Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Three AMD 990FX-Based Motherboards For Enthusiasts
By ,
1. Performance Beats Features?

Day in and day out, you and I get hammered with a constant stream of press releases, record-setting attempts, and flowery marketing intended to get us thinking that one company's product is better than another's thanks to a truckload of features. Then we get asked, "How much more would you pay for that?"

Really, though, how many of us can afford a trio of top gaming cards? Who among us wants to configure eight 3 TB disks in RAID 10, and add an SSD boot drive for good measure? How many of us really need all of those features, and how many of us can use all of that performance we find so news-worthy?

AMD’s FX family sits at the opposite end of the price/performance scale from Intel’s Sandy Bridge-E-based Core i7s, yet it still offers the flexibility of 44 PCIe 2.0 lanes. That kind of room to upgrade lends itself to all kinds of low-cost future add-ons that you'll more easily be able to afford, since it didn't cost you an arm and a leg to buy the platform. The extra pathways even let you carry into your new system some of the stuff that made previous-gen builds so enjoyable and versatile, such as TV tuners, wireless networking, and high-end audio cards.

Some folks lament the fact that AMD isn't competing in the high-end space right now. We look at the company's combination of affordable CPUs and connectivity-rich chipsets as ideal for mid-budget builds, though. Marketing folks don't think that sort of talk is very sexy though, so we weren't entirely surprised that only three motherboard vendors expressed interest in sending us 990FX-based products to compare for a 2013 Socket AM3+ update.

990FX Enthusiast Motherboard Features
 ASRock 990FX
Extreme9
Asus M5A99FX
Pro R2.0
Gigabyte
990FXA-UD3
PCB Revision1.041.013.0
ChipsetAMD 990FX / SB950AMD 990FX / SB950AMD 990FX / SB950
Voltage RegulatorFourteen PhasesEight PhasesTen Phases
BIOSP1.10 (01/24/2013)1503 (01/11/2013)FC (02/05/2013)
200.0 MHz RCLK200.83 MHz (+0.42%)200.66 MHz (+0.33%)200.92 MHz (+0.46%)
I/O Panel Connectors
P/S 2221
USB 3.0422
USB 2.0488
Network111
eSATA212
CLR_CMOS ButtonYesNoNo
Digital Audio OutOptical + CoaxialOpticalOptical
Digital Audio InNoneNoneNone
Analog Audio666
VideoNoneNoneNone
Other DevicesIEEE 1394 x1NoneIEEE 1394 x1
Internal Interfaces
PCIe 2.0 x164 (x16/x4/x16/x0 or x16/x4/x8/x8)4 (x16/x4/x16/x4)4 (x16/x4/x16/x4)
PCIe 2.0 x1112
USB 3.02 (4-ports)1 (2-ports)1 (2-ports)
USB 2.02 (4-ports)3 (6-ports)3 (6-ports)
SATA 6Gb/s876
SATA 3Gb/sNoneNoneNone
4-Pin Fan252
3-Pin Fan4None2
FP-Audio111
S/PDIF I/ONoneOutput OnlyOutput Only
Internal ButtonsPower, ResetDirectKey, MemOK, BIOS FlashbackNone
Diagnostics PanelNumericNoneNone
LegacyCIR, IEEE-1394, SerialSerialIEEE-1394, Serial
Mass Storage Controllers
Chipset SATA6 x SATA 6Gb/s5 x SATA 6Gb/s
1 x eSATA 6Gb/s
6 x SATA 6Gb/s
Chipset RAID Modes0, 1, 5, 100, 1, 5, 100, 1, 5, 10
Add-In SATA2 x ASM1061 PCIe
2 x eSATA 6Gb/s
2 x SATA 6Gb/s
ASM1061 PCIe
2 x SATA 6Gb/s
88SE9172 PCIe
2 x eSATA 6Gb/s
USB 3.02 x EJ188H PCIe (8-ports)2 x ASM1042 PCIe (4-ports)2 x EJ168A PCIe (4-ports)
Networking
Primary LANWG82583V PCIeRTL8111E PCIeRTL8111F PCIe
Secondary LANNoneNoneNone
BluetoothNoneNoneNone
Audio
HD Audio CodecALC898ALC892ALC889
DDL/DTS ConnectNot SpecifiedDTS ConnectDDL
WarrantyThree YearsThree YearsThree Years
2. ASRock 990FX Extreme9

We never thought we’d see one of ASRock’s high-end board at mid-budget prices, but the company surprised us by introducing the 990FX Extreme9 at $160. We thought this must surely be a mistake, but were assured that the price was real. It eventually climbed to $175, dropped to $160 just before this round-up, and is now priced at $190.

Update, 4/3: ASRock tells us that the 990FX Extreme9 is now listed for $160 again on Newegg. This price will be held until the end of April. For $30 less than this board was originally reviewed, its feature set becomes much more attractive, and more in-line with the value message of AMD's FX processors.

Based on its feature set, this board probably should be in the $175 range we saw it at a week ago. Its elaborate 14-phase voltage regulator, two added-on four-port USB 3.0 controllers, extra pair of two-port SATA 6Gb/s controllers, Intel PCIe-based Wi-Fi controller, and even the legacy IEEE-1394 controller seem a little out of place compared the two more mainstream products in today's story. Without question, this board is a premium part.

Four of those USB 3.0 ports and two of its SATA 6Gb/s ports feed rear-panel connectors, bounded by dual-format (coaxial and optical) digital audio connectors, six analog audio jacks, and a CLR_CMOS button.

The other two added-in SATA ports are exposed internally, next to the similarly-premium lighted power button, reset button, and two-digit LED diagnostics display. Doubling up on mid-market expectations, four USB 3.0 ports connect the two internal USB 3.0 headers, which ASRock pioneered at our request.

Keen observers might notice that the chokes on ASRock’s voltage regulator appear tiny; there isn’t much room behind the CPU socket for 14 phases. We're not certain whether ASRock’s 14 phases can out-power Asus’ eight, but as you already know, manufacturers tend toward a larger number of lower-capacity phases to pad spec sheets, even though that's no explicit indicator of power performance.

ASRock also adds an extra set of PCIe switches to its third x16-length slot, allowing the board's bottom slot to support eight lanes of second-gen PCIe. This could be viewed as mandatory by some buyers, since AMD's 990FX chipset doesn’t support PCIe 3.0. This potential boon to SLI flexibility is bolstered by a bundled three-way SLI bridge.

We have no layout complaints and only a few caveats concerning 990FX Extreme9 connector placement. For example, all five fan headers are located near the motherboard’s top and bottom edges. All eight SATA ports point forward to a location that might be blocked by the drive cages of some (typically old) cases. The front-panel audio connector is placed in the traditional location, though the cables of some (typically old) cases are too short to reach its extreme bottom-rear corner. And because the board has two USB 3.0 dual-port internal headers, ASRock appears to think that two USB 2.0 headers are adequate. That last caveat is addressable via separately-available USB 2.0 adapters, when required.

Besides the already-mentioned three-way SLI bridge, the 990FX Extreme9 also include a two-way bridge, ASRock’s fantastic USB 3.0 drive bay adapter with integrated 2.5” drive tray and optional slot-plate, and an impressive collection of six SATA cables.

3. 990FX Extreme9 Software

ASRock hasn’t made any significant changes to its applications suite since last year, still including various freeware and trial software in addition to its XFast LAN, XFast USB, and AXTU. Since portions of AXTU are hardware-specific, we took a few minutes to examine its implementation on this board.

Part of its intricate hardware monitoring menu, AXTU appears to have the most accurate CPU temperature monitor this editor has seen for AMD’s current-generation FX processors. I said appears because few people know the actual core temperature: we've had issues with AMD’s thermal diode being inaccurate at any temperature more than a few degrees from its thermal threshold, and trying to take a reading from the heat spreader yields a result several degrees lower than the core.

Fan speed controls are independent for four of the five system headers.

Clock speeds are fully adjustable over a wide range, with CPU clock and voltage level adjustments verifiable in third-party programs like CPU-Z. Settings can also be saved as profiles and enabled at boot.

The OC DNA menu provides only BIOS info and secondary access to overclocking profiles.

Intelligent Energy Saver offers minor power savings via CPU voltage regulator phase idling.

ASRock’s XFast RAM provides RAM Disk functionality at no additional cost to the buyer. Though it runs under 64- and 32-bit Windows, its most interesting capability is addressing memory capacities beyond the 4 GB limit of 32-bit operating systems.

Restart to UEFI gives users quick access to BIOS, without worrying about how quickly they can hit the Del or F2 keys. Unlike competing solutions, it requires an operating system to employ.

4. 990FX Extreme9 Firmware

A simple menu structure allows experienced users to custom tune their 990FX Extreme9 without jumping through unnecessary steps. As always, inexperienced users are free to seek overclocking advice within our forums.

Shown at DDR3-2424, the 990FX Extreme9 only gets our DDR3-2666 memory to 2,411 MT/s before occasional errors begin to occur. This outcome, which we'd otherwise consider mediocre, is somewhat acceptable only because the CPU’s built-in memory controller doesn’t support higher ratios. The board’s 1.635 V setting approximates our desired 1.65 volts.

The 990FX Extreme9 also pushes this AMD FX-8350 sample to 4.44 GHz at a modest 1.40 V, though with even more anomalies in the process. For example, “Load-Line Calibration” is backwards, with 100% corresponding to full droop and the minimum setting providing maximum voltage increase. Full-load core voltage fluctuated between 1.39 and 1.49 V by default, and decreasing the CPU’s maximum voltage to the desired 1.40 V was accomplished by increasing load-line compensation to 75%!

The 990FX Extreme9 supports Intel's XMP technology and retains previous latency settings when switching from automatic to manual modes. This memory, for example, has tighter SPD timings for its slower DDR3-1600 default. So, disabling the XMP profile from the main page before picking manual timing controls would have caused those tighter defaults to be reflected in the firmware’s manual configuration boxes.

Anyone who doesn’t want to limit CPU voltage themselves is welcome to try ASRock’s automatic overclocking profiles. These are designed around manipulation of the reference clock, rather than the FX processor's adjustable multiplier, so that they can also support multiplier-locked CPUs.

5. Asus M5A99FX Pro R2.0

For the performance-value market, Asus continues to stress the importance of longevity and compatibility over oft-unused added ports. Durability is difficult to test within the several days I spend with each motherboard, but compatibility is one reason the firm’s products get picked for so many of my memory reviews.

Priced $45 less than the previously-detailed ASRock product, Asus’ M5A99FX Pro R2.0 is equipped with half as many USB 3.0 ports and only a single added-on SATA 6Gb/s controller. Eight is enough when it comes to the SATA needs of most buyers, and Asus locates one of those ports on the rear panel as eSATA.

That’s not to say that this board isn’t packed with not-so-apparent features. A quick look around its perimeter shows a USB BIOS Flashback button for updating firmware without so much as a CPU installed, a Direct Key button for booting directly into the firmware interface without worrying about hitting the Del key, and a MemOK button that selects a slower DRAM profile to allow booting with poorly-programmed modules.

Asus even adds DTS Connect and UltraPC II. The former combines DTS Neo:PC and DTS Interactive, upmixing stereo sources to as many as eight channels, and then encoding the signal in real-time for output through a digital source. The latter facilitates "virtual surround" through a set of algorithms intended to convey multi-channel audio through a set of stereo speakers or headphones.

Supporting only two front-panel USB 3.0 ports, Asus retains the expected trio of two-port USB 2.0 headers along the board’s bottom edge. A seventh SATA 6Gb/s port is added next to the USB 3.0 header to ease front-panel cable access.

Though it supports up to four single-slot or three dual-slot graphics cards, the M5A99FX Pro R2.0 isn’t designed with three-way SLI in mind. The two blue x16 slots share none of their lanes with the black slots, leaving each of those locked into x4-mode. The blue slots retain their total of 32 pathways, and are spaced perfectly to host two enormous triple-slot cards.

Having the “expected” number of USB 2.0 ports and a front-panel audio header slid around an inch forward from the bottom-rear corner, the M5A99FX Pro R2.0 comes with a single installation caveat: forward-facing SATA headers are occasionally blocked by the lower drive cage of some older ATX cases.

Four SATA cables are enough for most users, though the board does support seven internal drives. The M5A99FX Pro R2.0’s single SLI bridge is adequate as well, since the board technically supports four PCIe x16 graphics cards, but wasn't even properly designed for three-way SLI.

6. M5A99FX Pro R2.0 Software

Asus includes a fairly broad software suite with most of its current enthusiast-oriented motherboards, adding for example its Network iControl packet prioritization software and Remote Go suite to enable file sharing, media streaming and PC remote control from wireless devices.

Asus Ai Charger+ continues to add quick-charge capability to Battery Charging 1.1-compliant devices, as well as Apple products, and USB Boost continues to add UASP support for USB 3.0 devices and turbo mode for USB 2.0 devices. Asus Fan Expert provides a little more granularity compared to the automatic programming of most competing products.

Asus EPU sets power profiles to optimize efficiency, but its benefits were extremely limited in our system. Its “Max Power Savings” setting gave us approximately the same idle power as the bare system without this software, its “High Performance” setting gave us around the same performance and full-load power consumption as a management-free installation, and the only downfall was the “High Performance” mode kept our processor from idling down as far as a management-free installation.

Asus Digi+ is a few steps farther towards overclocking assistance, adding, for example, the Load-Line calibration setting needed to keep voltage stable under changing loads.

Auto Tuning includes a basic overclock profile for its “fast” setting, and a smart overclock under the “Extreme” setting. The smart overclock performs stability tests and attempts to increase clocks further than the “Fast” profile. Yet, both methods resulted in the same 4.32 GHz frequency on our CPU.

Manual overclockers will prefer TurboV Evo’s manual mode, which addresses the full range of base clock, voltage, and CPU ratio settings also found in firmware.

Asus PC Probe II keeps track of voltage, temperature, and fan speed data, while Sensor Recorder plots a history of these stats over time.

7. M5A99FX Pro R2.0 Firmware

Asus DRAM O.C. Profile adds Intel XMP configurations and several of Asus’ own custom memory overclocking settings to AMD-based motherboards. It’s found alongside other overclocking controls in the M5A99FX Pro R2.0’s Ai Tweaker menu.

A 4.51 GHz overclock was easily achieved at 1.40 V using a 22.5x CPU multiplier and Asus’ mildly-overclocked 200 MHz reference clock. Our DDR3-2666 samples climbed to a 2625 MHz data rate using even higher base clocks, but lower CPU multipliers were needed to get there.

The 1.40 V CPU core setting appeared accurate, but the 1.65 V memory setting did not. Our volt meter showed that 1.65 actual volts resulted from a 1.61 V setting, in spite of the motherboard’s insistence that only 1.595 V was detected. Misreporting DRAM voltages to achieve higher overclocking results has become universal among all recently-reviewed enthusiast motherboard brands.

A CPU Load Line Calibration setting of “Ultra High” is supposed to correspond to 75% correction, but kept our CPU core voltage 100% consistent under changing loads.

The M5A99FX Pro R2.0 shows current timings next to each adjustment, with Auto defaults for each selection. Users configuring custom timings can use the current timings columns to guide their efforts, which in our case began with the memory’s XMP profile.

8. Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3

For $5 less than its competition from Asus, Gigabyte’s 990FXA-UD3 provides similar hardware features. The firm loses the rarely-needed but somewhat-pricy USB Flashback processor, and instead adds a somewhat-outdated but less-costly FireWire controller.

Gigabyte doesn’t place one of its internal SATA ports on the upper half of the board to ease front-panel eSATA cable access, but instead puts both eSATA ports on the rear I/O panel. Buyers get the same total number of SATA ports, the same total number of USB 3.0 ports, and the same total number of USB 2.0 ports on both Gigabyte and Asus products (though only Asus claims UASP support under Windows 7).

Both similarly-priced, competing products offer the same PCIe x16 slot configuration, as both are designed primarily for two-way SLI. Both primary slots are permanently connected to 16 pathways each, and both secondary slots are permanently connected to four pathways each. Gigabyte adds an x1 slot above the top x16 slot, however, and uses a cut-away northbridge sink to allow installation of longer expansion cards in this location.

Gigabyte moves its CPU power connector behind the voltage regulator sink and turns it sideways, which could be a benefit or detriment, depending on case and cooler configurations. The latch on Asus’ top-edge connector faces upward, making it hard to reach in cases that rout its cable over the top edge of the motherboard tray, while Gigabyte’s alternative placement could be boxed in by rear-panel liquid cooling radiators, such as the Enermax ELC120 and Zalman LQ-320.

The 990FXA-UD3’s front-panel audio connector is found in the bottom-rear corner, where we're accustomed to finding it. But some cases occasionally enter the market with a cable that’s around half of an inch too short to reach that corner. Older cases might also have hard drive cages that block cable access to the forward-facing SATA ports. On the other hand, while a video card in the bottom slot might also block access to the front-panel USB 3.0 header, that problem is mostly theoretical on a board not practically designed for three-way CrossFire or SLI.

Four SATA cables, a single SLI bridge, and a case badge put Gigabyte’s 990FXA-UD3 installation kit on-par with its closest competitor, though the ends of Gigabyte’s cables are black. The badge might just be more important than the color of the cables, as it indicates that this board ships with Dolby Home Theater software. The software adds on-the-fly Dolby 5.1 digital encoding, multi-channel synthesized expansion, environmental correction, and various other audio manipulation technologies.

9. 990FXA-UD3 Software

Though the 990FXA-UD3 includes a variety of freeware and trial software, EasyTune6 is the focus of today’s discussion. That’s because its settings are unique to each motherboard.

The first two EasyTune6 menus cover hardware monitoring and reporting, with an interface that’s similar to CPU-Z but with slightly more detail. We can, for example, see all eight DRAM configuration settings on a ten-slot menu, where CPU-Z would limit us to four.

Gigabyte’s fan controls are fairly simple and somewhat limited, similar to what’s long been available in Gigabyte’s firmware.

Gigabyte’s HW Monitor menus track voltage changes and provide user-configurable alerts for temperature and fan monitors.

CPU reference clock and ratio settings are easily adjusted, while memory frequency adjustments aren’t as easy. Since memory ratio adjustments require a reboot, I suggest manipulating them exclusively through firmware.

Like reference clock and CPU ratios, the functionality for EasyTune6’s CPU core voltage changes can be verified through third-party programs, such as CPU-Z. A voltage meter was needed to verify the effectiveness of DRAM voltage adjustments.

10. 990FXA-UD3 Firmware

Gigabyte’s Motherboard Intelligent Tweaker menu opens to display vital component statistics, while several submenus allow actual adjustment.

The Advanced Frequency Settings submenu provides base clock and multiplier controls, including core multiplier, northbridge multiplier, DRAM multiplier, and HT Link frequency. Unfortunately, we found that the board does not block out invalid CPU northbridge ratios, such as those below the DRAM data rate. Additionally, with northbridge ratios spaced exclusively at 200 MHz intervals and DRAM ratios spaced at 266.6 MHz, few of the ratios are identical.

Furthermore, the board lacks any DDR3-2400 ratio. If, for example, you want to set DDR3-2400 by increasing base clock at the DDR3-2133 ratio, you’ll need to start out with a northbridge ratio for 2,200 MHz, a reference clock of 225 MHz, and hope that the resulting 2,475 MHz CPU northbridge frequency doesn’t crash the processor. In our case, it does.

The Advanced Memory Settings submenu provides a redundant memory multiplier control that, like the one in Advanced Frequency Settings, is selectable to match Intel XMP settings. Below that, setting DRAM Timing Selectable to Quick provides linked timing adjustments, while setting it to Expert mode allows per-channel timing manipulation.

Primary and secondary timings are individually adjustable or left in automatic mode, which is tied to the chosen DRAM configuration (XMP or SPD).

A simplified voltage menu gives users access to CPU core, CPU NB core, DRAM, HT Link, PCIe, PLL, and 990FX voltage levels. We found that Regular Vcore Loadline Calibration kept our CPU voltage consistent through shifting load levels, and that a DRAM voltage of 1.615 V corresponded to a meter reading of 1.650 V.

11. Test Settings And Benchmarks
Test System Configuration
CPUAMD FX-8350 (Vishera): 4.0 GHz, 8 MB Shared L3 Cache, Socket AM3+
CPU CoolerSunbeamtech Core-Contact Freezer w/Zalman ZM-STG1 Paste
RAMG.Skill F3-17600CL9D-8GBXLD (8 GB) at DDR3-1600 C9 Defaults
G.Skill F3-2666C11Q-16GTXD (16 GB) at XMP-2666 C11 Timings
GraphicsAMD Radeon HD 7970 3 GB: 925 MHz GPU, GDDR5-5500
Hard DriveSamsung 470 Series MZ5PA256HMDR, 256 GB SSD
SoundIntegrated HD Audio
NetworkIntegrated Gigabit Networking
PowerSeasonic X760 SS-760KM: ATX12V v2.3, EPS12V, 80 PLUS Gold
Software
OSMicrosoft Windows 8 Professional RTM x64
GraphicsAMD Catalyst 13.1


AMD's overclocking-friendly FX-8350 gets carried over from our recent CrossFire article.

DDR3-1600 CAS 9 is the reference point for benchmarks, but something faster is needed to test DRAM overclocking capability. Unfortunately, none of our current batch of high-speed memory has DDR3-1600 CAS 9 SPD defaults. G.Skill’s DDR3-2666 is substituted for overclocking evaluation.

This is an AMD platform test, and AMD also produces some of today’s top graphics processors. Thus, I upgrade from our standard GeForce GTX 580 to a more modern Radeon HD 7970.

The Arctic Cooling Accelero Xtreme 7970 is carried over from Don Woligroski’s review, because he never got around to reinstalling the original reference cooler. Thanks for the card Don!

3D Gaming Benchmarks
Battlefield 3Campaign Mode, "Going Hunting" 90-Second Fraps
Test Set 1: Medium Quality Defaults (No AA, 4x AF)
Test Set 2: Ultra Quality Defaults (4x AA, 16x AF)
F1 2012
Version 1.2, Direct X 11, Built-in Benchmark
Test Set 1: High Quality, No AA
Test Set 2: Ultra Quality, 8x MSAA
The Elder Scrolls V: SkyrimUpdate 1.5.26, Celedon Aethirborn Level 6, 25 Seconds Fraps
Test Set 1: DX11, High Details No AA, 8x AF, FXAA enabled
Test Set 2: DX11, Ultra Details, 8x AA, 16x AF, FXAA enabled
Far Cry 3V. 1.04, DirectX 11, 50-Second Fraps "Amanaki Outpost"
Test Set 1: High Quality, No AA, Standard ATC., SSAO
Test Set 2: Ultra Quality, 4x MSAA, Enhanced ATC, HDAO
Adobe Creative Suite
Adobe After Effects CS6Version 11.0.0.378 x64: Create Video which includes 3 Streams, 210 Frames, Render Multiple Frames Simultaneosly
Adobe Photoshop CS6Version 13 x64: Filter 15.7 MB TIF Image: Radial Blur, Shape Blur, Median, Polar Coordinates
Adobe Premeire Pro CS6Version 6.0.0.0, 6.61 GB MXF Project to H.264 to H.264 Blu-ray, Output 1920x1080, Maximum Quality
Audio/Video Encoding
iTunesVersion 10.4.1.10 x64: Audio CD (Terminator II SE), 53 minutes, default AAC format 
LAME MP3Version 3.98.3: Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min, convert WAV to MP3 audio format, Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kb/s)
HandBrake CLIVersion: 0.98: Video from Canon Eos 7D (1920x1080, 25 FPS) 1 Minutes 22 Seconds
Audio: PCM-S16, 48,000 Hz, Two-Channel, to Video: AVC1 Audio: AAC (High Profile)
TotalCode Studio 2.5Version: 2.5.0.10677: MPEG-2 to H.264, MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec, 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2), Audio: MPEG-2 (44.1 kHz, Two-Channel, 16-Bit, 224 Kb/s), Codec: H.264 Pro, Mode: PAL 50i (25 FPS), Profile: H.264 BD HDMV
Productivity
ABBYY FineReaderVersion 10.0.102.95: Read PDF save to Doc, Source: Political Economy (J. Broadhurst 1842) 111 Pages
Adobe Acrobat XVersion 10.0.0.396: Print PDF from 115 Page PowerPoint, 128-bit RC4 Encryption
Autodesk 3ds Max 2012Version 14.0 x64: Space Flyby Mentalray, 248 Frames, 1440x1080
BlenderVersion: 2.64a, Cycles Engine, Syntax blender -b thg.blend -f 1, 1920x1080, 8x Anti-Aliasing, Render THG.blend frame 1
Visual Studio 2010Version 10.0, Compile Google Chrome, Scripted
File Compression
WinZipVersion 17.0 Pro: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to ZIP, command line switches "-a -ez -p -r"
WinRARVersion 4.2: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to RAR, command line switches "winrar a -r -m3"
7-ZipVersion 9.28: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to .7z, command line switches "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5"
Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings
3DMark 11Version: 1.0.1.0, Benchmark Only
PCMark 7Version: 1.0.4 x64, System, Productivity, Hard Disk Drive benchmarks
SiSoftware Sandra 2011Version Version 2013.01.19.11, CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / Cryptography, Memory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark
12. Results: Synthetic Benchmarks

I deviated from our normal bare-installation benchmarking to include default manufacturer-supplied software installations in today’s test, looking specifically for the effect of performance and power differences on efficiency. Default should provide the best balance, right?

Asus started off with a modest lead in 3DMark, which was barely large enough to force a retest that proved this advantage consistent.

I was surprised to see Gigabyte fall behind in PCMark’s storage bench. Retests again proved this deficit consistent using AMD’s own AHCI driver on these AHCI-enabled motherboards.

That drop in SATA performance is mainly seen in PCMark’s “Starting Applications” profile. This will have an impact on the system’s overall performance value, since storage makes up 10% of the overall score.

Asus falls a little behind in Sandra’s Encoding/Decoding and Memory Bandwidth test, but this is also the company that usually gets the top DRAM stability scores. Differences this small are a matter of give-and-take.

13. Results: Battlefield 3 And Far Cry 3

ASRock’s barely-noticeable victory in Battlefield 3 at our lower quality settings becomes completely unnoticeable as graphics detail is increased and platform performance is de-emphasized.

Its lead remains through Far Cry 3, particularly at low resolutions. Retesting demonstrated consistency.

14. Results: F1 2012 And Skyrim

Even after retesting multiple times, Asus’ M5A99FX Pro R2.0 (say that five times fast) constantly produced a frame rate drop at our lowest F1 2012 setting. Conversely, it achieved an unexpected lead at 1280x720 and 1920x1080 using our highest-quality preset.

After seeing a few quirks in three other games, our Skyrim results are much more normal-looking.

15. Results: Audio And Video Encoding

Asus falls slightly behind in our single-threaded audio conversion tests, though it also appears to employ the most complex efficiency-optimizing software. In just a couple of pages, we'll be checking to see if Asus also enjoys lower average power consumption, too.

16. Results: Content Creation

ASRock’s 990FX Extreme9 stumbles slightly in Photoshop’s OpenCL-accelerated test, while Gigabyte picks up a second in Acrobat and 3ds Max. All three boards remain well-matched in the balance, in spite of attempts by their various software suites to optimize performance-to-efficiency.

17. Results: Productivity And File Compression

Gigabyte’s 990FXA-UD3 picks up a couple of seconds in WinZip's OpenCL-based compression test, but average benchmark performance remains fairly consistent between all three products.

18. Overclocking Results

All three motherboards support multiplier ranges that exceed the potential of any hardware available today, and all three support high voltage levels that exceed our cooling solution. Rather than tempt fate with some form of exotic cooling that wouldn't represent real-world use, we made this a comparison an average builder can rely on. Sunbeam’s Core Contact Freezer serves cooling duties.

We don’t see any large differences in CPU overclocking capability, but the M5A99FX Pro R2.0’s win is valid regardless of margin. More impressive is the integrated northbridge clock rate, which pushes well past ASRock's effort and hints at trouble for Gigabyte's platform.

That trouble shows up as moderate DRAM data rate limits, since the FX processor’s integrated northbridge operates only at frequencies that exceed the DRAM data rate. Asus widens its lead over ASRock here, at least when two modules are installed.

19. Power, Heat, And Efficiency

The strangest thing about Asus’ power management software might be that, operating at its default mode, the app costs us between 25 and 30 W at idle compared to “Max Power Saving” mode or even Windows 8 running without some form of manufacturer-imposed management. Either of those options drops idle draw into the mid-60 W range. Why not switch to “Max Power Saving” mode exclusively for this test? I don't think it's realistic to expect enthusiasts to toggle between operating modes based on what they're doing. What we're testing here is a more real-world configuration.

That high idle wattage result is particularly unfortunate when we see just how much better the M5A99FX Pro R2.0 is than Gigabyte's 990FXA-UD3 at full load. Default settings appear designed to cap CPU current (and thus heat), rather than maximize performance or efficiency.

As a point of comparison, ASRock’s Intelligent Energy Saver is disabled by default.

ASRock’s multitude of tiny voltage regulator phases does a fairly good job of spreading heat across the 990FX Extreme9’s oversized heat sink.

Asus’ software plays a role in dropping the M5A99FX Pro R2.0 a percent below average, while Gigabyte’s reduced storage performance bends the ends of the curve to put ASRock 2% over the top.

More than anything, ASRock's efficiency lead is a testament to how well AMD’s hardware and firmware manages power on its own, without the intervention of software.

20. Who Wins This Three-Way 990FX Comparison?

Today’s test is a little different than our usual process in that we went ahead and used each company's bundled management software at its default settings, allowing some of the value added to each board's bundle to show through. ASRock's board comes the closest to a traditional "clean" install, since its IES technology is turned off by default. Asus takes an approximate 1% performance hit, but doesn't appear to get any efficiency benefit. And Gigabyte's firmware nudges storage performance down slightly.

ASRock also offers the most features, and if you need those features, they might be worth the extra $22 shown in the chart, compared to Gigabyte’s 990FXA-UD3. The problem is that the chart represent last week's prices, and we haven't a clue what will happen next week. The best ASRock can hope to accomplish is an occasional value-tie to Gigabyte, and that didn't happen today. Whether or not Gigabyte and ASRock achieve a value tie appears to depend on the day of the week you look at their prices.

Update, 4/3: ASRock tells us that the 990FX Extreme9 is now listed for $160 again on Newegg. This price will be held until the end of April. For $30 less than this board was originally reviewed, its feature set becomes much more attractive, and more in-line with the value message of AMD's FX processors.

The tightest competition comes down to Asus' M5A99FX Pro R2.0 and Gigabyte's 990FXA-UD3. Gigabyte enjoys a slight advantage in the performance-per-dollar race, while Asus' big lead is in memory overclocking. At the same time, Asus takes a big loss in idle power consumption, but compensates with a big win in full-load power draw. And if we diminished most of those power differences by not installing Asus' power management software at default settings, the company would have likely matched the performance of Gigabyte and ASRock.

Gigabyte has the benefit of FireWire ports, which most users no longer need. Asus has the benefit of USB BIOS Flashback, which isn't needed very often either, but is a real lifesaver when you figure out an update is necessary to support that new processor you just bought. Asus bundles a better application suite to complement a longer list of exclusive features. Then again, we think Asus needs those extras to justify the M5A99FX Pro R2.0’s $5 premium over the Gigabyte board. The company succeeds in this. And, with overall value balanced, we cast our vote in favor of the better overclocker.

Our Smart Buy award applies to folks who put in the effort to configure Asus' power management software to their perfect preferences or, alternatively, the purists who'd prefer not to install it at all. The utility's default settings simply were not beneficial in our tests.

We know that some of those same purists will object, pointing out that they won't install any of Asus' value-added software anyway, will do their research before buying a processor that might not be supported out of the box, and don't plan on using extraordinarily fast DDR3 memory. They'll tell us they're better off saving $5, keeping FireWire connectivity, or adding an expansion card to its extra single-lane PCI Express slot. Because those enthusiasts have their own specific needs, they already know they're right. Our next award is proof that $5 saved is $5 earned, and recognition that Gigabyte's 990FXA-UD3 is still a solid, well-priced product that does its job well.