Integrated Device Testing
Audio Subsystem Testing
Audio Playback Testing
Using a selection of Hard Rock and Heavy Metal music tracks and Windows Media Player, the audio subsystem playback performance was tested for playback accuracy and fidelity.
Playback using the app provided test sounds and audio test tracks was clear and distortion free using a 5.1 speaker setup through the on-board analogue audio ports.
Listening tests using the selected audio tracks were performed with a Razer Carcharias audio headset as well as a 5.1 speaker setup to exercise the subsystem's audio fidelity. GIGABYTE seems to know how to design integrated audio subsytems. Even without the bells and whistles of the changeable OP-AMP and configurable levels, the X99-SOC Champion's integrated audio chipset performed well using both the speaker setup and the headphones. The audio clarity and crispness was superb through both listening devices.
Microphone Port Testing
For testing the board's Microphone input port, the microphone from a Razer Carcharias audio headset was used to capture a 10 second spoken phrase with the assistance of the Microsoft Sound Recorder application. The resulting audio file was saved to the desktop and played back using Windows Media Player.
The recorded audio was distortion-free during all test run, requiring recording volume set to a minimum of 75 and Microphone Boost enabled with a +20dB setting. Enabling the Noise Suppression and Acoustic Echo Cancellation functions via the audio control panel had no discernible audio quality impact on the recorded audio stream.
ATTO Disk Benchmark
To validate that the board’s device ports were functioning correctly, we connected an OCZ Vertex 460 240GB SATA III SSD to the system and ran the ATTO Disk Benchmark against the drive. The SSD was directly connected to the native SATA 3 ports. NGFF port testing was performed using an M.2 based Plextor PCIe M.2 2280 128GB SSD. ATTO was configured to test against transfer sizes from 0.5 to 8192 KB with Total Length set to 512 MB and Queue Depth set to 10. The M.2 SSD selected for testing has a maximum read throughput of 770 MB/s and a write throughput of 335 MB/s over a PCI-Express x2 bus. The selected SSD has a maximum maximum read throughput of 540 MB/s and a write throughput of 525 MB/s on a SATA III controller. The drive tests were repeated three times with the highest repeatable read and write speeds recorded.
SSD performance met performance expectations across all ports, pushing the performance limits of the OCZ Vertex 460 test drive used. The M.2 SSD performance was also on par with expectations with read performance just shy of 800 MB/s.
SoftPerfect Research NetWorx Speed Test
In conjunction with Windows Performance Monitor, SoftPerfect Research NetWorx Speed Meter application was used to measure the upload and download performance of the motherboards integrated network controllers. Speed Meter was used to measure average network throughput in MB/s with Windows Performance Monitor used to measure average CPU utilization during the tests.
The LanBench network benchmarking software was used to generate send and receive traffic between the local and remote systems over a five minute period with packet size set to 4096 and connection count set to 20. A LanBench server was set up on the remote system to generate or receive traffic for the tests performed. The upload and download tests were repeated three times with the highest repeatable average throughput and the lowest repeatable average CPU utilization percentage recorded.
Note that that theoretical maximum throughput for a Gigabit Ethernet adapter is 125 MB/s (1.0 Gbps).
Performance on the Intel GigE network controller was excellent with both upload and download transfers averaging well over 100 MB/s. The average performance difference between the upload and download transfers was a mere 8 MB/s with the upload performing best at an average speed of 118 MB/s. Even the CPU utilization numbers average a low 2% during all tests with spikes on the controller staying below 10% for the duration of both runs.
Can anyone explain why modern
Can anyone explain why modern motherboards STILL come with PS/2 ports? Does some common non-KB/Mouse hardware peripheral that i’m completely unaware of use them? I can’t imagine someone forking out cash for a new X99 system and thinking “alright, done. Now to plug in this old PS/2 mouse and keyboard”
Exactly you fucking jackass.
Exactly you fucking jackass.
Yes PS/2 keyboards are very
Yes PS/2 keyboards are very much in use by builders/overclockers/tweakers. The support is better, the pitfall fewer. Some gamers think they get better performance with PS/2, but I dunno. I just know it is much less of a pain to deal with an overclocked and unstable system with a PS/2 keyboard. USB needs to init correctly, PS/2 usually hasn’t that problem.
Of course an extreme overclockers board has at least a keyboard PS/2 port. It would sell a lot less if it lacked it.
I’ve overclocked my last
I’ve overclocked my last three personal 24/7 systems and cant say i’ve ever run into an issue with my usb kb/mouse setup, but i’m not an extreme overclocker either. I admit, i don’t follow that scene closely. So perhaps it’s just an issue i’ve never run into. I have a stack of old PS/2 keyboards and mice that i haven’t touched in years. The idea of using one, to me, is on the same level as adding in an old 3.5″ floppy drive. I’ll have to read up on the pros/cons of PS/2 peripherals since i haven’t looked at one in so long.
Yes, you should read up on
Yes, you should read up on this. PS/2 has some important advantages over USB that should not be ignored or glossed over.
PS/2 has a much lower CPU overhead, especially when running mouse polling above 100Hz. If you want low latency input with low CPU overhead and you also want high polling rates then you must use PS/2. USB simply cannot do all three of those things at the same time.
For me, the inclusion of two PS/2 ports on a motherboard is a must have, even now in 2015. Motherboards with only one, or no PS/2 ports don’t even make it on to my short list.
Somehow I got a double post.
Somehow I got a double post.
It has less input latency and
It has less input latency and overhead, supports key rollover better, and is supported by many UEFIs and BIOSes better than USB. I enjoy it because it will give you a much faster boot than anything else if you have your keyboard plugged into that and disable USB init in the UEFI.
In the pricing section you
In the pricing section you talk about the gaming G1 instead of the SOC?????
Thanks for the heads up, it
Thanks for the heads up, it has been corrected…
it is good to have at least
it is good to have at least one PS/2 keyboard & mouse if overclocking/IT “desktop” computer repair. USB keyboard & mouse require drivers but PS/2 one doesnt. overclocking require more time testing & not in windows OS boot with drivers. meaning sometimes usb keyboard & mouse are plug in & dont work because drivers hasnt been loaded yet & try PS/2 one instead. PnP stand for Plug and Play today but early it was Plug & Pray it work.
i work at a small computer store & build over 40+ new computers in 2014 from simple “Low End”, “high End” & even something close to the “Dream System” (tinyurl.com/m4zpl8k). using USB keyboard & mouse is fine. but get desktop repair with DDR1 or DDR2 with windows xp even IDE hard drives with AGP/PCI cards. so good to have spare parts around.
this is the same thing with serious & parallel ports. i dont use it personally since 1990s but get about a few requests for it from businesses for old LEGACY machines.
Right, i understand having
Right, i understand having them around if you’re in the business of repairing and maintaining old systems. That’s the exact reason i have a few around. But an X99 board isn’t an old system with AGP ports and Windows XP.
Anyway, there’s a good reply up above about it that i responded to as well.
I dont know about anyone
I dont know about anyone else. but I have a Z97 UD5H with same bios. and I find it incredibly annoying, and very contradictory
So Gigabyte copies Asus’ OC
So Gigabyte copies Asus’ OC Socket plus violates patents in order to enable the higher clock speeds on both the CPU and memory side and nothing is mentioned about it? This is not Gigabyte engineering prowess, it is their ability to once again copy whatever Asus does on their boards.
Also, Gigabyte no longer advertises their copied socket as being Intel Certified like on their other X99 boards. Does this mean if I use this board and the cpu dies that Intel will not provide a warranty? Will Gigabyte warranty the CPU?