System Performance

Power Consumption

Power consumption was tested on the system while in a single MSI GTX 770 Lightning GPU configuration with a wall meter connected to the OCZ 1250W power supply. This power supply is Gold rated, and as I am in the UK on a 230-240 V supply, leads to ~75% efficiency > 50W, and 90%+ efficiency at 250W, suitable for both idle and multi-GPU loading. This method of power reading allows us to compare the power management of the UEFI and the board to supply components with power under load, and includes typical PSU losses due to efficiency. These are the real world values that consumers may expect from a typical system (minus the monitor) using this motherboard.

While this method for power measurement may not be ideal, and you feel these numbers are not representative due to the high wattage power supply being used (we use the same PSU to remain consistent over a series of reviews, and the fact that some boards on our test bed get tested with three or four high powered GPUs), the important point to take away is the relationship between the numbers. These boards are all under the same conditions, and thus the differences between them should be easy to spot.

Power Consumption: Long Idle with GTX 770

Power Consumption: Idle with GTX 770

Power Consumption: OCCT Load with GTX 770

With the added PLX switches and LSI RAID controller, the Extreme11 was from the outset not going to be overly great when it came to power consumption. The same conclusions came from the ASRock X99 WS-E/10G with its power hungry 10G chip, and as a result these boards match each other both at idle and CPU load.

Windows 7 POST Time

Different motherboards have different POST sequences before an operating system is initialized. A lot of this is dependent on the board itself, and POST boot time is determined by the controllers on board (and the sequence of how those extras are organized). As part of our testing, we look at the POST Boot Time using a stopwatch. This is the time from pressing the ON button on the computer to when Windows 7 starts loading. (We discount Windows loading as it is highly variable given Windows specific features.) 

Windows 7 POST Time - Default

Windows 7 POST Time - Stripped

The extra controllers cause a small bump in POST time, with the final result being near the bottom of our testing results.

Rightmark Audio Analyzer 6.2.5

Rightmark:AA indicates how well the sound system is built and isolated from electrical interference (either internally or externally). For this test we connect the Line Out to the Line In using a short six inch 3.5mm to 3.5mm high-quality jack, turn the OS speaker volume to 100%, and run the Rightmark default test suite at 192 kHz, 24-bit. The OS is tuned to 192 kHz/24-bit input and output, and the Line-In volume is adjusted until we have the best RMAA value in the mini-pretest. We look specifically at the Dynamic Range of the audio codec used on board, as well as the Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise.

Dynamic Range of X99 Extreme11 at 100% volume

Rightmark: AA, Dynamic Range, 24-bit / 192 kHz

Rightmark: AA, THD+N, 24-bit / 192 kHz

The Extreme11 results match what we have seen before on other ASRock X99 boards with Realtek ALC1150 audio codecs – around 103 dB for dynamic range and above -78 dB for THD+N.

USB Backup

For this benchmark, we transfer a set size of files from the SSD to the USB drive using DiskBench, which monitors the time taken to transfer. The files transferred are a 1.52 GB set of 2867 files across 320 folders – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second HD videos. In an update to pre-Z87 testing, we also run MaxCPU to load up one of the threads during the test which improves general performance up to 15% by causing all the internal pathways to run at full speed.

USB 2.0 Copy Times

USB 3.0 Copy Times

USB 2.0 performance is somewhat middling, but USB 3.0 performance on the PCH is some of the best we have seen.

DPC Latency

Deferred Procedure Call latency is a way in which Windows handles interrupt servicing. In order to wait for a processor to acknowledge the request, the system will queue all interrupt requests by priority. Critical interrupts will be handled as soon as possible, whereas lesser priority requests such as audio will be further down the line. If the audio device requires data, it will have to wait until the request is processed before the buffer is filled.

If the device drivers of higher priority components in a system are poorly implemented, this can cause delays in request scheduling and process time.  This can lead to an empty audio buffer and characteristic audible pauses, pops and clicks. The DPC latency checker measures how much time is taken processing DPCs from driver invocation. The lower the value will result in better audio transfer at smaller buffer sizes. Results are measured in microseconds.

DPC Latency

LSI 3008 Performance

Unlike our X79 Extreme11 review, I unfortunately did not have a series of SSDs on hand to test in a similar manner. Nevertheless, the implementation for the X99 version is the same as the X79, and to recap our X79 Extreme11 results gives the following for peak sequential read speeds. The legend gives our X79 setup in terms of SATA 6 Gbps ports + SATA 3 Gbps ports (thus 2+0 gives a RAID-0 array of two SATA 6 Gbps ports), with the final eight being solely populated on the LSI controller.

This in order to match the best PCH performance in this setup, it required three drives in RAID-0 on the LSI ports. Similar results can be extrapolated for X99 whereby six of the 10 SATA ports on the PCH are capable of RAID, and a similar number on the LSI would be needed to match it. Unfortunately any RAID array that crosses both the PCH and the LSI ports needs to be from software.

In The Box, Test Setup and Overclocking CPU Performance
Comments Locked

58 Comments

View All Comments

  • Stylex - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    with that logic we should still have usb 1.1 or serial ports. All USB3 just makes things easier to plug in, as you don't have go looking for the 'special' ports.
  • wmaciv01 - Wednesday, March 11, 2015 - link

    I just built a system with this board to host my ANS-9010's (x4 32GB in an 8 port RAID 0). Still kind of tinkering with it and exploring the BIOS. I installed the 40 lane 6 core Haswell and have 32GB Mushkin RED DDR4 2400 and a Samsun xp941 256GB as the boot drive. Case is an Xigmatek Elysium. Wish I could post some pics/bench stats for you guys.
  • darkfalz - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link

    8 port RAID 0 - I hope nothing critical resides on that drive.
  • dishayu - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link

    I'm not so sure if I would buy a motherboard without USB-C ports today.
  • darkfalz - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link

    18 SATA ports but no onboard RAID-5 or 6 - almost a LOL moment, but I suppose you could do your boot SSD and then run a huge soft raid array...
  • Navvie - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link

    I'd be interested to see ZFS benchmarks, assuming of course the LSI controller still allows the drives to be accessed as JBOD.
  • mpogr - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link

    It doesn't look like the guys here heard about ZFS, otherwise they wouldn't complain about lack of hardware RAID...
  • mpogr - Thursday, March 12, 2015 - link

    This board could be interesting for either a bare metal or virtualised ZFS-based storage server. There is no need in hardware RAID for that one, just fast SATA ports, fast CPU and lots of RAM. Having PCIe 3.0 slots is beneficial for Infiniband cards and, without a switch (which for 40Gbit+ IB costs 1000s), you'd need a few of them, so multiple x8 or slots are beneficial. ECC RAM support (with Xeon CPUs) is a must for such a server as well.
    What's missing? First and foremost, onboard graphics and IPMI! You want to be able to run this sucker headless. Second, what the heck is with the price? Comparable Supermicro boards (e.g. X10SRH-CF, with IPMI!) cost $400. Yes, they don't support multi-GPU graphics or overclocking, but who needs those on a storage server? I think this board completely missed its target audience...
  • JohnUSA - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link

    $630 ? Ouch, no thanks.
  • mapesdhs - Monday, March 16, 2015 - link

    Without any cache, the SAS controller is useless. Lack of cache really kills 4K performance,
    especially with SSDs (I've tested this with a P410 vs. other cards). With cache included, even
    just 1GB, 4K performance can be amazing, over 2GB/sec.

    Hence, as others have said, better off using a different cheaper board and a separate SAS card
    that does have cache and a BBU, including any numerous X79 boards, though if storage is a
    focus then something with 10GigE support makes more sense, XEON, ECC (unless one is using
    ZFS I guess), in which case one is moving away from consumer X79/X99 anyway.

    mpogr makes some interesting points; thing is, there are proper XEON server boards available
    for less anyway, put a SAS card on one of those and away you go, no need to worry about any
    consumer-related mbd issues. Afterall, if one is going to be using a XEON and ECC then oc'ing
    doesn't matter at all.

    I was considering an X79 Extreme11 a couple of years ago for a pro system I was building for
    someone (they couldn't afford a dual-XEON setup), but the lack of SAS cache meant it was
    not worthwhile. Used an ASUS P9X79 WS instead and I'm glad I did.

    Ian.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now