    Is there a reason the motherboards with moulded shapes over the various I/O ports don't include the I/O shield built-in? I hate adding those damned things; seems unnecessary if your motherboard is shaped around the ports already.
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, October 4, 2014 - link

    Power phases?

    Also, it seems really lazy to not check what changing the MSI load line calibration setting would actually do if changed. "This is quite odd. It would seem the efficiency of the MSI motherboard when overclocked is somehow stunted..." vdroop is supposed to be part of the Intel specification and load line calibration defeats it, right? So, it looks like there is your answer. Auto isn't the optimal setting.

    Also, if you tested these motherboards in the order you reviewed the overclocking results in, you may have fatigued the chip which explains why the results kept getting worse.
  • woj666 - Monday, October 6, 2014 - link

    Agreed, it seems very obvious that that Load Line Calibration setting of "auto" on this MSI board is in fact quite aggressive and applying vboost as described here http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/5 and here http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/24019-load-lin...

    The OC section of this article is not comparing apples to apples as the default LLC settings are not the same for the different boards.
  • akula2 - Tuesday, October 14, 2014 - link

    It was a great review, appreciate it very much.

    1) why Asus X99-E WS is missing out of action?

    2) Asus X99-E WS ($510) or Asrock X99 WS ($310)?

    My ten X99 ultra Workstations will have the upcoming Maxwell based Nvidia Quadro and Tesla cards? I'm also evaluating Firepro W9100 card too. I don't know if there will be Maxwell based Titan Black (II or whatever name)?

    Five builds will have Xeon E5-2680 v3 (more like due to price/performance) or Xeon E5-2690 v3
    Five builds will have i7-5760X CPUs

    I never used Asrock WS boards earlier, but have many Asus WS boards (X79/Z97). So, what do you think of Asrock WS over Asus X99-E WS in the given configuration above?

    Yeah, all Xeon workstations will have Intel P3700 NVMe storage solution. Also, I'm pondering on Synology DiskStation DS2413+ for 48TB NAS solution using WD Red Pro HDDs for those planned ten X99 builds.

    Hence, what do you think about those two boards?

    3) Did you observe any PCI-e 3.0 limitations/bottleneck on those two boards? Asus X99-E board has 16-four lanes solution? Please clarify on this count.

    Thank you
  • eng.michael - Friday, January 23, 2015 - link

    HELLO
    PLEASE HELP ME
    I have one , and i install O.S windows server 2012R2 ,and install all drivers correctly EXCEPT LAN driver , any one can help me in this BIG Problem.
    THANKS

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now