System Performance

Not all motherboards are created equal. On the face of it, they should all perform the same and differ only in the functionality they provide - however, this is not the case. The obvious pointers are power consumption, POST time, and latency. This can come down to the manufacturing process and prowess, so these are tested.

For Z490/W480 we are running using Windows 10 64-bit with the 1909 update.

Power Consumption

Power consumption was tested on the system while in a single MSI GTX 1080 Gaming configuration with a wall meter connected to the power supply. This power supply has ~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 testbed 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: Long Idle (w/ GTX 1080)Power: OS Idle (w/ GTX 1080)Power: Prime95 Blend (w/ GTX 1080)

The Supermicro performs as expected, with a lower overall power draw at idle and full-load. This is down to the lower TDP of the Xeon W-1200 (80 W) against the Core i7-10700K (125 W). The Core i7-10700K roughly has 56% extra power to maneuver, and this is backed up by our data at full-loud.

Non-UEFI 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 starts loading. (We discount Windows loading as it is highly variable given Windows specific features.)

Non UEFI POST Time

Motherboards designed for professional use tend to have longer booting times than regular desktop models, and our POST time test shows this. Even with controllers that we could disable, we managed to get the POST time to under 35 seconds. When compared to the slowest Z490 model on test, this was around 46% slower, which isn't a negative as this is common as drivers and controllers on this time of board take longer to initialize. 

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.

Deferred Procedure Call Latency

We test DPC latency at default settings out of the box, and the Supermicro didn't do too badly, although we anticipated the performance to be below the Z490 models we've tested. This kind of model isn't aimed at audio engineers, so it's to be expected.

Board Features, Test Bed and Setup CPU Performance, Short Form
Comments Locked

55 Comments

View All Comments

  • Operandi - Friday, December 11, 2020 - link

    **meant to reply here**

    Point being why even review this in the context of a world where the platform AMD exists? From a feature and performance stance AMD is better on both. Unless there is something Supermicro has that other board vendors don't as I don't think Supermicro has a "workstation" AM4 board but still, so what...
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, December 11, 2020 - link

    Products deserve reviews even if the reviews show them to be less compelling versus the competition. For a general audience, the competitiveness factor should be mentioned. For more niche audiences it's not necessarily necessary.
  • Jorgp2 - Sunday, December 13, 2020 - link

    >Point being why even review this in the context of a world where the platform AMD exists?

    AMD exists?

    Last time i checked there were only two AM4 workstation boards, and they're both made by supermicro.
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, December 15, 2020 - link

    "Last time i checked there were only two AM4 workstation boards, and they're both made by supermicro."

    How many does a person need to pick from? Just one means the company is present in the niche. And, when a company isn't present but could be that is also noteworthy context.
  • FLHerne - Friday, December 11, 2020 - link

    AMD doesn't officially validate ECC on Ryzen processors. Most motherboards don't support it at all, and the ones that do are on a "this seems to work" basis, which isn't how corporate IT does things. There've been many reports of Ryzen setups where ECC appears to be fully enabled in the BIOS and hardware but doesn't actually report memory errors.

    Threadripper has proper support for ECC, but is far above the price range of CPUs mentioned in this article.

    There are also a handful of workloads where Intel processors do outperform the AMD price-equivalent, most obviously things using AVX512.
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, December 11, 2020 - link

    Amazon is currently selling TR 2950X at $590, although that is a clear-out price.

    So, that takes the 2950X near to the W-1290P in terms of price while being a 16/32 chip rather than 6/12. The TR is probably not as good for things like high-frequency trading but should kill the Intel in the heavily threaded stuff.

    Not so relevant for big business since those parts are probably rather limited in terms of stock but relevant to individual shoppers.
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, December 11, 2020 - link

    "e.g. 1290p is 10 cores, 20 threads."

    Okay... so a bit less drastic of a difference.
  • AntonErtl - Saturday, December 12, 2020 - link

    Concerning the "many reports", where do I find them? And if there are no failures, I would not expect any error reports. And while reports are useful to find broken DIMMs, the most important feature of ECC memory is that errors are corrected. In any case, in my testing I did see errors reported to the OS.
  • AdrianBc - Saturday, December 12, 2020 - link

    While you are mostly right, nonetheless there are a few Ryzen motherboards that are sold as server motherboards or as workstation motherboards, so at least for the motherboards, full ECC support is claimed.

    For example, I am using since last year a workstation motherboard that directly competes with the one reviewed: ASUS Pro WS X570-ACE.

    I am using it with ECC memory, and I have verified that it works OK.
  • AdrianBc - Saturday, December 12, 2020 - link

    And have I forgotten to add that with this Ryzen workstation MB I have replaced precisely a Supermicro workstation MB, the predecessor from the X11 series of the one reviewed. Obviously with excellent results.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now