Review MSI MPG X570 Gaming Plus Review: Affordable Basics

[zx128k]

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.



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.



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.


Agreed.



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 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.




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.

Ignoring buildzoids video were he states the vrm is okay for a budget board? Knowing what you are doing and building a system. Is not the same as building a system from reviews and not knowing what you are doing.

You don't need a stupid efficient vrm if you have good cooling. Stock you just need 18 watts of cooling at the vrm's which with good air flow is fine.

A 12 core cpu needs 24 watts of vrm cooling @ 150A overclocking which should be fine with good case air flow. A 16 core cpu overclocking needs 175A which requires 30 watts of cooling at the vrm heatsink. This should be okay with good air flow but is close to the maximum the heatsinks can handle. For 200A or a completely maxed out 16 core you will need 38 watts of cooling on the vrm's. At this point the vrm needs active cooling from a fan. The heatsink near the IO shield will likely need to cool 30 watts, so its best to put the fan there first and test.

The x570 taichi needs about 24 watts of cooling at 200A.

View: https://youtu.be/OUtvsAmD3Ws?t=1053
At 150A we need 16 watts of cooling. There is approx. a 8 watt difference between the x570 taichi and the Gaming Plus at 150A. With the air flow I have, atm I am at 20-30c on the VRM's. The x570 taichi has decent VRM's but if I push the limits then quickly they too will become hot. At 500A I would need 84 watts to cool the x570 taichi vrm's. 71 watts @ 400A and 44watts @ 300A. This is a solid vrm but still can't complete with the top boards.

The TUF Gaming X570-Plus [Wi-Fi] has 3x SiC639 50A Power Stage by the spreadsheet which is the same as the Prime X570-Pro. ROG Crosshair VIII Hero [Wi-Fi] has more phases and 2x IR3555 60A Power Stage.

Focusing on the power delivery solution, ASUS equips the TUF X570-Plus with a 12+2 phase physical implementation.

ASUS is using a proprietary ASP1106G PWM controller in a 4+2 phase mode. Details for this controller are limited but it is likely a re-badged Intersil PWM.

Interestingly, given the rather limited 4+2 electrical phase control capability of the PWM, we do not see ASUS applying any PWM phase doublers. This is typical of what we have seen from ASUS motherboards recently, with the vendor arguing that ‘fattening up’ the quantity of electrical components per phase signal is more beneficial than doubling the phases via a dedicated logic IC.

As such, ASUS’ 12 CPU VCore phases are actually a 4×3 design with three lots of electrical components per single control phase. You can see which phases are working together by decoding the text on the PCB highlighting power phase mounting positions.

Focussing specifically on the 4×3, non-doubled CPU VCore power delivery system, ASUS is using a total of twelve Vishay SiC639 DrMOS power stages. These power stages are rated at ‘up to’ 50A of continuous current output just like we see from the SiC632 solutions and they look to be very slightly de-rated compared to the SiC634 alternatives. https://www.kitguru.net/components/...rm-temperature-analysis-luke-deep-dive/all/1/

The ASUS Crosshair VIII Hero is a 7+1 phase design.

The Maximus XI hero appears to be different and uses 2x SiC632. The voltage controller used for the Asus Hero XI is ASP1400 *(4+(2) referred to as a budget controller found on cheaper motherboards as a cost savings. Buildzoid recommends a better heatsink for this particular phase design, among other concerns.

They are not the same.

 

[rigg42]

Ignoring buildzoids video were he states the vrm is okay for a budget board? Knowing what you are doing and building a system. Is not the same as building a system from reviews and not knowing what you are doing.

You'll have to point me to where he said that. I believe what he said was more to the effect that this is an inexpensive way to build a high current VRM . I believe he took issue with them using it on an expensive board for this reason but I've never heard him be overly critical of the design itself. This is clearly much more than an okay VRM for a budget board. It's a absolute freaking beast for a "budget" board.

View: https://youtu.be/bqHd_tFqvj0?t=636

View: https://youtu.be/CtvAd7y9B9o?t=333

You don't need a stupid efficient vrm if you have good cooling. Stock you just need 18 watts of cooling at the vrm's which with good air flow is fine.

A 12 core cpu needs 24 watts of vrm cooling @ 150A overclocking which should be fine with good case air flow. A 16 core cpu overclocking needs 175A which requires 30 watts of cooling at the vrm heatsink. This should be okay with good air flow but is close to the maximum the heatsinks can handle. For 200A or a completely maxed out 16 core you will need 38 watts of cooling on the vrm's. At this point the vrm needs active cooling from a fan. The heatsink near the IO shield will likely need to cool 30 watts, so its best to put the fan there first and test.

The x570 taichi needs about 24 watts of cooling at 200A.
View: https://youtu.be/OUtvsAmD3Ws?t=1053
At 150A we need 16 watts of cooling. There is approx. a 8 watt difference between the x570 taichi and the Gaming Plus at 150A. With the air flow I have, atm I am at 20-30c on the VRM's. The x570 taichi has decent VRM's but if I push the limits then quickly they too will become hot. At 500A I would need 84 watts to cool the x570 taichi vrm's. 71 watts @ 400A and 44watts @ 300A. This is a solid vrm but still can't complete with the top boards.

What is the point you are trying to make? I understand the concept of VRM cooling. I don't require a lecture on the subject. You also completely ignore the ambient air temp in your argument. You also assume that anyone buying this board has a case that can accommodate a fan to cool the VRM. I'm not arguing that this VRM is completely terrible (in general) and incapable of working fine with proper airflow on the VRM. Only that its terrible relative to what you can get elsewhere on x570. You are straw manning an argument I'm not making.

Are you seriously telling me you would rather spend $10 on a fan to cool an anemic motherboard VRM rather than spend an extra $10-$25 on a board with current capacity comparable to a flagship quality VRM? If you're lucky enough to be in the US with a Micro Center around the Tuf and Gaming Plus are the same price so you'd literally be paying more to go MSI plus a fan. Why put a band-aid on a cut rather than avoid the cut in the first place. Your point is much more valid when discussing cheaper last gen boards. Sorry to break it to you but it doesn't make any sense in the context of x570. You just don't save enough money on the cheaper x570 boards vs the Tuf and Aorus Elite to justify the potential headaches.

 

[zx128k]

You'll have to point me to where he said that. I believe what he said was more to the effect that this is an inexpensive way to build a high current VRM . I believe he took issue with them using it on an expensive board for this reason but I've never heard him be overly critical of the design itself. This is clearly much more than an okay VRM for a budget board. It's a absolute freaking beast for a "budget" board.

View: https://youtu.be/bqHd_tFqvj0?t=636

View: https://youtu.be/CtvAd7y9B9o?t=333




What is the point you are trying to make? I understand the concept of VRM cooling. I don't require a lecture on the subject. You also completely ignore the ambient air temp in your argument. You also assume that anyone buying this board has a case that can accommodate a fan to cool the VRM. I'm not arguing that this VRM is completely terrible (in general) and incapable of working fine with proper airflow on the VRM. Only that its terrible relative to what you can get elsewhere on x570. You are straw manning an argument I'm not making.

Are you seriously telling me you would rather spend $10 on a fan to cool an anemic motherboard VRM rather than spend an extra $10-$25 on a board with current capacity comparable to a flagship quality VRM? If you're lucky enough to be in the US with a Micro Center around the Tuf and Gaming Plus are the same price so you'd literally be paying more to go MSI plus a fan. Why put a band-aid on a cut rather than avoid the cut in the first place. Your point is much more valid when discussing cheaper last gen boards. Sorry to break it to you but it doesn't make any sense in the context of x570. You just don't save enough money on the cheaper x570 boards vs the Tuf and Aorus Elite to justify the potential headaches.

High side its 4c029N (https://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/927028/ONSEMI/NTMFS4C029N.html) which is pretty solid high side mosfet. The low side is what he really likes, 4c024N which has a 2.8mΩ (https://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/927033/ONSEMI/NTMFS4C024N.html) RDS(on) mosfet @ 10 volts (https://www.microcontrollertips.com/mosfets-what-is-rdson-faq/). Normally this value is 4mΩ on budget boards which via P=VI = I2R = V2. R means less heat. Its uses the IR35201 which is an 8 phase voltage controller but runs at 4+2 phases. This is the default voltage controller for many high end motherboards for the last 7 years.

View: https://youtu.be/DinQsUNepoU?t=387


So yeah he thinks its okay. Not extremely efficient but who cares if you have the cooling.

 

[rigg42]

The Maximus XI hero appears to be different and uses 2x SiC632. The voltage controller used for the Asus Hero XI is ASP1400 *(4+(2) referred to as a budget controller found on cheaper motherboards as a cost savings. Buildzoid recommends a better heatsink for this particular phase design, among other concerns.

They are not the same.

It is, for all intents and purposes, the same VRM that the Maximus XI hero sports.

Are you familiar with the phrase "for all intents and purposes"? You're splitting hairs. Obviously you are smart enough to look up the data sheets so you know the differences between the 2 power stages is basically meaningless in this context. The controller is also essentially irrelevant since the v core sections are both 4 phase. Don't quote me on this but I believe the 2 controllers have the same max switching freq on the v core in their respective BIOS'. There may be a few other small differences but again, for all intents and purposes the two VRM's have the same design. Either way I think we can both agree that the Tuf has the best sub $200 VRM based on analysis and available temp data.

So yeah he thinks its okay. Not extremely efficient but who cares if you have the cooling.

The person who buys the MSI board based on TH Editors Choice award, uses it with a 105w CPU, and doesn't know they need airflow on the VRM definitely cares. If you had to bet money which board do you think Buildzoid would choose given a $0-$10 price difference? Which would you choose?

While I enjoy a good VRM discussion with someone who seemingly knows WTF they are talking about, you still have done nothing but strawman and nitpick semantics. You've failed to address the core of my very simple argument. Why would anyone give an Editors Choice award to a motherboard which has a competitor that has a VRM with twice the current capacity, far better VRM thermal performance, far better VRM power efficiency, arguably better features (at the very least comparable), and only costs $10 more at the time the award is given?

 

[zx128k]

Are you familiar with the phrase "for all intents and purposes"? You're splitting hairs. Obviously you are smart enough to look up the data sheets so you know the differences between the 2 power stages is basically meaningless in this context. The controller is also essentially irrelevant since the v core sections are both 4 phase. Don't quote me on this but I believe the 2 controllers have the same max switching freq on the v core in their respective BIOS'. There may be a few other small differences but again, for all intents and purposes the two VRM's have the same design. Either way I think we can both agree that the Tuf has the best sub $200 VRM based on analysis and available temp data.


The person who buys the MSI board based on TH Editors Choice award, uses it with a 105w CPU, and doesn't know they need airflow on the VRM definitely cares. If you had to bet money which board do you think Buildzoid would choose given a $0-$10 price difference? Which would you choose?

While I enjoy a good VRM discussion with someone who seemingly knows WTF they are talking about, you still have done nothing but strawman and nitpick semantics. You've failed to address the core of my very simple argument. Why would anyone give an Editors Choice award to a motherboard which has a competitor that has a VRM with twice the current capacity, far better VRM thermal performance, far better VRM power efficiency, arguably better features (at the very least comparable), and only costs $10 more at the time the award is given?

You just need normal air flow in your case across the VRM's for 105 watt stock cpu's. You have been total this already. There is nothing wrong with the VRM's on this motherboard. Seems to me you have some agenda here.

 

[rigg42]

You just need normal air flow in your case across the VRM's for 105 watt stock cpu's. You have been total this already. There is nothing wrong with the VRM's on this motherboard. Seems to me you have some agenda here.

I didn't need to be total (told) this. I'm well aware that (with your airflow caveat) the VRM is adequate. There is something wrong with defending this motherboard when something objectively much better is available for a minuscule premium. Your argument literally makes no sense. Why are you defending the clearly inferior piece of hardware vs an objectively better one with a tiny up-charge at best? My only agenda is to publicly recommend the CLEARLY much better price to performance piece of hardware . The fact you would defend the clearly inferior piece of hardware being given an award by a "professional" editor/reviewer makes your agenda a heck of lot more suspect than mine. The whole slap a fan on it argument is total BS when a fan costs about the same as the price difference between the 2 boards.

If you wanted to make a case for a capable >$100 B450 board with a fan on the VRM i'd be on board with your argument. If you are going to buy a sub $200 ATX x570 motherboard, anyone (when given the facts) with 2 brain cells to rub together is going to choose an Asus Tuf over an MSI Gaming Plus every day of the week and twice on Tuesday.

Again and again you fail to make a sound argument for the MSI over the Asus. Somehow the VRM being adequate with airflow over it makes it a sound purchase over a board with 2x as much VRM (and no need for airflow) for $10 more????????????? WTF dude? I'm stubborn as hell too but at some point you have to suck it up and admit defeat.

 

[zx128k]

I didn't need to be total (told) this. I'm well aware that (with your airflow caveat) the VRM is adequate. There is something wrong with defending this motherboard when something objectively much better is available for a minuscule premium. Your argument literally makes no sense. Why are you defending the clearly inferior piece of hardware vs an objectively better one with a tiny up-charge at best? My only agenda is to publicly recommend the CLEARLY much better price to performance piece of hardware . The fact you would defend the clearly inferior piece of hardware being given an award by a "professional" editor/reviewer makes your agenda a heck of lot more suspect than mine. The whole slap a fan on it argument is total BS when a fan costs about the same as the price difference between the 2 boards.

If you wanted to make a case for a capable >$100 B450 board with a fan on the VRM i'd be on board with your argument. If you are going to buy a sub $200 ATX x570 motherboard, anyone (when given the facts) with 2 brain cells to rub together is going to choose an Asus Tuf over an MSI Gaming Plus every day of the week and twice on Tuesday.

Again and again you fail to make a sound argument for the MSI over the Asus. Somehow the VRM being adequate with airflow over it makes it a sound purchase over a board with 2x as much VRM for $10 more????????????? WTF dude? I'm stubborn as hell too but at some point you have to suck it up and admit defeat.

The motherboard is what it is. Having dead spots in your case were hot air just circulates forever, has always caused overheating. That's why having the case open or on a test bed is fine but once inside the case you overheat. Fix the air flow. The board is basically £150, its a budget board.

What is the best motherboard is subjective.

Some websites list the MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge as the best budget motherboard. https://www.techsiting.com/best-x570-motherboards/
Others give the best value as the Asus Prime X570-P .
https://www.gamingpcbuilder.com/bes...nd_Mid-Range_and_Budget_AMD_X570_Motherboards
Some websites the Asus Tuf does not make the list.

Best X570 Motherboard in 2021 (Performance, Price, & Reviews)

Looking for the best X570 motherboard in 2021? Look no further, we have the best X570 motherboard comparisons with hands on testing.

www.wepc.com

10 Best X570 Motherboards to Buy in 2019 For AMD Ryzen 3000 CPUs

We list the 10 best X570 motherboards that support the latest AMD Ryzen 3000 processors offering a great feature set, performance, and expandability.

www.technadu.com

Or maybe you agree with this video.

What is good is subjective to how you value each part of a motherboard design. Overclockers are going to value VRMs the most and some other features. Other people may value RGB and don't overclock because its too technical. You add weight to the value of each part of the motherboard you buy. Some aspects like vrm design could have more value to you than other aspects like RGB or the newest wifi. This determines the motherboards overall value to you.

With review sites they will tell you about a board but a review is the beginning of research not the end of it. If you buy a board because one website told you too. With all the information we have on the internet, then you have not made an effort as an overclocker.

As an overclocker I would not get a budget board because they lack too many features. Asus Tuf lacks too many features. For example there is no Dr. Debug with LED. No Power button or reset button on the board. No Clear CMOS Button. There is no dual bios or bios flash back.

If funds are tight I would get something like the Taichi and live without some overclocking features. Yes the Asus Tuf may be a cheap budget board with overclocking potential. It must also be said that not everyone in the budget section wants to overclock or values anything other than vrm's that just work.

x570 gaming plus is just cheap and should work well. It's a budget board and aims towards low cost for a cheap build. There is nothing I can see evidence wise that is wrong with the VRM's. They will do the job and that's normally what you want with a budget board.

Now if you want to overclock you are going to have too get a good expensive PSU to go along with your motherboard. More expensive RAM is a must for a Ryzen system. An AIO cooler.

With the x570 gaming plus its about, RAM check, PSU check, cpu check and stock cooler check. Budget gaming at best, with a 3600x comes to mind.

 

[refillable]

Some websites list the MSI MPG X570 Gaming Edge as the best budget motherboard.

None of the four sites provides any testing behind their listings. Seriously?

Other people may value RGB and don't overclock because its too technical. You add weight to the value of each part of the motherboard you buy. Some aspects like vrm design could have more value to you than other aspects like RGB or the newest wifi.

Putting into context here, what does the Gaming Plus has over the ASUS TUF or Prime?

As an overclocker I would not get a budget board because they lack too many features. Asus Tuf lacks too many features. For example there is no Dr. Debug with LED. No Power button or reset button on the board. No Clear CMOS Button. There is no dual bios or bios flash back.

I am an overclocker and I would get a budget board. On the same price any sound overclocker would pick better quality VRM than anything you mentioned.

 

[zx128k]

QUOTE
None of the four sites provides any testing behind their listings. Seriously?

Budget x570 boards are about ticking boxes feature wise.

Putting into context here, what does the Gaming Plus has over the ASUS TUF or Prime?

It's cheaper which is the whole point of budget boards. If you wanted good vrm's for overclocking you would get a decent overclocking board. As a cheaper board the Gaming Plus wins. Priorities being cost in the budget segment.

I am an overclocker and I would get a budget board. On the same price any sound overclocker would pick better quality VRM than anything you mentioned.

None of the budget boards have vrm's anywhere near the x570 taichi and that motherboard just about makes it as a budget overclocking board. With a LN2 mode no less.

QUOTE

 

[DieselDrax]

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

You may want to check the date on that blog and the CPU they used, they're not rejecting anything about what was discovered during non-TH testing of the product considering they re-tested based on reviewer results and confirmed the non-TH test findings.

I've been a reader of TH for decades and generally felt the content was trustworthy based on the overall history, but I really wonder why the editor went out of his way to test this board and passive-aggressively (or just plain aggressively) go after other reviewers and showing he has little integrity or respect for others in the industry.

If the editor wanted to be transparent and validate other reviewers' results he would've done so with at least the same CPUs and workloads. Instead, he runs a lower TDP CPU and different workloads in an obvious attempt to prove everyone else wrong. What are the motives behind such an unprofessional review and response? They claim passion. Their actions and results say something entirely different.

How many times should a site be allowed to totally screw up reviews before they become irrelevant and untrustworthy? TH might find out.

 

[zx128k]

You may want to check the date on that blog and the CPU they used, they're not rejecting anything about what was discovered during non-TH testing of the product considering they re-tested based on reviewer results and confirmed the non-TH test findings.

I've been a reader of TH for decades and generally felt the content was trustworthy based on the overall history, but I really wonder why the editor went out of his way to test this board and passive-aggressively (or just plain aggressively) go after other reviewers and showing he has little integrity or respect for others in the industry.

If the editor wanted to be transparent and validate other reviewers' results he would've done so with at least the same CPUs and workloads. Instead, he runs a lower TDP CPU and different workloads in an obvious attempt to prove everyone else wrong. What are the motives behind such an unprofessional review and response? They claim passion. Their actions and results say something entirely different.

How many times should a site be allowed to totally screw up reviews before they become irrelevant and untrustworthy? TH might find out.

3700x @ 1.4volts vcore. >105 watt tdp. The all core clock speed is 4249MHz which is basically the same as the 3800x in cinebench r20. The cpu is at 122 watts in the screen shot. CPU core power is 104 watts. So nothing wrong with the blog. There are no other motherboard entries after this blog about vrm tests. https://www.msi.com/blogs/product/motherboard Only the post on October 21, 2019. The other one is about the godlike https://www.msi.com/blog/unmatched-thermals-only-with-msi-x570-motherboards

 

[DieselDrax]

3700x @ 1.4volts vcore. >105 watt tdp. The all core clock speed is 4249MHz which is basically the same as the 3800x in cinebench r20. The cpu is at 122 watts in the screen shot. CPU core power is 104 watts. So nothing wrong with the blog. There are no other motherboard entries after this blog about vrm tests. https://www.msi.com/blogs/product/motherboard Only the post on October 21, 2019. The other one is about the godlike https://www.msi.com/blog/unmatched-thermals-only-with-msi-x570-motherboards

And yet folks running the 3900X and 3950X are having throttling problems due to the VRM, so clearly running the 3700X, overclocked or not, with certain benchmarks isn't producing the thermal issues that others ARE experiencing. HU was very clear about their testing and being run on a loop for an hour. How long was the workload run for here? Was is a single run that didn't expose thermal problems?

Pointing at results using lower-end CPUs with other benchmarks that don't result in thermal throttling due to VRM temps DOES NOT INVALIDATE all of the results and experiences reviewers and consumers alike have had. I simply don't understand why people are trying so hard to disprove what's already been proven repeatedly.

Run the SAME CPU and SAME TEST using the SAME METHOD and SAME SETTINGS and see what happens. This nonsense of "Well, we used a lower TDP CPU with fewer cores with different benchmarks and it was fine" needs to stop. I don't care what what OC math shows. Reality doesn't always match theory which is why if this review were submitted to the scientific community for peer review as an attempt to disprove other results it would be dismissed as invalid. It fails to follow the criteria used by everyone else that has actually experienced the problem.

Simply put, the results here are invalid because the test hardware and methodology did not match the ones producing the problem. There is no justification or reasoning that can overcome that glaring defect in the review process.

Take care.

 

[zx128k]

And yet folks running the 3900X and 3950X are having throttling problems due to the VRM, so clearly running the 3700X, overclocked or not, with certain benchmarks isn't producing the thermal issues that others ARE experiencing. HU was very clear about their testing and being run on a loop for an hour. How long was the workload run for here? Was is a single run that didn't expose thermal problems?

Pointing at results using lower-end CPUs with other benchmarks that don't result in thermal throttling due to VRM temps DOES NOT INVALIDATE all of the results and experiences reviewers and consumers alike have had. I simply don't understand why people are trying so hard to disprove what's already been proven repeatedly.

Run the SAME CPU and SAME TEST using the SAME METHOD and SAME SETTINGS and see what happens. This nonsense of "Well, we used a lower TDP CPU with fewer cores with different benchmarks and it was fine" needs to stop. I don't care what what OC math shows. Reality doesn't always match theory which is why if this review were submitted to the scientific community for peer review as an attempt to disprove other results it would be dismissed as invalid. It fails to follow the criteria used by everyone else that has actually experienced the problem.

Simply put, the results here are invalid because the test hardware and methodology did not match the ones producing the problem. There is no justification or reasoning that can overcome that glaring defect in the review process.

Take care.

Hardware unbox video was quoted above, were they state testing was done with an open case (case door removed) for 1 hour in blender with the 3900x and no vrm issues. 73c peak in an 18c room. This implies air flow as the issue for overheating. All his tests are no direct air flow, 3900x with pbo and auto OC.

The VRM temperature displayed by thermal imager in the MSI blog post its at approximately 60~70 degrees. My x570 Taichi gets 30c VRM temps with the air flow I have and the 18c room temp. So I guess these VRM's suck by overclocking standards. If all you care about is vrm temperature. https://pasteboard.co/IWETNYm.gif

 

[rigg42]

QUOTE
Putting into context here, what does the Gaming Plus has over the ASUS TUF or Prime?

It's cheaper which is the whole point of budget boards. If you wanted good vrm's for overclocking you would get a decent overclocking board. As a cheaper board the Gaming Plus wins. Priorities being cost in the budget segment.

What about price to performance? As of today the price difference is $5 at online retailers which basically nullifies your price argument. Micro Center has the Tuf WIFI and the Gaming Plus for the same price.

https://www.microcenter.com/product/608574/asus-x570-tuf-gaming-plus-(wi-fi)-amd-am4-atx-motherboard

https://www.microcenter.com/product/608747/msi-x570-mpg-gaming-plus-amd-am4-atx-motherboard

As refillable pointed out, It's not cheaper than the Prime-P. It's also arguably a much better choice.

Why so much effort to grasp at straws?

I am an overclocker and I would get a budget board. On the same price any sound overclocker would pick better quality VRM than anything you mentioned.

None of the budget boards have vrm's anywhere near the x570 taichi and that motherboard just about makes it as a budget overclocking board. With a LN2 mode no less.

C'mon dude. Anywhere near? The Tuf VRM matches it's current capacity and performs within 10c in thermal testing. By this rational the Taichi is terrible since the Aorus Master and Crosshair VIII are available. There is literally way less price gap between the Taichi and those boards than there is between the Taichi and Tuf.

 

[zx128k]

What about price to performance? As of today the price difference is $5 at online retailers which basically nullifies your price argument. Micro Center has the Tuf WIFI and the Gaming Plus for the same price.

https://www.microcenter.com/product/608574/asus-x570-tuf-gaming-plus-(wi-fi)-amd-am4-atx-motherboard

https://www.microcenter.com/product/608747/msi-x570-mpg-gaming-plus-amd-am4-atx-motherboard

As refillable pointed out, It's not cheaper than the Prime-P. It's also arguably a much better choice.

Why so much effort to grasp at straws?



C'mon dude. Anywhere near? The Tuf VRM matches it's current capacity and performs within 10c in thermal testing. By this rational the Taichi is terrible since the Aorus Master and Crosshair VIII are available. There is literally way less price gap between the Taichi and those boards than there is between the Taichi and Tuf.

Cherry picking prices, I went with recommend retail price from the manufacture or what the manufacture was selling the boards at. Wait till you find out the wholesale prices.

To a real overclocker both the Tuf WIFI and the Gaming Plus are equally worthless. This argument is about the Gaming Plus vrm's overheating and that point is dead.

 

[DieselDrax]

Hardware unbox video was quoted above, were they state testing was done with an open case (case door removed) for 1 hour in blender with the 3900x and no vrm issues. 73c peak in an 18c room. This implies air flow as the issue for overheating. All his tests are no direct air flow,

The VRM temperature displayed by thermal imager in the MSI blog post its at approximately 60~70 degrees.

Open-air testing without direct or active airflow is widely regarded as the best way to test for thermal design flaws because it takes external elements out of the equation and requires that the products rely on their inherent design under testing and whether or not their design is effective or flawed. The fact that providing direct airflow reduced VRM temps is about as surprising as a boat with a leak sinking if there's nothing pumping the water out. Meaning, it's not surprising at all. If active cooling is necessary to keep the VRM at a reasonable temperature then active cooling, or at least better cooling, should be included on the board because the VRM setup was clearly insufficient under certain workloads with certain supported CPUs.

Put another way, would anyone buy this board if MSI put a warning on the box that the VRM needed to be actively cooled in order for it to function properly? I doubt it.

The fact that none of the other boards had these VRM temp problems proves, again, that MSI failed with their VRM design.

Why are you trying to hard to make excuses for such a poor design? Every example attempting to dispute the VRM problem is showing bad or invalid test methodology and results that mask the underlying problem. It's disgraceful.

 

[zx128k]

Open-air testing without direct or active airflow is widely regarded as the best way to test for thermal design flaws because it takes external elements out of the equation and requires that the products rely on their inherent design under testing and whether or not their design is effective or flawed. The fact that providing direct airflow reduced VRM temps is about as surprising as a boat with a leak sinking if there's nothing pumping the water out. Meaning, it's not surprising at all. If active cooling is necessary to keep the VRM at a reasonable temperature then active cooling, or at least better cooling, should be included on the board because the VRM setup was clearly insufficient under certain workloads with certain supported CPUs.

Put another way, would anyone buy this board if MSI put a warning on the box that the VRM needed to be actively cooled in order for it to function properly? I doubt it.

The fact that none of the other boards had these VRM temp problems proves, again, that MSI failed with their VRM design.

Why are you trying to hard to make excuses for such a poor design? Every example attempting to dispute the VRM problem is showing bad or invalid test methodology and results that mask the underlying problem. It's disgraceful.

Please show your Gaming plus board's vrm overheating. This needs to be a video with a page stating I don't own the gaming plus in it. Today or later date and time.

The design is not poor, I covered that above, with evidence that the design does not generate excessive heat. Also evidence that the vrm in the real world does work without overheating.

If there are no videos showing the gaming plus vrm's overheating with case fans providing air flow over the vrm's. Then this argument is dead. Note you sound like you clearly own the Gaming Plus. So you do a video with a page I dont own the gaming plus display in it and show the vrm overheating.

Burden of proof is yours. I have provided reasonable evidence.

 

[DieselDrax]

Please show your Gaming plus board's vrm overheating. This needs to be a video with a page stating I don't own the gaming plus in it.

The design is not poor, I covered that above.

It is poor and I don't have to prove anything that's already been proven multiple times, you simply refuse to accept reality and continue to make excuses. Maybe you really like MSI and are trying to defend their honor by cherry-picking data and tests and trying to make excuses, I don't know. All I know is you seem to be unwilling to accept multiple tests showing the VRMs run too hot and want to just stick your head in the sand and pretend like that data doesn't exist. Taking a couple of tests where the testing didn't show problems for whatever reason does not invalidate the other tests. That's simply not how it works. You might as well say that you've smoked crack and didn't die, therefore nobody has died from crack. Please, learn how peer review and scientific methods work and should be applied to these reviews which include scientific (objective) data and not just subjective opinions. Our discussion has now come to an end since it provides no value and is not constructive. Take care.

 

[zx128k]

It is poor and I don't have to prove anything that's already been proven multiple times, you simply refuse to accept reality and continue to make excuses. Maybe you really like MSI and are trying to defend their honor by cherry-picking data and tests and trying to make excuses, I don't know. All I know is you seem to be unwilling to accept multiple tests showing the VRMs run too hot and want to just stick your head in the sand and pretend like that data doesn't exist. Taking a couple of tests where the testing didn't show problems for whatever reason does not invalidate the other tests. That's simply not how it works. You might as well say that you've smoked crack and didn't die, therefore nobody has died from crack. Please, learn how peer review and scientific methods work and should be applied to these reviews which include scientific (objective) data and not just subjective opinions. Our discussion has now come to an end since it provides no value and is not constructive. Take care.

Were is your evidence, there is none. You don't even own the board do you?

 

[rigg42]

Cherry picking prices, I went with recommend retail price from the manufacture or what the manufacture was selling the boards at. Wait till you find out the wholesale prices.

To a real overclocker both the Tuf WIFI and the Gaming Plus are equally worthless. This argument is about the Gaming Plus vrm's overheating and that point is dead.

I'm not cherry picking anything. Worst price for Tuf is $171.49. Best price for Gaming Plus is $159.34.

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

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

A "real overclocker"? ??What an arrogant and ignorant statement. Not everyone who overclocks has a huge budget. Few need LN2 features. A "real overclocker" probably wouldn't choose a Taichi over the flagship AsRock, Gigabyte, MSI, and Asus offerings either.

There is absolutely no reason you can't get a 3950x to it's full OC potential (on ambient cooling ) on an x570 Tuf. You make it sound as if a lack of dual bios, Post Code Display, and a clear CMOS button prevents you from overclocking. Sure those features are nice but they aren't strictly necessary to overclock. Anyone running a daily OC probably wouldn't use them after dialing in that OC. If they ever used them at all.

Assuming a $10 price premium on the Tuf would you buy the MSI over the Asus? Would you recommend the MSI over the Asus to a close friend or family member looking to run a 105w CPU? If so what is the compelling reason?

 

[zx128k]

I'm not cherry picking anything. Worst price for Tuf is $171.49. Best price for Gaming Plus is $159.34.

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

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

A "real overclocker"? ??What an arrogant and ignorant statement. Not everyone who overclocks has a huge budget. Few need LN2 features. A "real overclocker" probably wouldn't choose a Taichi over the flagship AsRock, Gigabyte, MSI, and Asus offerings either.

There is absolutely no reason you can't get a 3950x to it's full OC potential (on ambient cooling ) on an x570 Tuf. You make it sound as if a lack of dual bios, Post Code Display, and a clear CMOS button prevents you from overclocking. Sure those features are nice but they aren't strictly necessary to overclock. Anyone running a daily OC probably wouldn't use them after dialing in that OC. If they ever used them at all.

Assuming a $10 price premium on the Tuf would you buy the MSI over the Asus? Would you recommend the MSI over the Asus to a close friend or family member looking to run a 105w CPU? If so what is the compelling reason?

Were's the evidence, do you even own a Gaming Plus motherboard? Please post a video of the issue, with the current data and time. With I am a troll I don't even own a gaming plus shown on a page in the video. Show decent air flow in the case. I have a case fan over both my vrm's heatsinks because I am not a moron.

Yet again prove there is an issue with the gaming plus vrm's. Were is your evidence?

 

[rigg42]

Were's the evidence, do you even own a Gaming Plus motherboard? Please post a video of the issue, with the current data and time. With I am a troll I don't even own a gaming plus shown on a page in the video. Show decent air flow in the case. I have a case fan over both my vrm's heatsinks because I am not a moron.

Yet again prove there is an issue with the gaming plus vrm's. Were is your evidence?

When did I ever say there is a problem with the Gaming Plus VRM? There seems to be a fair bit of evidence that it is problematic (without airflow at least) but I've never made that claim. I have repeatedly stated that problem with the Gaming Plus is it's crappy value compared to the Tuf. The Tuf's VRM is just better no matter how many excuses you make for the Gaming Plus. Much better. More current capacity, better thermal performance, and better power efficiency. This isn't a small difference either. The gap is huge on the power delivery front. Measurably. The price gap between the 2 is minuscule in comparison. The Gaming Plus has no distinctive feature(s) to overcome this blatantly obvious fact.

You can go ahead and obfuscate all you want. At this point it's just embarrassing for you.

 

[zx128k]

When did I ever say there is a problem with the Gaming Plus VRM? There seems to be a fair bit of evidence that it is problematic (without airflow at least) but I've never made that claim. I have repeatedly stated that problem with the Gaming Plus is it's crappy value compared to the Tuf. The Tuf's VRM is just better no matter how many excuses you make for the Gaming Plus. Much better. More current capacity, better thermal performance, and better power efficiency. This isn't a small difference either. The gap is huge on the power delivery front. Measurably. The price gap between the 2 is minuscule in comparison. The Gaming Plus has no distinctive feature(s) to overcome this blatantly obvious fact.

You can go ahead and obfuscate all you want. At this point it's just embarrassing for you.

I wont answer personal attacks. All I see is your opinion. In a battle of opinion I would just go with toms hardware as the winner.

 

[rigg42]

I wont answer personal attacks. All I see is your opinion. In a battle of opinion I would just go with toms hardware as the winner.

You have a loose definition of the term personal attack. Especially since you basically just called me a troll in your previous post. I think I’ve backed my opinion up with sound reasoning and factual arguments.

Any reasonable person would deem that the difference between spending $160 and $170 on a motherboard (in the context of a PC build expensive enough to justify spending that much on said motherboard) is meaningless.

What is the logical reason for recommending the MSI over the Asus? It’s not price and it’s not Power delivery. The only other objective argument can be made on features.

What feature does the MSI have over the Asus, that overcomes the massive disparity in power delivery, and therefore makes it worthy of an editors choice award?

How many times do I have to ask that before someone makes an actual attempt to answer that question.

 

[zx128k]

You have a loose definition of the term personal attack. Especially since you basically just called me a troll in your previous post. I think I’ve backed my opinion up with sound reasoning and factual arguments.

Any reasonable person would deem that the difference between spending $160 and $170 on a motherboard (in the context of a PC build expensive enough to justify spending that much on said motherboard) is meaningless.

What is the logical reason for recommending the MSI over the Asus? It’s not price and it’s not Power delivery. The only other objective argument can be made on features.

What feature does the MSI have over the Asus, that overcomes the massive disparity in power delivery, and therefore makes it worthy of an editors choice award?

How many times do I have to ask that before someone makes an actual attempt to answer that question.

Opinion the only substantive argument was the possibility of the vrm's overheating. Without that they are just two budget boards with vrm's able to do overclocking within reason. It's just opinion after that. It does not appear that continuing this debate will reconcile points of a subjective nature.