Review MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus Review: Affordable Basics

Status
Not open for further replies.

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
So even X570 ATX boards still to this day have more physical expansion slots than they can sufficiently feed natively. This is why mATX should be king.
A bunch of graphics cards have coolers that are more than two slots thick. And most boards keep the top slot space vacant to make more room around the CPU, so that the second card would go into the case's fifth or sixth slot.
 
Reactions: z0d and spdragoo

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
So even X570 ATX boards still to this day have more physical expansion slots than they can sufficiently feed natively. This is why mATX should be king.
How many people do you know will actually need more than one 4.0x4 slot for M.2? Linus recently did a side-by-side SATA3 vs 3.0x4 vs 4.0x4 "blind test" in general use and SATA actually won - even people in the hardware review business cannot reliably tell the difference in real-world use other than file copy.

For most people, the flexibility of being able to pick between interface A or B for a given group of HSIO lanes without having to pay an exorbitant price premium for extra IO to support everything at once is far more valuable and you cannot cram all of that flexibility on a mATX board. Especially when two or even three out of four PCIe slots may be blocked off my the GPU alone as Crashman mentioned.

I have a mATX board in my current PC and regret that decision since it means I cannot have both my USB3 and FireWire cards (yes, I still occasionally use some FW stuff) installed at the same time since I have only one usable slot aside from the GPU.
 

tennis2

Judicious
Even with a dual slot GPU, most mATX boards still have 2 empty PCIe slots. Except, unlike ATX where "if you use this slot, this one gets disabled" doesn't come into play since you don't have more slots than can be simultaneously fed.
I'm not saying ATX shouldn't exist, there's just no reason it should be the most common form factor anymore with all the built in IO and features that modern chipsets have. Not like back in the day where you needed an add-in card for even fairly common IO tasks.
 

2Be_or_Not2Be

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2013
1,035
86
19,740
115
I have a mATX board in my current PC and regret that decision since it means I cannot have both my USB3 and FireWire cards (yes, I still occasionally use some FW stuff) installed at the same time since I have only one usable slot aside from the GPU.
Wait, are you saying that you have a USB3 add-in card? I think you might need a new m/b, not more slots in that old one. ;)

Kidding aside, I do think that mfgs still make way too many full-size ATX and not enough micro-ATX/mini-ITX. I think multi-GPU setups have been waning in popularity, whether due to lack of return in cryptomining or just the overall higher expense of multiple high-end GPUs without a corresponding linear increase in performance. Yet we don't see more micro-ATX, ITX, or even DTX boards; we see the same large amount of ATX/eATX.

I personally only need a mini-ITX board (YMMV, of ocurse), and I would love to see more options available in that space.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
Even with a dual slot GPU, most mATX boards still have 2 empty PCIe slots. Except, unlike ATX where "if you use this slot, this one gets disabled" doesn't come into play since you don't have more slots than can be simultaneously fed.
I'm not saying ATX shouldn't exist, there's just no reason it should be the most common form factor anymore with all the built in IO and features that modern chipsets have. Not like back in the day where you needed an add-in card for even fairly common IO tasks.
I already explained it to you. With the hardware these guys want, the second card has to go into the case's fifth or sixth slots. Now, you go tell the motherboard companies they can't push the top slot down into the second space. And while you're at it, tell the graphics card companies that all cards must be at most two spaces thick.

I don't have to like it, I need only be realistic.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Wait, are you saying that you have a USB3 add-in card? I think you might need a new m/b, not more slots in that old one. ;)
A new motherboard wouldn't help since most modern boards still only have six USB ports at the back. One of those would still get dedicated to my UPS, three of them would still go to my USB hubs for convenient access to USB ports (my computer is deep under my desk, so using front-panel ports is a non-option), mouse and keyboard fill in the rest.

So, even if I upgraded my PC, chances are I'd still toss an USB3 card in for 2-4 extra ports so I can leave everything permanently wired in without daisy-chaining hubs.
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
1
Our search for the best deal in 3rd Generation Ryzen processor support led us to MSI’s MPG X570 Gaming Plus. Is it a deal or should you look elsewhere for X570 options?

MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus Review: Affordable Basics : Read more

Welcome to Tom's hardware, Were we stress test a motherboard with a 65w CPU.

Seriously?

"Most buyers in the sub-$200 motherboard market will never upgrade to the Ryzen 9 3950X, and few will even jump up to the 3900X, and hardly any buyers would expect boards in this price class to overclock those processors. When you’re mostly after the basics in an X570 board, so you can spend more on the processor or other components, the MPG X570 Gaming Plus is easy to recommend."

What kind of crap is that? Does it say on the box "does not support Ryzen 3900 or 3950x?

Tom's Hardware used to be a great place to go for good reviews. Now they are just pandering to there sponsors.

tsk tsk.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
Welcome to Tom's hardware, Were we stress test a motherboard with a 65w CPU.

Seriously?

"Most buyers in the sub-$200 motherboard market will never upgrade to the Ryzen 9 3950X, and few will even jump up to the 3900X, and hardly any buyers would expect boards in this price class to overclock those processors. When you’re mostly after the basics in an X570 board, so you can spend more on the processor or other components, the MPG X570 Gaming Plus is easy to recommend."

What kind of crap is that? Does it say on the box "does not support Ryzen 3900 or 3950x?

Tom's Hardware used to be a great place to go for good reviews. Now they are just pandering to there sponsors.

tsk tsk.
Tom's Hardware used to be a great place to go for feedback. We tested this CPU up to 230W via overclocked stress tests. The 3950X TDP is 105W. Reading instead of skimming could be helpful..tsk tsk ;)
 
Reactions: Dark Lord of Tech

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
1
Tom's Hardware used to be a great place to go for feedback. We tested this CPU up to 230W via overclocked stress tests. The 3950X TDP is 105W. Reading instead of skimming could be helpful..tsk tsk ;)
"Most buyers in the sub-$200 motherboard market will never upgrade to the Ryzen 9 3950X, and few will even jump up to the 3900X, and hardly any buyers would expect boards in this price class to overclock those processors. When you’re mostly after the basics in an X570 board, so you can spend more on the processor or other components, the MPG X570 Gaming Plus is easy to recommend."

Seriously?

https://www.google.com/search?q=running+a+3900x+on+MSI+MPG+X570+Gaming+Plus&client=opera&hs=4IO&sxsrf=ALeKk00M7YkDWWnsoNBQbLEnqD3waTbylA:1582340287937&ei=v5hQXoHbOIy2swWp0JrQCA&start=10&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwjBtpr2lOTnAhUM26wKHSmoBooQ8tMDegQIDBAz&biw=3440&bih=1368

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7PkZwY9PWM


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7PkZwY9PWM&t=672s

Has a bios revision corrected these problems? They have been duplicated on numerous other sites.

But seriously, how can you recommend this board when other boards do much better.......
 
Last edited:

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
"Most buyers in the sub-$200 motherboard market will never upgrade to the Ryzen 9 3950X, and few will even jump up to the 3900X, and hardly any buyers would expect boards in this price class to overclock those processors. When you’re mostly after the basics in an X570 board, so you can spend more on the processor or other components, the MPG X570 Gaming Plus is easy to recommend."

Seriously?

https://www.google.com/search?q=running+a+3900x+on+MSI+MPG+X570+Gaming+Plus&client=opera&hs=4IO&sxsrf=ALeKk00M7YkDWWnsoNBQbLEnqD3waTbylA:1582340287937&ei=v5hQXoHbOIy2swWp0JrQCA&start=10&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwjBtpr2lOTnAhUM26wKHSmoBooQ8tMDegQIDBAz&biw=3440&bih=1368

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7PkZwY9PWM


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7PkZwY9PWM&t=672s

Has a bios revision corrected these problems? They have been duplicated on numerous other sites.

But seriously, how can you recommend this board when other boards do much better.......
What BIOS problems? The one where entering the "Board Explorer" menu causes USB devices to be disabled, as described in the article?
We were aware of sites reporting an overheating voltage regulator, so we checked the voltage regulator temperature using nothing but case fans, while the CPU was overclocked, and saw it only reach the 90's. Given that it was already consuming more power in the overclocked configuration than a 3950X uses in its stock configuration, we were satisfied that good case airflow was enough and added no further commentary.

But here's the best part: It's only recommended as an acceptable $160 solution. The ASRock board was ALREADY recommended as a better $200 alternative. It's all right there: If you're cheap, this board is adequate. If you can afford a better board, go with the ASRock.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
But seriously, how can you recommend this board when other boards do much better.......
Also makes it sound like X570 is the only possible option even though a bunch of boards going all the way down to A320 can run the 3950X just fine if you don't care about PCIe 4.0 or overclocking. May not make much sense at current prices but given the rate at which AMD CPU prices drop especially around new lineup launches, the 3950X may be under $300 new and $200 used a year from now, which could very well make it a common sighting on $100-ish boards.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
Also makes it sound like X570 is the only possible option even though a bunch of boards going all the way down to A320 can run the 3950X just fine if you don't care about PCIe 4.0 or overclocking. May not make much sense at current prices but given the rate at which AMD CPU prices drop especially around new lineup launches, the 3950X may be under $300 new and $200 used a year from now, which could very well make it a common sighting on $100-ish boards.
We're actually waiting for the new B series to launch. Like right now waiting. As in we expect it to happen in 1H.
We recommended the ASRock X570 Steel Legend as the cheapest solution for big processors because its voltage regulator has enough current to overclock those. With eight 46A MOSFETS on the MPG X570 Gaming Plus and likely some further safety limits, we're looking at a 368W solution that's probably capped at around 300W. Far more than enough to run a big CPU at stock settings, but not enough to overclock it. And don't we all overclock?

I should also note that the reason we bought this board was to observe the voltage regulator overheating. But even at max overclock and load (meter shows around 230W, actual CPU power is probably around 180W), we could only get the temperature to around 90 °C. And we're only using the draft of our two front-mounted radiator fans to do this. Maybe those other guys were using slower fans, or at a greater distance? I doubt they were lying about their temperatures, but wouldn't find it too difficult to believe that they were purposely dis-optimizing airflow over the voltage regulator. Either way, we wasted $160 trying to prove it was a bad board and instead gave it an award for being the cheapest "good enough" board.
 
Last edited:

tennis2

Judicious
I already explained it to you. With the hardware these guys want, the second card has to go into the case's fifth or sixth slots. Now, you go tell the motherboard companies they can't push the top slot down into the second space. And while you're at it, tell the graphics card companies that all cards must be at most two spaces thick.

I don't have to like it, I need only be realistic.
It sounds like you may be unaware of (or have a skewed experience with) the current state of the market. The VAST majority of users these days only have one GPU.
I'd like to see Tom's do a hardware survey of their users. I can GUARANTEE it would prove my point. I've seen plenty of user hardware surveys on other sites. For example, TechReport (RIP) in 2014 found that:
  • 90% of 3918 users polled use only a single GPU. (I'm certain this number has increased since then)
  • 75% of 3872 users polled have no other expansion cards besides a GPU.
  • 72% of 3902 users polled have an ATX mobo.
Also, I'm not saying ATX should be non-existent, just that there's no reason it should be the most common size.
 
Last edited:

closs.sebastien

Reputable
Feb 9, 2018
67
13
4,535
0
So even X570 ATX boards still to this day have more physical expansion slots than they can sufficiently feed natively. This is why mATX should be king.
mATX cases are too small for a sufficient air cooling.
I am happy to have a normal ATX, with:
  • core i7 8700k with a big cooler - bequiet dark rock 3
  • rtx 2070 - 2 slots and 2 big fans
  • sound card (soundblaster z)
  • additional usb 3 (pcie card)
  • m2 ssd
  • 1 sata harddrive
  • 2 sata ssd
  • 2 optical drives (standard dvd & bluray-burner)
  • some 12cm fans in front of the case
but; everyone has its own & different need...
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
1
I should also note that the reason we bought this board was to observe the voltage regulator overheating. But even at max overclock and load (meter shows around 230W, actual CPU power is probably around 180W), we could only get the temperature to around 90 °C. And we're only using the draft of our two front-mounted radiator fans to do this. Maybe those other guys were using slower fans, or at a greater distance? I doubt they were lying about their temperatures, but wouldn't find it too difficult to believe that they were purposely dis-optimizing airflow over the voltage regulator. Either way, we wasted $160 trying to prove it was a bad board and instead gave it an award for being the cheapest "good enough" board.
While some of the other boards under the same config were running at 70C. 20C greater heat seems kind of a big deal in my book. Did you perform your testing in a case, or rather an open air test bench with fans blowing on the voltage regulators? If the latter, it's not the "other guys" testing methology that comes into question, rather yours. After all, most people do (gasp) install these in cases.

You also seem to be slightly out of touch with how a lot, if not most people seem to pick their motherboard/CPU combo lately, spending the most possible on the CPU, while skimping on the mobo. Not sure how you can slap on an editors choice award with the caveat that "most people wont install a 3900x or 3950x" into it.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: envy14tpe

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
It sounds like you may be unaware of (or have a skewed experience with) the current state of the market. The VAST majority of users these days only have one GPU.
I'd like to see Tom's do a hardware survey of their users. I can GUARANTEE it would prove my point. I've seen plenty of user hardware surveys on other sites. For example, TechReport (RIP) in 2014 found that:
  • 90% of 3918 users polled use only a single GPU. (I'm certain this number has increased since then)
  • 75% of 3872 users polled have no other expansion cards besides a GPU.
  • 72% of 3902 users polled have an ATX mobo.
Also, I'm not saying ATX should be non-existent, just that there's no reason it should be the most common size.
Not at all. Really, the intro to this response counters your original point. You should have made two points:
1.) Most gaming builds have only one card, a graphics card.
2.) Even those who want a second card only need Micro ATX.

But instead you lead only with Point 2, so that's what I've been discussing. People want graphics cards that are just a little too big to fit over two slots. Motherboard manufacturers prefer to put the top slot in the case's second position. So, those who want a second card would typically be putting it in the case's fifth slot position. It's a problem with the way these motherboards and graphics coolers are being designed, not a problem with the Micro ATX form factor.

I've been a long-time proponent of Micro ATX, but I've also been a long time proponent of designing boards with the graphics slot in the highest position and limitting card thickness to around 38mm. Yet when you limited your discussion to the number of slots supported, I had to consider the way motherboards and graphics cards are being designed in practice.

Of course people are using only one card. That's a different discussion.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
While some of the other boards under the same config were running at 70C. 20C greater heat seems kind of a big deal in my book. Did you perform your testing in a case, or rather an open air test bench with fans blowing on the voltage regulators? If the latter, it's not the "other guys" testing methology that comes into question, rather yours. After all, most people do (gasp) install these in cases.

You also seem to be slightly out of touch with how a lot, if not most people seem to pick their motherboard/CPU combo lately, spending the most possible on the CPU, while skimping on the mobo. Not sure how you can slap on an editors choice award with the caveat that "most people wont install a 3900x or 3950x" into it.
Sure, but $40 is also a big deal. This is recommended as the cheapest "good enough" board, the ASRock was recommended as the best somewhat-inexpensive board, the price difference being around 20%.

"With eight 46A MOSFETS on the MPG X570 Gaming Plus and likely some further safety limits, we're looking at a 368W solution that's probably capped at around 300W. Far more than enough to run a big CPU at stock settings, but not enough to overclock it. And don't we all overclock? "
If you won't acknowledge that response, I don't think we can call this a discussion.
 

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
1
Sure, but $40 is also a big deal. This is recommended as the cheapest "good enough" board, the ASRock was recommended as the best somewhat-inexpensive board, the price difference being around 20%.

"With eight 46A MOSFETS on the MPG X570 Gaming Plus and likely some further safety limits, we're looking at a 368W solution that's probably capped at around 300W. Far more than enough to run a big CPU at stock settings, but not enough to overclock it. And don't we all overclock? "
If you won't acknowledge that response, I don't think we can call this a discussion.
I was unaware of the fact the designation "Editors Choice" was now meant to mean "good enough". Sorry, this smacks of sponsor bias. But you can pat yourself on the back for your small disclaimer if you like.

And would I spend an extra $40.00 on a board with a better VRM solution? Absolutely !!!!! Better that than the extra 1-2 fans...........

And you never responded to my point of testing in an open air test bench vs a case............
 
Last edited:
Reactions: rigg42 and svan71
@Crashman I don't see CPU's listed albeit I do see mention of the 3700x. Where there other CPU's tested especially for the heat/vrm measurements? I must admit TH's formating of these reviews suck compared to the old style of which I'M sure you cant control. The site in general is much harder to read longer articles like full reviews.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
You misunderstood, I was asking if a bios revision corrected the overheating issues this board had upon release, nothing else.
That's completely possible.
Here was our method:
1.) See postings about overheating voltage regulators
2.) Contact all the manufacturers and say "We're doing a budget X570 series, would you like to join?"
3.) Talk to everyone who responds
4.) Note that MSI talked about something other than the budget X570 series
5.) Buy the board and run the test, using the latest firmware because we always run the latest public firmware.
6.) Report the overheating if it occurs.

But rather than overheating, we were left with "entering Board Explore menu causes USB ports to be disabled" and "Hardware monitor page in MSI software is blank". Those are two annoying problem, but shouldn't be a deal breaker to people who know about them before ordering.

We used HWInfo and an IR meter and reported the highest temperature of those two. Here's the test system:
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
I was unaware of the fact the designation "Editors Choice" was now meant to mean "good enough". Sorry, this smacks of sponsor bias. But you can pat yourself on the back for your small disclaimer if you like.
The reason our recommendations are limited is that AMD processors don't often run at their rated frequency and we don't want to be stuck with "but I'm not overclocking, I'm just trying to get my processor up to its rated frequency" excuses on a board that obviously doesn't have enough power to overclock those CPUs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ncogneto

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,355
53
19,870
1
That's completely possible.
Here was our method:
1.) See postings about overheating voltage regulators
2.) Contact all the manufacturers and say "We're doing a budget X570 series, would you like to join?"
3.) Talk to everyone who responds
4.) Note that MSI talked about something other than the budget X570 series
5.) Buy the board and run the test, using the latest firmware because we always run the latest public firmware.
6.) Report the overheating if it occurs.

But rather than overheating, we were left with "entering Board Explore menu causes USB ports to be disabled" and "Hardware monitor page in MSI software is blank". Those are two annoying problem, but shouldn't be a deal breaker to people who know about them before ordering.

We used HWInfo and an IR meter and reported the highest temperature of those two. Here's the test system:
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YibdAYBgJK4hDzDH7Z8GNi-650-80.jpg

A cooler master haf x evo lol. (I am only laughing because that is the case I am running my MSI unify and 3800x in (oc'ed to 4.4 all core FLCK 1900).

That setup is pretty dam close to an open air test bench.............

Pull the sides off and it is. On a side note, any thermal testing should include the test setup...........

You slap that board into a standard case, install a normal CLC cooler on it, and watch the thermals on the VRM's sore. ( Using a CLC eliminates the CPU fan which traditionally helps cool the VRM's)

This is a pretty standard setup........

Now your additional 20C matter.......... Alot!

Rookie troll, pul lease. That was a poor excuse of an attempt at a dismissal.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: rigg42
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS