The ASRock Z490 PG Velocita Motherboard Review: It Means SPEED
by Gavin Bonshor on September 21, 2020 9:00 AM ESTSystem 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 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.
The ASRock performed very well in our power consumption tests at full load with the lowest recorded result from all Z490 boards tested so far. In contrast, it was a little power hungry in both long idle and idle power states.
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.)
In our non-UEFI POST testing, the ASRock performs competitively with a default POST time of 11.8 seconds. We managed to shave off just under a second by disabling non-essential controllers such as audio and networking.
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.
We test DPC out of the box with default settings. The ASRock performed superbly with the lowest result outputted from any Z490 model we have tested so far.
16 Comments
View All Comments
YB1064 - Monday, September 21, 2020 - link
It would be nice if you can thrown in a comparable dataset from an AMD system. It wouldn't be remiss to cut out motherboard gaming benchmarks altogether. The motherboard stopped being a factor cince, 2001 (?)Udyr - Monday, September 21, 2020 - link
Although I agree with you that some comparison is necessary for the majority of users to have a "visual" difference vs other products, the board has always been a factor. Bad VRM, conductor and other important parts of it have to work properly for the overall system to have good stability, otherwise you start having random issues or, worst case scenario, fried componentsYB1064 - Monday, September 21, 2020 - link
The stress tests should bring out any issues with the VRM. Gaming benchmarks don't add much to a MB review.oRAirwolf - Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - link
I think it is good just to validate that there are no glaring performance issues that haven't been addressed. I agree that the benchmarks are pretty much useless otherwise though.AMDSuperFan - Monday, September 21, 2020 - link
Why didn't they benchmark this system with an AMD CPU in it? Scared?Tomatotech - Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - link
Absolutely agree. Don’t forget the hammer to help install an AMD cpu in it. The benchmarks won’t be great though.mattkiss - Monday, September 21, 2020 - link
Hmm...Buildzoid didn't like this mobo very much: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmKiwDL3UrAwhatthe123 - Monday, September 21, 2020 - link
Seems more accurate than this review. This review just focuses on general performance out of the box if a normal single gpu config, so yes it's similar in performance with but with better DPC latency.Problem is other models at this price point have more features and/or more efficient/powerful VRM design that doesn't require a bunch of little fans. The little fans are what help it drop VRM temps down to the 60s, but most VRMs don't really have any degradation problems even at in the 90Cs, so it's not clear what the price premium is paying for except DPC latency.
mattkiss - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link
"This review just focuses on general performance out of the box if a normal single gpu config, so yes it's similar in performance with but with better DPC latency."Not sure I understand your statement...both reviews are of the ASRock Z490 PG Velocita.
whatthe123 - Friday, September 25, 2020 - link
I meant that as in, this review compares the velocita in a single GPU config against other motherboards then just checks the results, whereas buildzoid's review actually looks into what features the board provides and how it manages to achieve its results i.e. a bunch of proprietary small fans when competitors have passive cooling more than good enough to keep VRMs stable.The conclusion anandtech's review makes only makes sense if you ignore all the other features offered by competitors. Otherwise it doesn't make sense because you're paying the same price and getting fewer features on top of having more moving parts that can fail.