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, but also the ability for the manufacturer to optimize USB speed, audio quality (based on audio codec), POST time and latency. This can come down to manufacturing process and prowess, so these are tested.

For Z390 we are running an updated version of our test suite, including OS and CPU cooler. This has some effect on our results.

Power Consumption

Power consumption was tested on the system while in a single ASUS GTX 980 GPU configuration with a wall meter connected to the Thermaltake 1200W 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 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: Long Idle (w/ GTX 980)Power: OS Idle (w/ GTX 980)Power: Prime95 Blend (w/ GTX 980)

For a flagship motherboard, the Supermicro C9Z390-PGW displays quite efficent power draw when at full load. It's consistent with other models at long idle and in idle states when tested with our power hungry i7-8700K test bed chip.

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

The Supermicro C9Z390-PGW represents one of the slowest boards recorded in our POST time test. Supermicro doesn't have a good record in this regard as three out of four LGA 1151 boards that we've tested sit at the bottom. 

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

None of the LGA 1151 motherboards tested so far has been optimized for DPC latency. The C9Z390-PGW sits middle of the road with a result of 127 ns; it performs just better than the MSI MEG Z390 ACE and sits below the ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming.

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

42 Comments

View All Comments

  • shabby - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    Play harder? These guys need some new marketing people.
  • crotach - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    They could include a sticker in the box that says "My other motherboard is an Asus"
  • prophet001 - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    Seems like Asus' quality has gone down in recent years?
  • GTVic - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    I base my buying decisions exclusively on online comments like this.
  • close - Tuesday, February 5, 2019 - link

    Your alternative is to buy a significant number of boards (hundreds and up) and use them over a significant period (years) in order to have any hope of a reliability statistic based on a remotely relevant data set. Are you? Because otherwise when it comes to "quality" I agree, you DO base your buying decisions exclusively on online comments like this.
  • GreenReaper - Friday, February 1, 2019 - link

    Well that's why you got a Supermicro.
  • philehidiot - Saturday, February 2, 2019 - link

    Just out of interest, banter aside, I've been an incidental fan of Asus mobos for many decades in that, whilst I consider all the major brands, I always seem to end up with an Asus. It's not intentional, it's just perhaps that their selection of feature sets to market perhaps always seems to meet my needs. I've never had an Asus fail on me it must be said, (aside from an incident stemming purely from my own cackhandedness around a CPU socket) I've never had an issue and they've always seemed well built. My last Asus board was bought around 5-6 years ago and was just the same as the rest in terms of build. Is the general consensus that Asus's build quality has dropped and they should be treated with caution?
  • jabber - Sunday, February 3, 2019 - link

    I've had plenty of Asus and they have all been fine. I've got a X99 Asus at the moment and its been pretty solid. To be honest I've not seen a failed motherboard since the removal of electrolytic caps around 2006. I remember around 2009-2011 I was getting masses of PCs in from 2003/2006 with 'issues' and as soon as I opened them up I would see the crusty bulging caps.

    Boards have physically improved all round I would say. Now if they could get the bugs out of the BIOS...
  • Gadgety - Monday, February 4, 2019 - link

    Yes, bugs, pathetic. PC industry is supposedly competitive, yet so many present half baked solutions, and lots of marketing talk. ASUS charges extra premium and still doesn't deliver a bug free BIOS.
  • close - Tuesday, February 5, 2019 - link

    I have a ROG board that stopped receiving driver and BIOS updates less than 2 years after launch. This wouldn't matter much if the existing drivers worked properly under Win10 and offered all the functionality advertised in big letters on the box. It didn't. I simply take that as a lesson to stay away from the praised high end. At least when they inevitably sh*t the pants I will not be too disappointed.

    But yes, it's still working although with just the occasional reset in memory parameters where it defaults to the lowest memory frequency. And some other small annoyances with the drive order. Etc. Great job they did on that BIOS.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now