The ASUS Z370-I Gaming Review: Mini-Me Mega Motherboard
by Joe Shields on May 21, 2018 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- Mini ITX
- Asus
- Coffee Lake
- Z370
- Z370-I Gaming
Benchmark Overview
For our testing, depending on the product, we attempt to tailor the presentation of our global benchmark suite down into what users who would buy this hardware might actually want to run. For CPUs, our full test suite is typically used to gather data and all the results are placed into Bench, our benchmark database for users that want to look at non-typical benchmarks or legacy data. For motherboards, we run our short form CPU tests, the gaming tests with half the GPUs of our processor suite, and our system benchmark tests which focus on non-typical and non-obvious performance metrics that are the focal point for specific groups of users.
The benchmarks fall into several areas:
Short Form CPU
Our short form testing script uses a straight run through of a mixture of known apps or workloads and requires about four hours. These are typically the CPU tests we run in our motherboard suite, to identify any performance anomalies.
| CPU Short Form Benchmarks | |
| Three Dimensional Particle Movement v2.1 (3DPM) | 3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, derived from my academic research years looking at particle movement parallelism. The coding for this tool was rough, but emulates the real world in being non-CompSci trained code for a scientific endeavor. The code is unoptimized, but the test uses OpenMP to move particles around a field using one of six 3D movement algorithms in turn, each of which is found in the academic literature. |
| The second version of this benchmark is similar to the first, however it has been re-written in VS2012 with one major difference: the code has been written to address the issue of false sharing. If data required by multiple threads, say four, is in the same cache line, the software cannot read the cache line once and split the data to each thread - instead it will read four times in a serial fashion. The new software splits the data to new cache lines so reads can be parallelized and stalls minimized. | |
| WinRAR 5.4 | WinRAR is a compression based software to reduce file size at the expense of CPU cycles. We use the version that has been a stable part of our benchmark database through 2015, and run the default settings on a 1.52GB directory containing over 2800 files representing a small website with around thirty half-minute videos. We take the average of several runs in this instance. |
| POV-Ray 3.7.1 b4 | POV-Ray is a common ray-tracing tool used to generate realistic looking scenes. We've used POV-Ray in its various guises over the years as a good benchmark for performance, as well as a tool on the march to ray-tracing limited immersive environments. We use the built-in multi threaded benchmark. |
| HandBrake v1.0.2 | HandBrake is a freeware video conversion tool. We use the tool in to process two different videos into x264 in an MP4 container - first a 'low quality' two-hour video at 640x388 resolution to x264, then a 'high quality' ten-minute video at 4320x3840, and finally the second video again but into HEVC. The low-quality video scales at lower performance hardware, whereas the buffers required for high-quality tests can stretch even the biggest processors. At current, this is a CPU only test. |
| 7-Zip 9.2 | 7-Zip is a freeware compression/decompression tool that is widely deployed across the world. We run the included benchmark tool using a 50MB library and take the average of a set of fixed-time results. |
| DigiCortex v1.20 | The newest benchmark in our suite is DigiCortex, a simulation of biologically plausible neural network circuits, and simulates activity of neurons and synapses. DigiCortex relies heavily on a mix of DRAM speed and computational throughput, indicating that systems which apply memory profiles properly should benefit and those that play fast and loose with overclocking settings might get some extra speed up. |
System Benchmarks
Our system benchmarks are designed to probe motherboard controller performance, particularly any additional USB controllers or the audio controller. As general platform tests we have DPC Latency measurements and system boot time, which can be difficult to optimize for on the board design and manufacturing level.
| System Benchmarks | |
| Power Consumption | One of the primary differences between different motherboads is power consumption. Aside from the base defaults that every motherboard needs, things like power delivery, controller choice, routing and firmware can all contribute to how much power a system can draw. This increases for features such as PLX chips and multi-gigabit ethernet. |
| Non-UEFI POST Time | The POST sequence of the motherboard becomes before loading the OS, and involves pre-testing of onboard controllers, the CPU, the DRAM and everything else to ensure base stability. The number of controllers, as well as firmware optimizations, affect the POST time a lot. We test the BIOS defaults as well as attempt a stripped POST. |
| Rightmark Audio Analyzer 6.2.5 | Testing onboard audio is difficult, especially with the numerous amount of post-processing packages now being bundled with hardware. Nonetheless, manufacturers put time and effort into offering a 'cleaner' sound that is loud and of a high quality. RMAA, with version 6.2.5 (newer versions have issues), under the right settings can be used to test the signal-to-noise ratio, signal crossover, and harmonic distortion with noise. |
| USB Backup | USB ports can come from a variety of sources: chipsets, controllers or hubs. More often than not, the design of the traces can lead to direct impacts on USB performance as well as firmware level choices relating to signal integrity on the motherboard. |
| DPC Latency | Another element is deferred procedure call latency, or the ability to handle interrupt servicing. Depending on the motherboard firmware and controller selection, some motherboards handle these interrupts quicker than others. A poor result could lead to delays in performance, or for example with audio, a delayed request can manifest in distinct audible pauses, pops or clicks. |
Gaming
Our gaming benchmarks are designed to show any differences in performance when playing games.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
37 Comments
View All Comments
Chaitanya - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
Price premium for the compact build just doesnt justify the cooling compromises that mini-ITX brings to the table especially for people living in hot climatic regions of the globe where ambient temps can cross 40Deg C.jordanclock - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
And...? So this one product might not be suitable for people using tiny air cooled cases in warm places? And who are you to say what is and isn't justified for different people? Liquid cooling pretty much negates the space issues. Also a mini-ITX board does not need to be used in a mini-ITX case.tarqsharq - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
Yeah, it seems odd to complain about cooling problems when you're already at 104F... might want to invest in AC at that point or just get a massive case with tons of fans, not conducive to ITX at all!MDD1963 - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
"Also a mini-ITX board does not need to be used in a mini-ITX case."I'm sure there's at least one tard looking to stuff one into Corsairs largest ATX doublewide case right now....
meacupla - Tuesday, May 22, 2018 - link
Do you mean the Obsidian 1000D? Because that case has room for an E-ATX and mITXSamus - Thursday, May 24, 2018 - link
Haha that's exactly what I was thinking. Dual PC's in a PC!Joe Shields - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
I'm not sure what one has to do with the other. One isn't paying a premium for the cooling, or less of it - that simply comes with the territory of the Mini-ITX board in general.Clearly, if one is living in such an area where your inside temperature is 40C, additional cooling considerations are likely warranted, almost regardless of the build size. I do not understand the root of that comment...
Chaitanya - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
One of the main selling point of Mini-Itx motherboards is smaller and compact PC builds and thats how both motherboard and case manufacturers have been marketing it. So if you want to take full advantage of smaller system then going the route of smaller Mini-Itx cases is necessary which means a restriction on size of cooler that can be used. And using tower style Itx cases defeats the purpose as one can easily go to micro Atx form factor without increasing the volume of pc case too much.Ratman6161 - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
I guess we can, or at least should, agree that there isn't a one size fits all and that Mini-ITX in general falls into the "not for everybody" category. Then again, If I built my wife a system in a mammoth full tower case, I'd probably be getting some very dirty looks to...so that is also a "not for everybody" sort of build.All that said, this article is actually a motherboard review. I am personally interested in a Mini-ITX build, but for a more mainstream, non-gaming sort of system. so what I'd like to see is a different article that addresses Mini-ITX in general and the issues, pros and cons surrounding it; selecting components that fit in a reasonable case, coolers that fit etc. One thing I would have liked to have seen in this particular article - even though its a motherboard review - is what it looks like actually mounted in a case and using components one might actually be able to fit in such a case. Notably, the GTX 980 isn't something that you could actually use in a Mini-ITX build so why benchmark with it? Or am I wrong about that?
Ratman6161 - Monday, May 21, 2018 - link
Just looked again. Ditto on the power supply and dual 120MM cooler. If they wouldn't fit in a Mini-ITX case why use them for testing the motherboard intended for such a case?