ASRock X99 WS Conclusion

If we were to assign characteristics to a company based on previous launches, ASRock tends to be the one that has a mountain of small new ideas. Some of these ideas work really well and become essential parts of the package, while others initially sound confusing and drop off the radar. While the workstation route is somewhat new to ASRock’s consumer motherboard design team, it seems that the historic characteristics of ASRock are not here in the X99 WS – there is very little that seems ‘new’ compared to everyone else. If we look at other motherboards in this review, we have features such as the OC Socket, the UV light-up rear-panel or interesting PCIe/storage arrangements, but it would seem that ASRock’s effort in the X99 WS is more on the components than the functionality.

The big thing ASRock is promoting with the X99 WS is full Xeon E5 v3 support with ECC and RDIMM verification up to 128GB of memory. The WS is not the only motherboard in the X99 consumer stack to accept Xeons (in fact, most of them will), although few openly announce ECC/RDIMM support. The main lynchpin with ASUS WS motherboards, for example, is QVL support for a large range of additional PCIe devices that regular users do not use (Xeon Phi, RAID cards, FPGA). Unfortunately ASRock has made no effort to communicate that support in their press or online materials, suggesting that the only move towards ‘WS’ naming is the dual Intel NIC design with vPro support (for Windows Server applications) and some higher end components for 12-phase power delivery.

With all this being said, the X99 WS is a more than capable board for a build. It gives a set of six full-length PCIe slots for additional cards, M.2 support up to 110mm and for WS users and a pair of COM headers teamed with a TPM header. We get the enhanced audio with Purity Sound 2 hiding a Realtek ALC1150 codec under an EMI shield, and the extra-large heatsinks should help with heat dissipation. One additional benefit with the WS is that the z-height is sufficient to use this motherboard in a 1U server, allowing for high-density setups. If a user is building a heavy compute platform, there are two additional power connections for PCIe cards, although the 4-pin molex connector in the middle of the board is somewhat unwieldy from a cable management perspective.

From a BIOS and software perspective, the BIOS has been rearranged slightly for manual overclocking which makes it easy to understand where everything is, although there is room for some small adjustment. The aesthetic of the BIOS is very easy to read, which is a bonus, although there is no 'simple mode' similar to the other manufacturers. The software uses the standard A-Tuning interface, and while it offers a good number of options, it does get marked down in a couple of areas where the interface could be improved for a better user experience.

The motherboard offers a number of very positive points in terms of stock performance – the MultiCore Turbo rules giving it a push ahead of the ASUS/GIGABYTE results while having the lowest idle power consumption. The audio is in the middle of the back, while the DPC and POST times are a little behind the best X99 tested in this review. Automatic overclocking offers a good number of options from 4.0 GHz to 4.5 GHz, and manual overclocking reached 4.5 GHz before peak temperatures became too high.

Overall, the ASRock X99 WS performs well out of the box and enforces the support for Xeons + ECC/RDIMMs should a user need it. However, it marks a departure from previous ASRock releases by not adding much ‘extra’ to the overall experience in terms of direct functionality.

GIGABYTE X99-UD7 WiFi Conclusion MSI X99S SLI Plus 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