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 was clear and distortion free using both the 5.1 speaker setup and the Kingston HyperX Cloud Gaming headset through the integrated analogue audio ports.
Listening tests using the selected audio tracks were performed with a Kingston HyperX Cloud Gaming audio headset as well as a 5.1 speaker setup to exercise the subsystem's audio fidelity. In both cases, audio reproduction was clear, rich, and distortion-free with the little quality difference between either output device.
Microphone Port Testing
For testing the board's Microphone input port, the microphone from a Kingston HyperX Cloud Gaming 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.
For best audibility, Microphone Boost was enabled at +20dB with a 50% recording volume. Any lower than that caused the vocalizations to become muted. There was no negative impacts to voice or audio pickup with either the Noise Suppression or Audio Cancellation settings engaged.
ATTO Disk Benchmark
To validate that the board’s device ports were functioning correctly, we connected a Samsung 850 EVO 250GB 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, the USB 3.0 ports, and USB 3.1 Gen2 ports. NGFF port testing was performed using an M.2 based Samsung 950 Pro PCIe M.2 2280 256GB SSD. The M.2 device was tested using the board's integrated M.2 slot. USB port testing performed using the Samsung 850 EVO SSD in a USB 3.1 Gen 2 compatible enclosure. 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 2200 MB/s and a write throughput of 900 MB/s over a PCI-Express x4 bus. The selected SSD has a maximum read throughput of 540 MB/s and a write throughput of 520 MB/s on a SATA III controller. The drive tests were repeated three times with the highest repeatable read and write speeds recorded.
On the Intel X99 controller, the SSD's performed equally across both the primary and secondary controllers with performance falling within limits of the drive specs. The M.2 drive performance held back by the integrated M.2 port. The onboard M.2 port was a PCIe x2 port, capable of only a 10Gb/s max transfer rate. The USB 3.x performance tests fell as expected with the drive closely approaching SATA III speeds over the USB 3.1 interface and falling under 450 MB/s over USB 3.0.
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, the lowest repeatable average CPU utilization, and lowest repeatable performance spike percentages recorded.
Note that that theoretical maximum throughput for a Gigabit Ethernet adapter is 125 MB/s (1.0 Gbps). The theoretical maximum throughput for the integrated wireless AC controller is 162.5 MB/s (1300 Mbps).
Both Intel controllers, the I110-AT and I118-LM, performed marvelously with performance averaging 117 MB/s during download and upload tests. The Broadcom 802.11ac controller performance fell behind that of the Intel controllers, coming in at almost 85 MB/s for download and just over 75 MB/s during upload tests. However, this type of average performance for a pure wireless transfer is nothing to discount. For CPU utilization during the network tests, utilization averaged an impressive 5% or lower across all network interfaces with utilization spikes remaining under 10%.
Those finned heatsinks used
Those finned heatsinks used to cool VRM are really neat. Its hard to see those good old finned heatsinks on recent motherboards.
on page 2 -> “ASUS designed
on page 2 -> “ASUS designed the X99-M WS board with a total of eight SATA 6 Gb/s ports, all controlled by the Intel Z170 chipset.”
it should rather be X99 chipset 😉
Agree.
Appears to be a typo
Agree.
Appears to be a typo on the “Features and Motherboard Layout” page where “[…] 6 Gb/s ports, all controlled by the Intel Z170 chipset. […]” should say X99 chipset. As far as I know, ASUS hasn’t made any revision to the chipset.
You are correct, thanks for
You are correct, thanks for pointing it out. So much for my iron clad review methods…
I’ve built a pc with this
I’ve built a pc with this mobo. I love the board. Only down side would be the fact that older m.2 (x2, not 32gbps) was used.
Totally agree, I’m looking
Totally agree, I’m looking forward to build a small powerful system, and this motherboard would have been great, but the m.2 slot is already dated and lagging behind current SSDs.
If you are only using one
If you are only using one video card, I would think that you could get an m.2 to PCIe adaptor card for about $20 to $30. For full speed you would need to use one of the x16 or x8 slots, either of which would prevent use of a second video card unless you have a single slot card.
i hope to correct your
i hope to correct your confusion here. m.2 is a slot, and ssd is a type of storage. m.2 theoretically can reach a transfer rate of 32 gb/s. On the other hand, the most common form of today’s ssd in computer main storage ultiliszes the sata III slot that reaches a transfer rate of 6 gb/s. PCIe based ssd will reach the same performance as m.2. The storage board that you use for m.2 slot is ssd too. sata 3 is slower but not lagging behind anything because sata 4 doesn’t not exist and the use of PCIe is slowly replacing sata. m.2 is faster than sata. which ssd drives were you referring to? please understand the logic of form and function.
Thank you Morry Teitelman for
Thank you Morry Teitelman for the Review! Been waiting for it 🙂
Wow, I didn’t know the antenna came with it 🙂
Does this board support Dual Channel memory if only using a Dual Channel memory kit of 2 sticks or more? My understanding was that this board only supports Quad. If it supports both, what are the pros and cons? You didn’t go in much details when OC the memory.
What is your opinion on the OC socket compared to the competitors options? Did you feel it provided better stability?
Thanks 🙂
It appears to only have 3
It appears to only have 3 PCIe X16/8, but supports Quad SLI?
That’s a neat trick.
Its supports Quad SLI when
Its supports Quad SLI when using two dual GPU cards…
Ah, i totally forgot about
Ah, i totally forgot about that.
As always unique &
As always unique & interesting perspective from Morry.
Sadly board is a bit hit and miss. mATX is not exactly good for advanced RAID setups (and I don’t mean 2 SSDs in non-redundant ‘RAID’ 0 on chipset controller because that’s how most home users see RAID) or anything in general except SLI/CF. One of the things I don’t get it. “WS” doesn’t equal SLI/CF gaming machine.
Can’t slap more than one RAID card as it’ll be totally impossible to provide enough cooling to keep RoC cool (unless liquid cooled, but still not enough space for 2 controllers or expander). Even with less power-hungry HBAs for drive pools 1 card is max.
WS moniker with mATX/mITX boards is a bit overinflated. It’s not very good at everything workstation should do or at least be prepared to do. That’s why I just read ‘micro/mini’ reviews for flavor sake. Definitively not my cup of tea. But if your “workstation” is a gaming one, go ahead. 😀
Hello
thank very much Morry
Hello
thank very much Morry for the review and also the review of the big X99-WS board, I know it is very late, but I had to disconnect my internet for a few months for the sake of passing in college *sigh*
One more I have one little parts question: does the add-in card stack up against the onboard 3.1 ?
Is there a board similar to
Is there a board similar to this but with the m.2 x4?
The only x99 mATX board that
The only x99 mATX board that I know of is the EVGA X99 Micro2, here:
http://www.evga.com/Products/Product.aspx?pn=131-HE-E095-KR
What about the two ASRock
What about the two ASRock boards? They also feature M.2 with PCIe 3.0 x4 bandwidth.
ASRock X99M Extreme4:
http://asrock.com/mb/Intel/X99M%20Extreme4/index.us.asp
ASRock Fatal1ty X99M Killer/3.1:
http://asrock.com/mb/Intel/Fatal1ty%20X99M%20Killer3.1/index.us.asp
Asus is really testing my
Asus is really testing my loyalty, not releasing an x99 ROG branded MATX mobo. I’m in love with my Fractal Define Mini, and refuse to change it.
Maybe they should do a
Maybe they should do a refresh on x99 platform and remove that useless data exspress port. It’s what’s kept me from upgrading my x79 rig something bout useless tech on board bugs me too much to buy in why I waiting for z170ws but it’s $600 cnd atm a gut punch at that price.maybe kabby lake will cause a refresh and data exspress will go the way of FireWire,and be ripped of chipset and outa BIOS.
Not sure that I follow what
Not sure that I follow what you’re saying.
As far as I know, this board doesn’t support sata express ports. It does have a lot of sata ports to support multiple raid setup.
Which they believe is more important on a WS board than fewer high performance data transferring storage drives.
Weaknesses
*Lack of
It does have an integrated CMOS clear switch. It’s the red button situated beneath the lower PCI-E x16 slot.