Intel Core i9 9900K processor review
Intel Core i7 9700K processor review
Intel Core i5 9600K processor review
MSI MEG Z390 ACE review
ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero review
Crucial P1 M.2 1000GB SSD Review
Corsair Force Series MP510 M.2 SSD Review
MSI GeForce RTX 2070 Armor 8G review
ASUS Turbo GeForce RTX 2070 8GB review
Guru3D PC Buyers Guide Autumn 2018
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro review
Posted by: on: 07/31/2018 03:00 PM [
6 comment(s) ]
We review the Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro, optimized for Ryzen processors, and in specific the new Ryzen 2000 / Zen+. The new B450 series chipset based board offer some more appealing value, as budget wise these board sell at a sub 125,- USD/EUR price point, and Gigabyte certainly chucked this board full with features. So much so that you cannot really look at it as a budget offering anymore.
Read article
Advertisement
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 7584
Senior Member
Posts: 7584
Posted on: 07/31/2018 08:27 PM
Thanks for the review. I'm interested in a new motherboard. I'll think I'll pass on this one. I don't like the lack of a ps/2 port and I'd prefer an actual voltage setting versus an offset. Otherwise, this looks like a decent motherboard.
It's interesting to see the difference in maximum core # power readings at default versus overclocked. I've used your reviews to see how my readings differ compared to yours. My 1200 yields 11-12 watt core # power readings at 3.9 Ghz. I get a little jealous when I see the lower core # power readings on the higher binned cpus you often test.
Your gaming tests also seem to show differing performance regarding the size of the L3 cache. Ghost Recon Wildlands: 1920 X 1080 appears to show that the smaller L3 cache on the lower model ryzens is having a negative effect on the frame rate.
Once again, thanks for the review. I'll read the others soon.
Don't be, mine does eat 16W per core at peak clock.
To the board. Really like it. It is very well organized. And has everything MB in gaming/office/workstation/ ... PC needs.
Thanks for the review. I'm interested in a new motherboard. I'll think I'll pass on this one. I don't like the lack of a ps/2 port and I'd prefer an actual voltage setting versus an offset. Otherwise, this looks like a decent motherboard.
It's interesting to see the difference in maximum core # power readings at default versus overclocked. I've used your reviews to see how my readings differ compared to yours. My 1200 yields 11-12 watt core # power readings at 3.9 Ghz. I get a little jealous when I see the lower core # power readings on the higher binned cpus you often test.
Your gaming tests also seem to show differing performance regarding the size of the L3 cache. Ghost Recon Wildlands: 1920 X 1080 appears to show that the smaller L3 cache on the lower model ryzens is having a negative effect on the frame rate.
Once again, thanks for the review. I'll read the others soon.
Don't be, mine does eat 16W per core at peak clock.
To the board. Really like it. It is very well organized. And has everything MB in gaming/office/workstation/ ... PC needs.
cocopipi
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Posted on: 08/01/2018 01:52 PM
For real test with some knowledge and enthusiasm added check:
Short summary: this board is garbage ... biggest mistake in article is number of phases. It does not use 11 VRM phases (8+3) but only 7 (4+3).
Fake VRM phases are explained here:
For real test with some knowledge and enthusiasm added check:
Short summary: this board is garbage ... biggest mistake in article is number of phases. It does not use 11 VRM phases (8+3) but only 7 (4+3).
Fake VRM phases are explained here:
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 7584
Senior Member
Posts: 7584
Posted on: 08/01/2018 02:12 PM
For real test with some knowledge and enthusiasm added check:
Short summary: this board is garbage ... biggest mistake in article is number of phases. It does not use 11 VRM phases (8+3) but only 7 (4+3).
Fake VRM phases are explained here:
Sad. Higher heat => lower power efficiency, lower longevity.
For real test with some knowledge and enthusiasm added check:
Short summary: this board is garbage ... biggest mistake in article is number of phases. It does not use 11 VRM phases (8+3) but only 7 (4+3).
Fake VRM phases are explained here:
Sad. Higher heat => lower power efficiency, lower longevity.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33505
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33505
Posted on: 08/01/2018 02:25 PM
No, it certainly isn't. The VRM hype simply is getting out of context, as hey people love to create viral clicks? The board has 4 phases to the CPU, and yes they are doubled up, doubling up still cools down the chokes and capacitors in use as they distribute the load evenly. Add to that the VRM cooling that gigabyte applied and have a peek at the thermal image in the review.
Even if you load up b450 with the fastest Ryzen (like we did) it'll function fine. Once you overclock extremely things could be different. This, however, is B450, the entry-level budget board not intended for all kinds of freaky stuff. I mean if you are planning to run viral on the CPU software like prime95, hey okay .. you're right. But if you plan to do all kinds of weird stuff on your B450 motherboard, perhaps you should have looked at X470 in the first place? This board will be fine for the 90% out there and is far from being garbage.
Short summary: this board is garbage ..
No, it certainly isn't. The VRM hype simply is getting out of context, as hey people love to create viral clicks? The board has 4 phases to the CPU, and yes they are doubled up, doubling up still cools down the chokes and capacitors in use as they distribute the load evenly. Add to that the VRM cooling that gigabyte applied and have a peek at the thermal image in the review.
Even if you load up b450 with the fastest Ryzen (like we did) it'll function fine. Once you overclock extremely things could be different. This, however, is B450, the entry-level budget board not intended for all kinds of freaky stuff. I mean if you are planning to run viral on the CPU software like prime95, hey okay .. you're right. But if you plan to do all kinds of weird stuff on your B450 motherboard, perhaps you should have looked at X470 in the first place? This board will be fine for the 90% out there and is far from being garbage.
Crazy Serb
Member
Posts: 99
Member
Posts: 99
Posted on: 08/01/2018 08:19 PM
For doubled phases you need doubler's, which this board does not have and you need voltage controller, which supports doubling and you guessed by now, this board does not have... Also, if you remove those "doubled" components, motherboard probably would not even notice it, unless doubled components are rated really low.
Also 5 minutes for VRM temps is not enough.
Since board vendors are not honest, I think that reviews need to be technically accurate at least.
The board has 4 phases to the CPU, and yes they are doubled up,
For doubled phases you need doubler's, which this board does not have and you need voltage controller, which supports doubling and you guessed by now, this board does not have... Also, if you remove those "doubled" components, motherboard probably would not even notice it, unless doubled components are rated really low.
Also 5 minutes for VRM temps is not enough.
Since board vendors are not honest, I think that reviews need to be technically accurate at least.
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Thanks for the review. I'm interested in a new motherboard. I'll think I'll pass on this one. I don't like the lack of a ps/2 port and I'd prefer an actual voltage setting versus an offset. Otherwise, this looks like a decent motherboard.
It's interesting to see the difference in maximum core # power readings at default versus overclocked. I've used your reviews to see how my readings differ compared to yours. My 1200 yields 11-12 watt core # power readings at 3.9 Ghz. I get a little jealous when I see the lower core # power readings on the higher binned cpus you often test.
Your gaming tests also seem to show differing performance regarding the size of the L3 cache. Ghost Recon Wildlands: 1920 X 1080 appears to show that the smaller L3 cache on the lower model ryzens is having a negative effect on the frame rate.
Once again, thanks for the review. I'll read the others soon.