Review MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus Review: Affordable Basics

[rdgoodri]

Misleading review. Didn't test with 3900x or 3950x even though this is the premium x570 chipset. VRM Thermals tested by others way higher than normal. Do Not Buy this one.

 

[Crashman]

In regards to the edited forum post of mine: This was done to stay in line with community standards. I understand we're all incredibly passionate about hardware and testing, and in retrospect, I get that your feedback was meant with best intent. My sincerest apologies for a temporary lapse in mutual respect for hardware analysis, and I'm hoping we can keep having a lively chat here to discuss the findings.

Thank you, by the way, for the excellent feedback on testing methodology. I've spoken to a few fellow authors and some of the editorial people here at Tom's, and we're already making necessary adjustments based upon your recommendations. We love it that our audience is as committed and passionate about hardware as we are, and we'd not be who we are or come as far as we have if we didn't listen to interesting ideas and constructive feedback when we get it from you.

Passion is the natural byproduct of caring about one's work, and I'm definitely guilty of responding with a bit too much passion in here. Sorry about getting heated guys, I definitely could have handled this feedback in a more positive way. I truly do care about the work we do here at Tom's, and I want to make sure that we're giving the best advice possible. We're going to take a look at these results again as we tear apart our VRM analysis methodology to see how much the results change with additional sensors and heavier hardware loads. Stay tuned.

 

[mariushmth]

Hi,

If you want to be honest with the viewers, please re-test the board with a suitable processor like 3900x or any 95w or higher processor.

Also, please DO NOT use an IR sensor as they can be affected by the metal reflectivity and other factors (shiny heatsinks don't measure right, and those hand held ones almost never measure the temperature from the exact point where the laser points so you can be tricked by that) . Use a proper K type thermocouple attached to the heatsink, ideally you'd detach the heatsink of the vrm and insert the K type thermocouple between one of those thermal pads and the heatsink, above a power stage/lo-side mosfet.

It would be also worth attaching a thermocouple right under those mosfets, under the heatsink... in closed cases with poorer ventilation, that area can be very hot and cause the VRM circuit to throttle.

I would also like to point out that I would be one of those people that would buy now an x570 with a processor like 1600 AF series (because it's basically a rebranded 2600) or a 2600) and maybe a couple years from now, I would upgrade to a 3900x or 3950x when the prices drop significantly.

I'm aiming for a Gigabyte x570 Aorus Elite simply because I like a board that's more business like with less printed text or logos or crap on it, and that board at 170-180$ has a 12 phase VRM and it's one of the cheapest that has usb 3.1 gen 2 10g for front panel.
The WiFi version of x570 Aorus Elite is 205$ on Amazon .... so you can't even really justify this MSI motherboard as good value at 160$ when 10-20$ more gets you very good VRM.

Prices can go down substantially... 1600AF is 85-100$, right now you can buy Ryzen 2600 on aliexpress for around 110$, without heatsink.. and around 120-140$ on Amazon with heatsink, retail... 2 years ago when it was launched it was $200

The 470$ Ryzen 3900 will probably be around 200-250$ in a year or so and then I'd be able to afford it, becuase I won't have to upgrade the motherboard as well.

 

[Jim90]

So I've just viewed Steve's latest video at Hardware Unboxed and I'll tell you I'm pretty shocked.
I really can't believe that Tom's is still resorting to dishonest/misleading/poorly thought out pieces like this. Does it not occur to you that after that infamous article on 24th Aug 2018, you would very much be under the spotlight for some time. Information moves instantly at the click of a button - if you're called out by any other well known site, that news is gonna spread fast, as it is right now - and no, it isn't one site calling you out.
Unbelievable incompetence with a concerning level of arrogance ("folks buying this board won't want to upgrade CPU's later" - really??)

 

[rigg42]

I truly do care about the work we do here at Tom's, and I want to make sure that we're giving the best advice possible. We're going to take a look at these results again and tear apart our VRM analysis methodology to make sure that what we're doing is the best approach. And if we have to, we'll adopt a better approach. Stay tuned.

Your testing methodology is clearly flawed. MSI's acknowledgement of the VRM thermal issues proves this. If you did truly care, your response would have already concluded that you NEED to take a better approach. At least if you wish to retain any credibility. Your approach needs no further evaluation. The evaluation has been already been done by other reputable reviewers and MSI themselves.

 

[JamesSneed]

TH can you simply dispel everyone's issue with this testing and test this board with a 3950x and see if the VRM has overheating issues? The board supports this CPU so it shouldn't be an issue. When you do can you use a thermocouple for temperatures because using IR with these low VRM's possibly isn't accurate?

Also, concluding many won't use a high end CPU with a lower end $200 board really shouldn't be your call because you might be very wrong a year from now when the CPU's go on sale.

 

[rigg42]

If we instead consider its $25 savings when compared to the Tuf Gaming X570 Plus (Wi-Fi), we could just as easily say that it has around $25 less worth. You could be paying for the more-expensive board’s even-larger CPU voltage regulator and onboard Wi-Fi controller. Or, perhaps you don’t need those things?

How do you justify leaving the non wifi version of the Tuf Gaming x570 Plus out of the equation in this statement? What are the distinguishing features of the MPG x570 Gaming Plus that makes it worthy of an Editors Choice award over the Tuf Gaming x570 Plus or the ASRock X570 PRO4 that are its direct price competitors? What features make the MPG x570 Gaming Plus worthy of spending an extra $20 over the ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming 4 or Gigabyte X570 Gaming X?

I think any reasonably objective person who has spent any time analyzing the VRM designs, or looking at VRM thermal testing for the x570 lineup, would conclude that the VRM design common to the X570-A Pro, MPG X570 Gaming Plus, and MPG X570 Gaming Edge WiFi is objectively the worst design available on x570. IMO to make the MPG X570 Gaming Plus worthy of an Editors Choice award you need to justify it's recommendation over motherboards with objectively better power delivery in the same or cheaper pricing tier.

If you can't justify the the Editor's Choice award by pointing out a feature that makes the motherboard better than the competition (in terms of price to performance and/ or feature set), then the Editor's Choice award is not only meaningless but suspicious. I fail to see how anyone in good conscience could recommend this motherboard, much less give it an award, given the alternatives for the same or less money.

 

[Verrin]

Soderstrom, I hope you've learned that your pride isn't worth more than your professional reputation. Tom's has had a rocky public perception as of late (The 'Just Buy It' shenanigans for one, being the notable example), and the way you've taken feedback (especially before you started backpedaling with your stubbornness and language) isn't helping instill confidence in this website. I've been reading articles here for decades, and in the face of strong competition, this isn't a productive mindset when the alternatives are there.

I would suggest regularly comparing yourself to your peers in the industry (a lot of them are very transparent, certainly a order of magnitude more than this article has been), to make sure your testing methodology standards are the same or better. I know you've been around a while, but the reality is, everyone always has room for improvement. Especially in an industry such as yours, where methods and tools are constantly evolving and improving, so there's always a risk of exposing yourself to substandard or flawed practices.

I'd certainly like to see you reach out to HardwareUnboxed and demonstrate that you aren't above criticism or fault (as really no one is, including myself). And while it seems you've acknowledged from the feedback that there is room for improvement here, I really do hope to see that in future articles from you, even if you may refuse to fix all the issues with this one. I think it's fair to say, most people do want to see you do your best work, and we do have your interests at heart, despite the razzing from this you've received.

 

[deadoon]

I did come here due to the hardware unboxed video, and I did read the review, it feels like it is avoiding the issue and sidestepping it rather than confronting any problem factors.

As for proper vrm temperature testing, der8auer does a really good job on these and their review is one of the reasons I picked up the tuf gaming x570 board. Cheap, but not as cheap as the one in this review, but can handle upwards of 225W synthetic loads at quite respectable temperatures under less than ideal circumstances, with good airflow it trades blows with top tier boards. Additionally there was no mention of the other version of the tuf gaming x570 which has no wifi which would be a more direct comparison.

 

[InvalidError]

Soderstrom, I hope you've learned that your pride isn't worth more than your professional reputation.

Most of the writers and editors that built THG have moved on to do other stuff years ago and Tom himself appears to have been mostly phased out too, doubt he has much involvement with what happens on THG anymore.

 

[jon96789]

You guys just just lost all your credibility with your readers... I bought the MSi X570 motherboard with a 105-watt AMD 3900X back in September and ran into all kinds of issues. HWiNFO and a thermal IR gun showed that the CPU hit 95+ degrees C and the VRMs hit 100+ degrees with the CPU. At that point, the motherboard throttled the CPU down to 500 Mhz until it cooled down. At that point, the CPU speed increased closed to its rated speed and it overheated again, throttling the CPU again. This process repeated itself over and over again. To eliminate the cooler as a contributor, I changed from the AMD Wraith Prism cooler to a Corsair H115 RGB Platinum AIO cooler which helped the CPU temp but of course did not affect the terrible VRM performance.

I consulted with MSi and they said they will look into the matter and get back to me... Guess what, after repeated calls, no one ever got back to me. I even updated the BIOS to the latest release with no change in the temps.

I ended up buying an ASUS X570 ROG Crosshair VIII Hero and the VRMs never went higher than 60 degrees C.

I gave my old MSi motherboard to my grandson and built a PC with the 65-watt AMD 3700X and can confirm the motherboard ran a lot cooler, never exceeding 60-70 degrees, matching your test results.

But by stating that the MSi can run any 105-watt CPU is being dishonest to your readers. I guess Tom's Hardware has been paid off by their sponsors to my dismay.

 

[deadoon]

Looking at it again, it is odd that the power usage difference is being brushed off. Power usage is heat generation, and that heat has to be somewhere. Considering the power usage is the same at idle despite the feature differences between the boards(wifi onboard vs none), the extra 10-20w under load(for margin of error level performance differences) that this board draws should be raising some suspicion rather than a single line response.

 

[rhysiam]

I'm hoping we can keep having a lively chat here to discuss the findings.

I really appreciate this post Crashman. I look forward to seeing how your testing methodology and reporting evolves in future articles.

A few suggestions - these may well be on your to-do list already - but I'll list my thoughts here for what they're worth:
- A more detailed description of your testing method: It would be really helpful if you include a detailed breakdown of your tests either in the article itself, or as a separate article which you can reference in each motherboard review. Part of the issue here is that you don't provide enough information for your audience or other reviewers (in this case Steve from HU) to recreate your findings. What room temp were you testing at? How long did you run the Small FFT test for? Is there any airflow over the VRMs at all?

- A testing methodology: A more detailed description of your methods can also be accompanied by a clear rationale, justification and preemptive defence for your chosen method. Tell us up front why you've selected your particular testing approach. Are you trying to present a 'worst case' scenario? Are you going for something middle-of-the-road? You've used a 3700x for this review, but what will you do when you next test a high-end X570 board? Will you use the same CPU? That seems odd as you'd be pairing a high end board with a mid-range 65W CPU. Alternatively, will you change the tested CPU (thus changing your method) because the product is in a different category? In that case you won't be able compare results between entry level and high end X570 boards. Personally that seems flawed to me, but perhaps there are benefits I'm not aware of? If so, show me an article that justifies your approach and convince me!

In the end of the day, if you outline clear testing procedures (your method) and articulate a logical justification for your particular approach (methodology), and then produce a suite of reviews that consistently adhere to this predefined approach, it's much more difficult to criticise or disregard the reviews. No doubt you'd still get accused of shilling, but those of us with a shred of critical thinking would respect the work, even if we personally disagree with the chosen approach.

The only final thing I'd say is that I personally find it concerning how readily this review disregards the findings of numerous other reviews, without any real attempt to explain the differences. Then in the comment section, we have strident defences of the findings once criticism inevitably started to crop up. As @deadoon points out above, your power consumption testing found 20W higher power draw on this motherboard? Where is that extra power going if not to the VRM? If it is being spewed out as heat from the power delivery system, surely that additional 20W over competing motherboards would be enough to hit the thermal limits without decent airflow? Given the existing reviews that highlight issues and 20W more power pouring into this system... did this raise red flags? Was it looked in to? When people started raising concerns in the comment section, did anyone think to go back and double check, or try some different approaches to see if they could identify the extra power draw or recreate the findings of others? For example, there's some suggestion from @Crashman that the new BIOS has corrected the issue. Did you try the old BIOS to see if you could replicate what other respected reviews found? I'm not saying that your findings are wrong, I honestly don't know, I'd just hope that a reviewer committed to accuracy would be really careful before publishing and then staunchly defending findings which contradict information from other reputable sources.

I can only imagine how frustrating it must be to be accused of shilling, but many of the responses in this thread seem primarily defensive. If we're genuinely committed to accurate reporting, shouldn't the position of the author ultimately be one of curiosity as to why his or her findings don't align with those of other reviews, rather than defensive?

I wish TH all the best as you revisit your approach to these articles in future.

 

[Nick_C]

Thank you, by the way, for the excellent feedback on testing methodology. I've spoken to a few fellow authors and some of the editorial people here at Tom's, and we're already making necessary adjustments based upon your recommendations. We love it that our audience is as committed and passionate about hardware as we are, and we'd not be who we are or come as far as we have if we didn't listen to interesting ideas and constructive feedback when we get it from you.

One idea - take down the "Editor's Choice" accolade - so that unwitting buyers aren't misinformed by a single test result that doesn't match with those of others (or the manufacturer itself).

Passion is the natural byproduct of caring about one's work, and I'm definitely guilty of responding with a bit too much passion in here. Sorry about getting heated guys, I definitely could have handled this feedback in a more positive way.

In your position you, or more accurately tom'sHARDWARE, can't afford to over-react to criticism. The Internet does not forget.

 

[zx128k]

The cheaper MSI boards are not for overclocking the 3900x or 3950x. You can overclock the 3900x but you are going to need major air flow. They should be able to run the 3900x and the 3950x without overclocking. They are fine with the 3700x/3800x or 3600x if you overclock.

More or less the MPG X570 Gaming Plus is for running cpu's like the 3800x/3700x. It's a budget board. They are £124.99 to £159.99, half the cost of a minimum feature overclocking board with solid vrms and heatsinks. I would guess running a 3900x would lead to throttling without major air flow because people love overclocking. This board is not for overclocking the 3900x or 3950x.

Hitting 95+ degrees C with your stock cpu cooler is more or less inadequate air flow in the case or overclocking. source

Then changing from the AMD Wraith Prism cooler to a Corsair H115 RGB Platinum AIO cooler would be making things even worse by removing the prism coolers fan which is close to the VRMs. Now your VRMs are going to overheat in that case with poor air flow. Wondering why and changing motherboard priceless.

With good airflow. Using the 3900x hardware unboxed found 73 degrees vrm temps running blender (no pbo or auto overclock). All PC builds require good air flow in the case and there should be good air flow over the vrms. Actively adding fans for major air flow may be required for this board if you overclock the 3900x, .i.e. enable pbo or auto overclocking. Do not overclock the 3950x on this board.

Boards and vrms spreadsheet is the source for cpu overclocking suitability.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...IVNyMatydkpFA/htmlview?sle=true#gid=639584818

MSI are rejecting that there are any issues. https://www.msi.com/blog/mpg-x570-gaming-edge-wifi-vrm-thermal-test

 

[Olle P]

From page 1 of the review:

... the MPG X570 Gaming Plus has no Gen2 front-panel USB header. On the other hand, those retaining an old high-end case might appreciate that this board has two USB3 Gen1 front-panel headers.

No Gen 2 header? I happen to be one of those with this motherboard in a moderately old and higher end case, and I do use one of the available Gen2 headers. (That's USB generation 2, or USB2, which was the latest when the case was new, some ten years ago.)
USB3 isn't really old enough to be readily available in older cases!

 

[zx128k]

From page 1 of the review:No Gen 2 header? I happen to be one of those with this motherboard in a moderately old and higher end case, and I do use one of the available Gen2 headers. (That's USB generation 2, or USB2, which was the latest when the case was new, some ten years ago.)
USB3 isn't really old enough to be readily available in older cases!

I have a 7 year old case with usb3. My case is high-end and I do appreciate USB3 Gen1 front-panel headers.

 

[InvalidError]

From page 1 of the review:No Gen 2 header?

In modern days, "gen 2" means USB3.x-gen2 (10Gbps), not USB2.

USB2 uses the same wiring, headers and pinout as USB1, so nothing worth writing about there.

 

[RTV-5]

Crashman,

What on Earth is wrong with you. Miriad people are having problems with MSI's X570's VRMs overheating. Its an obvious issue. I get it that you want to stand up for MSI and they have made some fabulous products but to attack people who have tested the motherboards with reasonable testing conditions and hardware because they have written an unfavorable review based on the results is, as an author with a large audiance, somewhat unethical. Then you write that you have tested the hardware yourself and dispute their findings but your setup conditions for the testing are questionable and possibly unsound and that is incompetent. But the kicker is that in the proces you actually insulted the intelligence of a huge group of MSI users who also happen to be Toms Hardware readers.

I've never before even known of the reveiwers that you refer to as 'trolls and liars' but their configuration and results seemed to be reasonably sound and yours were at least questionable. I have no reason to stand up for them but based on what I read over there (the first time I've ever even heard of them) I have to say that I am disappointed to see that kind of garbage come from Toms Hardware. We all have bad days; perhaps that explains it? Perhaps you don't like their accent, I could relate to that. But really, what I read sounded like the ranting and raving of someone who is off of their medications. I don't see how I could have misunderstood something so simple, perhaps you should apologize. Perhaps you should make a correction. That would at least reassure me that Tom's Hardware is still somewhere that I could find information and opinions that I can count on.

 

[zx128k]

Crashman,

What on Earth is wrong with you. Miriad people are having problems with MSI's X570's VRMs overheating. Its an obvious issue. I get it that you want to stand up for MSI and they have made some fabulous products but to attack people who have tested the motherboards with reasonable testing conditions and hardware because they have written an unfavorable review based on the results is, as an author with a large audiance, somewhat unethical. Then you write that you have tested the hardware yourself and dispute their findings but your setup conditions for the testing are questionable and possibly unsound and that is incompetent. But the kicker is that in the proces you actually insulted the intelligence of a huge group of MSI users who also happen to be Toms Hardware readers.

I've never before even known of the reveiwers that you refer to as 'trolls and liars' but their configuration and results seemed to be reasonably sound and yours were at least questionable. I have no reason to stand up for them but based on what I read over there (the first time I've ever even heard of them) I have to say that I am disappointed to see that kind of garbage come from Toms Hardware. We all have bad days; perhaps that explains it? Perhaps you don't like their accent, I could relate to that. But really, what I read sounded like the ranting and raving of someone who is off of their medications. I don't see how I could have misunderstood something so simple, perhaps you should apologize. Perhaps you should make a correction. That would at least reassure me that Tom's Hardware is still somewhere that I could find information and opinions that I can count on.

Totally not a troll post right? 5 posts on this forum and you are attacking people personally. Singling them out so to speak. It's like you created the account to do so, like everyone creates an account other than their main for the moment they want to s##t post or troll. Missed my posts above did you, were I pointed to the part in the hardware unboxed video they state the board is okay if you have decent air flow. The IR pictures from the manufacture that show the same.

 

[jpishgar]

Hey there all!

Super-friendly reminder that personal attacks are not permitted on our forums, at all. You're welcome to attack the substance of the message, or the message itself, but not the messenger. Thanks for your compliance in helping to keep our community a civil place to discuss hardware.

-JP

 

[rigg42]

The cheaper MSI boards are not for overclocking the 3900x or 3950x. You can overclock the 3900x but you are going to need major air flow. They should be able to run the 3900x and the 3950x without overclocking. They are fine with the 3700x/3800x or 3600x if you overclock.

More or less the MPG X570 Gaming Plus is for running cpu's like the 3800x/3700x. It's a budget board. They are £124.99 to £159.99, half the cost of a minimum feature overclocking board with solid vrms and heatsinks. I would guess running a 3900x would lead to throttling without major air flow because people love overclocking. This board is not for overclocking the 3900x or 3950x.

So why would anyone buy one of these low end MSI boards? You can safely overclock Zen 2 8 and 6 cores on the majority of the AM4 motherboards. If you want x570 for PCIE4 and out of the box compatibility, all of the other x570 boards have better power delivery. The VRM on the X570-A Pro, MPG X570 Gaming Plus, and MPG X570 Gaming Edge WiFi is essentially the same as they used on a bunch of their last gen boards (most notable being the b450 Tomahawk) with doublers added to make it a true 8 phase.

There are better options in this price range. The lower end ASUS offerings absolutely slay these boards. The Tuf Gaming x570 Plus has a killer VRM and feature set for what it costs. Which happens to be about the same as the MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus being given the editors choice award. The VRM spreadsheet (which I also regularly link and use for reference) contradicts this statement: "They are £124.99 to £159.99, half the cost of a minimum feature overclocking board with solid vrms and heatsinks". Unless the low end x570 MSI stuff is significantly cheaper in other regions, I see no compelling reason to buy it vs the competition based on US pricing.

Boards and vrms spreadsheet is the source for cpu overclocking suitability.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...IVNyMatydkpFA/htmlview?sle=true#gid=639584818

MSI are rejecting that there are any issues. https://www.msi.com/blog/mpg-x570-gaming-edge-wifi-vrm-thermal-test

Steve claims that he took his findings to MSI (before releasing his video) and they were able to reproduce them. I have been following him long enough to trust this statement without hesitation. He has earned his trustworthy reputation. Every criticism of this Tom's review could be made about this blurb from MSI. In fact, it so closely mirrors the testing found here I'm now even more suspicious. This is coming from somebody who thinks the shill conspiracy stuff is total BS 99% of the time.

 

[poymumu]

In regards to the edited forum post of mine: This was done to stay in line with community standards. I understand we're all incredibly passionate about hardware and testing, and in retrospect, I get that your feedback was meant with best intent. My sincerest apologies for a temporary lapse in mutual respect for hardware analysis, and I'm hoping we can keep having a lively chat here to discuss the findings.

Thank you, by the way, for the excellent feedback on testing methodology. I've spoken to a few fellow authors and some of the editorial people here at Tom's, and we're already making necessary adjustments based upon your recommendations. We love it that our audience is as committed and passionate about hardware as we are, and we'd not be who we are or come as far as we have if we didn't listen to interesting ideas and constructive feedback when we get it from you.

Passion is the natural byproduct of caring about one's work, and I'm definitely guilty of responding with a bit too much passion in here. Sorry about getting heated guys, I definitely could have handled this feedback in a more positive way. I truly do care about the work we do here at Tom's, and I want to make sure that we're giving the best advice possible. We're going to take a look at these results again as we tear apart our VRM analysis methodology to see how much the results change with additional sensors and heavier hardware loads. Stay tuned.

Horrible, I am usually a reader without account but I saw this whole mess here. I created account just to comment on this mess. Now the author is apologizing after arguing with the community and even calling a Hardware Unboxed channel from Youtube "troll" and "lying". Tons of data and actual users out there having issues. And this author just shut his ears and just believed what he did was right.

Then when this mess got big enough, he opened one ear, accepting his mistakes. I personally don't believe this above quote after seeing his attitude towards the community and Youtube channels. We all know people don't change easily.

Let me tell you, no matter what subject or industry we are talking, if you are not taking in any feedback from others and be stubborn like that, your only way is down. You will never learn, you will never improve, you are in your little comfort zone sticking with your belief.

Maybe he is jealous of Youtube's popularity nowadays. But look, that's the market, and you have to follow the market. I'm very disappointed with these hardware review sites that I used to read everyday. Samething happened to TechPowerUp site with Gamers Nexus.

Be open minded and learn.

 

[zx128k]

So why would anyone buy one of these low end MSI boards? You can safely overclock Zen 2 8 and 6 cores on the majority of the AM4 motherboards. If you want x570 for PCIE4 and out of the box compatibility, all of the other x570 boards have better power delivery. The VRM on the X570-A Pro, MPG X570 Gaming Plus, and MPG X570 Gaming Edge WiFi is essentially the same as they used on a bunch of their last gen boards (most notable being the b450 Tomahawk) with doublers added to make it a true 8 phase.

There are better options in this price range. The lower end ASUS offerings absolutely slay these boards. The Tuf Gaming x570 Plus has a killer VRM and feature set for what it costs. Which happens to be about the same as the MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus being given the editors choice award. The VRM spreadsheet (which I also regularly link and use for reference) contradicts this statement: "They are £124.99 to £159.99, half the cost of a minimum feature overclocking board with solid vrms and heatsinks". Unless the low end x570 MSI stuff is significantly cheaper in other regions, I see no compelling reason to buy it vs the competition based on US pricing.



Steve claims that he took his findings to MSI (before releasing his video) and they were able to reproduce them. I have been following him long enough to trust this statement without hesitation. He has earned his trustworthy reputation. Every criticism of this Tom's review could be made about this blurb from MSI. In fact, it so closely mirrors the testing found here I'm now even more suspicious. This is coming from somebody who thinks the schilling conspiracy stuff is total BS 99% of the time.

You know fine rightly you don't buy the cheapest board you can for overclocking. Even so you clearly pick the Tuf Gaming x570 Plus which for a budget board its okay. Not all budget boards are going to focus on their VRMs. Take Asrock for example.

This list is major air flow,
Asrock
X570 Phantom Gaming 4 £148.19
X570 Pro4 £179.99
X570M Pro4 £179.99

This list is minor air flow
Asrock X570 Extreme4 £229.99
Asrock X570 Steel Legend [Wi-Fi] £199.99

Why are you not crying about asrock? These above motherboards all need air flow as well. Funny enough they are the budget ones. With it getting better the more you pay.

These motherboards are okay but you still need to have air flow. Always with the air flow.
X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3 £239.99

Overclocking boards,
X570 Taichi £299.99
X570 Phantom Gaming X £359.99
X570 Creator £503.09
X570 Aqua £859.99

Hardware unboxed again stated at the end of their video that the board was okay with decent air flow with the 3900x, just as the spreadsheet states. Just as the manufactures website shows.

So take the ASUS TUF Gaming X570-Plus (Wi-Fi) ATX Motherboard its is £196.83 and you can get one here https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-Gaming-X570-Plus-Motherboard-Socket/dp/B07TPPJ5JZ straight from asus. More expensive than the MPG X570 Gaming Plus at £157.18 straight from MSI. Budget boards are about priorities. Most people prioritize cost. If you want to overclock, then get a ASRock x570 Taichi or something better.

Budget overclocking then avoid MSI X570-A Pro, Gaming Plus and Gaming Edge. Also many other motherboards from asrock and others. For £160 you get what you pay for. Gaming Plus is all about running at stock, that's why its got the vrms it has. Understand what you are buying.

Why buy the board for a 3900x and run with the stock cooler. Get 95c CPU temps because you have no idea what you are doing. Then get overheating vrm's because you then replace with an AIO and change from having bad air flow, to having no air flow. Then come on toms hardware forums about how this is their fault.

The cheaper you go the more you have to be on the ball. The decent overclocking motherboards have overkill VRM's. This is to ensure that whatever stupid things we customers do, the experience will be good.

It's always the same on the internet. Cheap motherboard, case, cooling and PSU. 9700k/9900k @ 5GHz overclock and beast mode gpu.

Somewhere there will be that someone that will buy the B450 Tomahawk [Max] for the 3900x/3950x and overclock it. 4.4GHz all cores @ 1.4 volts. After all the motherboard supports the 3900x/3950X on the MSI website. Run it all on a £30 1000 watt PSU no one has heard of https://www.aliexpress.com/popular/1000w-12v-power-supply.html. When asked about air flow over the VRMs, will reply I have three case fans and an AIO. I am fine. PSU is fine, its new.

Most of the b450 motherboards are worse but people upgrade to the 3700x/3900x on them all the time. Are they all bad motherboard now too?

Just saying I got the X570 Taichi, a good PSU and currently after +6 months. The only problems I have had are ones I created. Seems the issue here is customer expectations.

 

[rigg42]

You know fine rightly you don't buy the cheapest board you can for overclocking. Even so you clearly pick the Tuf Gaming x570 Plus which for a budget board its okay.

Just okay? It's $25 more expensive than the cheapest x570. It's worth it for the VRM alone considering it has superior current capacity compared to anything under $250. Its also well featured for a sub $200 x570 board. It's easily the best motherboard under $200 and the Aorus Elite is the only board that comes close.

Not all budget boards are going to focus on their VRMs. Take Asrock for example.

This list is major air flow,
Asrock
X570 Phantom Gaming 4 £148.19
X570 Pro4 £179.99
X570M Pro4 £179.99

This list is minor air flow
Asrock X570 Extreme4 £229.99
Asrock X570 Steel Legend [Wi-Fi] £199.99

Why are you not crying about asrock? These above motherboards all need air flow as well. Funny enough they are the budget ones. With it getting better the more you pay.

These motherboards are okay but you still need to have air flow. Always with the air flow.
X570 Phantom Gaming-ITX/TB3 £239.99

Overclocking boards,
X570 Taichi £299.99
X570 Phantom Gaming X £359.99
X570 Creator £503.09
X570 Aqua £859.99

Hardware unboxed again stated at the end of their video that the board was okay with decent air flow with the 3900x, just as the spreadsheet states. Just as the manufactures website shows.

The 3 sub $200 MSI boards all require MAJOR airflow at the 150A mark and get the red X of not recommended at 200A. No other x570 motherboard(s) have those distinctions. I'm not crying about anything. I'm pointing out that every x570 motherboard that costs the same or less than these motherboards has superior VRM's. This isn't an endorsement or recommendation for these motherboards. This is just a fact. If we accept that, than what distinctive feature(s) do the MSI boards have that make them worth recommending? There are cheaper motherboards with better power delivery. Even if it's only slightly better power delivery its still better. You need to point out some other feature(s) that make them worthy of a recommendation. Especially if you want to give the thing an Editors Choice award.

So take the ASUS TUF Gaming X570-Plus (Wi-Fi) ATX Motherboard its is £196.83 and you can get one here https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-Gaming-X570-Plus-Motherboard-Socket/dp/B07TPPJ5JZ straight from asus. More expensive than the MPG X570 Gaming Plus at £157.18 straight from MSI. Budget boards are about priorities. Most people prioritize cost. If you want to overclock, then get a ASRock x570 Taichi or something better.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/wh...plus-atx-am4-motherboard-tuf-gaming-x570-plus

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/q4...plus-atx-am4-motherboard-mpg-x570-gaming-plus

Make an apples to apples comparison. If you want to compare to the WIFI version of the Tuf than use the GAMING EDGE WIFI. The Gaming Edge WIFI is more expensive than the Tuf WIFI. Depending on where and when you buy it (here in the US) the non WIFI Tuf is about $10 more than the Gaming Plus. At Micro Center they are currently the same price.

Budget overclocking then avoid MSI X570-A Pro, Gaming Plus and Gaming Edge. Also many other motherboards from asrock and others. For £160 you get what you pay for. Gaming Plus is all about running at stock, that's why its got the vrms it has. Understand what you are buying.

Why buy the board for a 3900x and run with the stock cooler. Get 95c CPU temps because you have no idea what you are doing. Then get overheating vrm's because you then replace with an AIO and change from having bad air flow, to having no air flow. Then come on toms hardware forums about how this is their fault.

Agreed.

The cheaper you go the more you have to be on the ball. The decent overclocking motherboards have overkill VRM's. This is to ensure that whatever stupid things we customers do, the experience will be good.

Which is exactly why sites like TH need to make responsible hardware recommendations. The Tuf is just so much better than every board that costs less than it, and almost as good or better than almost everything else that costs more than it. 99% of people shopping for x570 boards should be buying it IMO . It literally has a flagship VRM. It is, for all intents and purposes, the same VRM that the Maximus XI hero sports. Unless you are doing extreme sub zero overclocking the only reasons to spend more money are form factor, cosmetic, troubleshooting, or I/O feature related. Nobody is running anywhere near the nearly 300A of current at 90% efficiency this VRM can deliver. At least on ambient cooling. Even if you never utilize the excellent power delivery you also never have to worry about it under any practical circumstance. It also has a very solid feature set. It is only $25 more than the cheapest x570 motherboard. IMO nobody should buy anything cheaper, and few should be buying anything more expensive. If an extra $25 is a decision factor at this level of motherboard then you shouldn't be buying x570 to begin with.

Somewhere there will be that someone that will buy the B450 Tomahawk [Max] for the 3900x/3950x and overclock it. 4.4GHz all cores @ 1.4 volts. After all the motherboard supports the 3900x/3950X on the MSI website. Run it all on a £30 1000 watt PSU no one has heard of https://www.aliexpress.com/popular/1000w-12v-power-supply.html. When asked about air flow over the VRMs, will reply I have three case fans and an AIO. I am fine. PSU is fine, its new.

Most of the b450 motherboards are worse but people upgrade to the 3700x/3900x on them all the time. Are they all bad motherboard now too?

This is irrelevant. The B450 tomahawk doesn't cost $165. It's a good motherboard in relation to it's direct competition. It's fine. I actually think it's a bit overrated. I just sold a system with one. It has basically the same VRM as the x570 Gaming Plus minus the doublers. You are making my argument stronger. Why are many of the MSI B450 motherboards well regarded? For the exact same reason the x570 Tuf is a better buy than everything else in its price range. It has comparable features and better power delivery than most or all of its direct competition.

People make dumb configuration decisions all the time. This doesn't mean those of us that know better shouldn't make an effort to inform them. Giving the MSI MPG X570 GAMING PLUS an Editors Choice award is laughable. Period.