Gigabyte X870E Aorus Master Review: Solid performance, fast M.2, ample USB

X870E Aorus Master offers updated aesthetics and loads of rear IO USB ports, plus three PCIe 5.0 M.2 sockets.

Gigabyte X870E Aorus Master
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Tom's Hardware Verdict

Gigabyte’s X870E Aorus Master gets a slight facelift, USB 4.0 Type-C ports, three PCIe 5.0 x4 M.2 sockets, Wi-Fi 7, and more “EZ” features. The $499.99 price is pleasingly the same as last-gen, too.

Reasons to buy

  • +

    No price increase from X670E Aorus Master

  • +

    Three PCIe 5.0 M.2 sockets

  • +

    Fast memory support (DDR5-8600)

  • +

    12 total USB ports on rear IO (2x USB 4.0)

  • +

    “EZ” features

Reasons to avoid

  • -

    Last-gen audio solution

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Gigabyte, like the other major board partners, has also joined the AMD X870/X870E chipset party with several new SKUs. In our lab now is the upper mid-range X870E Aorus Master, which, like its peers, promises native USB 4.0 and Wi-Fi 7. It also offers an updated design, robust power delivery, fast memory support listed to DDR5-8600(OC), several “EZ” features, and more, for just under $500.

Gigabyte shows up to the X870/X870E party with nine SKUs listed on its website. The full lineup consists of the X870E Aorus Master ($499.99), X870E Aorus Pro/Pro Ice ($359.99), X870E Elite ($319.99), X870 Elite Ice ($289.99), X870 Gaming X WIFI 7 ($289.99) Gaming WIFI 6 ($219.99), the X870 Aorus Elite WIFI 7 ($289.99), and a new Eagle WIFI 7 motherboard SKU ($229.99). So far, we don’t see any Micro-ATX or Mini-ITX boards, but perhaps we’ll see one in 2025 with the B840/B850 chipset. There's an updated SKU for everyone outside of the smaller form factor boards. With these new boards, Gigabyte has also given up charging more for white motherboards. Now, they cost the same as their dark counterpart.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Joe Shields
Staff Writer, Components

Joe Shields is a staff writer at Tom’s Hardware. He reviews motherboards and PC components.

  • UnforcedERROR
    I'm not sure I'd consider a $499 pricetag "pleasing" but I'll concede that they at least maintained the same price a generation later.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    It's an interesting choice to go with 3/4 M.2 off of CPU lanes. Perhaps it's due to the likelihood that the next generation of video cards will be PCIe 5.0 so running the primary slot at x8 won't matter for any card. I think I'd prefer having a second PCIe 5.0 slot than the PCIe 5.0 M.2 just the same though.
    Reply
  • PlutoDelic
    thestryker said:
    It's an interesting choice to go with 3/4 M.2 off of CPU lanes. Perhaps it's due to the likelihood that the next generation of video cards will be PCIe 5.0 so running the primary slot at x8 won't matter for any card. I think I'd prefer having a second PCIe 5.0 slot than the PCIe 5.0 M.2 just the same though.
    Honestly, 40 usable lanes and quad-channel support in my opinion should be the new norm.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    PlutoDelic said:
    Honestly, 40 usable lanes and quad-channel support in my opinion should be the new norm.
    I think the extra bandwidth from DDR5 has shoved quad channel further away at least from the manufacturers side of things. Better memory controllers and higher performance memory will likely keep the CPUs fed so I doubt this is going to change. The primary beneficiary for client workloads would be integrated graphics and the market for premium there is untested.

    As for PCIe while 40 lanes would be great moving DMI to PCIe 5.0 would go a long way. Doubling the chipset bandwidth would allow all the connectivity to go through the chipset which should leave around 28 lanes on current desktop CPUs. I think this would be sufficient for the majority of people with desktop workloads.
    Reply
  • DawesLimit
    I'm not sure what's intention for testing the 14900k and 7950X against the 9900X. They are faster, we know that. A better test would have been the 9900X on the older X670E vs the newer X870E MBs.
    Reply
  • DrDocumentum
    Confusing test mixing 7950x vs 9900x. More important data here would be a DDR5 6000 Mhz vs 8000 Mhz test to see if the improvements AMD claimed on DRAM speed support translates into tangible performance.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    DrDocumentum said:
    More important data here would be a DDR5 6000 Mhz vs 8000 Mhz test to see if the improvements AMD claimed on DRAM speed support translates into tangible performance.
    They stated in the review that their 8000 kit didn't work on this or the other X870E board they reviewed.
    Reply
  • shinywaffles
    did you test the ai snatch application that should help with optimizing the ddr5 memory? I have not been able to find it anywhere yet
    Reply
  • Hotrod2go
    I'm waiting to see reviews comparing performance both stock & OC between X670E boards & this X870E generation boards before I draw any conclusions on this 'updated' chipset.
    Some sources I've seen have suggested better RAM traces on these X870E boards but I'm still to see real world evidence of this.
    Reply
  • DawesLimit
    Hotrod2go said:
    I'm waiting to see reviews comparing performance both stock & OC between X670E boards & this X870E generation boards before I draw any conclusions on this 'updated' chipset.
    Some sources I've seen have suggested better RAM traces on these X870E boards but I'm still to see real world evidence of this.
    Yeah seems like a missed opportunity to test that scenarios. Then again, maybe AMD prohibit them from doing such comparission?! :unsure:
    Reply