Asus TUF Gaming Z590-Plus WIFI Review: TUF Enough

This mid-range board offers good performance and lots of features for $249.99

Reviews
By
Published
Asus TUF Gaming Z590-Plus WIFI
(Image credit: © Asus)

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.

Firmware

Asus’ BIOS for Z590 looks the same as found on previous-generation Z490-based motherboards. The BIOS starts in “EZ” mode, presenting some high-level information and a couple of adjustable options such as enabling XMP and Boot priority. Advanced Mode has a slew of BIOS options, many of which most users will not touch. Asus organizes the BIOS well, and many of the common functions, particularly overclocking functionality, are easily accessible without drilling deep into the pages. Overall, Asus offers a user-friendly BIOS with enough options to keep the most advanced users busy.

Joe Shields
Joe Shields
Staff Writer, Components

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

6 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Co BIY
    I enjoy these midrange reviews because these are boards I may actually be in the market for. The tradeoffs between the options are interesting.

    I think the tables with the "best" board on the bottom are confusing . The "best" should be at the top even when that means it has a lower number.

    And why is the MSI MEG Ace always at the top regardless of it's performance in a given test ? ( I don't think Tom's would sell top billing on every table regardless of scores - Especially when the top is sometimes the worst spot the way the tables are set.)
    Reply
  • Howardohyea
    Co BIY said:
    I enjoy these midrange reviews because these are boards I may actually be in the market for.
    I just read those reviews for fun, it is interesting to see different boards with different perks/aspects.

    It might be me though but I really would like to see a CMOS clear button on the rear IO, or have the CMOS battery not blocked under a graphics card
    Reply
  • Captain_Hook
    https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/USMhA68MCq8KqFhv4uwYMJ-970-80.jpg - it's nice to have a pic with Ryzen in an Intel motherboard review 🆒
    Reply
  • MainFramR1
    Co BIY said:
    I enjoy these midrange reviews because these are boards I may actually be in the market for. The tradeoffs between the options are interesting.

    I think the tables with the "best" board on the bottom are confusing . The "best" should be at the top even when that means it has a lower number.

    And why is the MSI MEG Ace always at the top regardless of it's performance in a given test ? ( I don't think Tom's would sell top billing on every table regardless of scores - Especially when the top is sometimes the worst spot the way the tables are set.)
    The top result in the charts is always the same and a reference for the 10900K versus the 11900K (AMD reviews its a 3900X). In other words, it's not the board, but the CPU used as a reference and is not included in the performance sort.
    Reply
  • Co BIY
    MainFramR1 said:
    The top result in the charts is always the same and a reference for the 10900K versus the 11900K (AMD reviews its a 3900X). In other words, it's not the board, but the CPU used as a reference and is not included in the performance sort.

    Now I see it. Thanks for the explanation.
    Reply
  • TheInspector069
    Admin said:
    Asus’ TUF Gaming Z590-Plus WIFI includes three M.2 slots with a unique latching system, a USB 3.2 Gen2x2 Type-C port, integrated Wi-Fi 6 and capable power delivery. Priced at around $250, it isn’t cheap but compares well to similarly priced Intel boards.

    Asus TUF Gaming Z590-Plus WIFI Review: TUF Enough : Read more
    Joe,

    If you look st the graphics for this board, it states 3Gbs for SATA connectivity. When I have seen 6Gbs including on your review.

    Would it be possible for someone on your side to notify ASUS of this error?

    Jonathan
    Reply