What's the use case for a uATX X99 gaming motherboard? The only time X99/Haswell-E will show a major improvement in gaming is for 3+ graphics card setups, which doesn't leave you with many options on uATX. I suppose you could stuff two R295x2s in there, but that's about it...
They won't provide a benefit for nearly any games though. I'm sure there are use cases outside of gaming, but this does have "gaming" in the product name.
Gaming mostly mean "it comes with stupid Killer NIC", possibly also "come with stupid Creative sound chip" oh and maybe "extra heat sinks or different color schemes.)
I would personally assume that many if not most workstation buyers will be looking for 8 slots for RAM. And two Dual-Slot GPUs, assuming that your small enclosure starts where the board ends, might be quiet starved of fresh air supply. Go ATX, give them an additional slot of space in between, and you should get much less noise all for the price of the about ~3 inch of office space.
"I would personally assume that many if not most workstation buyers will be looking for 8 slots for RAM."
Not really, 32 gigs of ram is ample for a workstation. More ram is needed for servers.
As for cooling, I already run a uATX workstation, water cooled, 2x 240x120 rads on both ends of the chassis. Runs quite cool, even with considerable overclocking.
Exactly what I was thinking. It's like the old x79 Alienware Area 51, where they used microATX. It was an annoying design with too many restrictions, and no airflow for dual video card setups, and they've done the same thing to the new x99 version, but with some strange "Triad case" design. It still only takes two video cards, but at least they left some space between them this time.
X99 is for lots of I/O for three or four video cards, or at least two video cards with some airflow space for them. To put it in microATX and say it is for gaming is just asinine. This is NOT a gaming board. Gaming doesn't make use of the extra cores, and that is the only reason to use this board.
Perhaps it could be used for workstation type work where the extra cores would be of some use, but even there, you'd have to have very specific uses with the barest number of cards. Professional dual GPU work couldn't be done with this board. There's not enough space between the cards for proper airflow. They'd be constantly thermally throttling down.
X99 allows you to use 6 or 8 core without resorting to Xeon chipset. You can build an video/photo/After Effects computer with X99 and a 1 fast GPU using mATX. Not sure why you assume it has to be at least 2 GPUs. Not all work needs a workstation with dedicated GPUs for compute or render.
Sure, but on average, how often do you pack your workstation into the back of your moms car and have her drive you to a many Video/Photo/After Effects LAN-Party? I just don't see what you really gain when building a workstation on µ-ATX instead of ATX. Sure its possible to use this board, but that's not the exact point.
And with Photo and Video Resolutions still increasing, it seems like you might be interested in another 4 RAM slots in a year or three.
If you do live video production this form factor is fantastic. To answer your question, every week. Every week I'm packing up two low-profile X99 powerhouses and taking them somewhere. When I had less power I was significantly limited in what I could do.
I used the ASRock board because it was available at launch time. This has 4 regular slots vs. only 3 on the ASRock, but the ASRock has 2 good NICs on-board.
The C612 chipset (the Xeon version of the X99) is exactly the same chip, however, firmware in the C612 allows for the use of Registered and ECC memory (something that has nothing to do with the chipset) above the features of the X99.
Registered memory comes in a lot larger sizes than unbuffered memory. A Xeon in an X99 board would only be able to address 128GB of memory, while a Xeon in a C612 board can address 512GB of memory.
ECC also corrects or prevents many memory errors that might pop up. Many of the unexplainable errors or crashes you experience are likely memory errors that ECC would prevent. It makes for a far more stable system.
According to Gigabyte's website, this board supports use of registered DIMMs, just not the ECC functionality, so it doesn't look like it's seriously crippled in terms of how much memory you can install.
I don't totally get the Haswell-E micro ATX board form factor. Everything about Haswell-E screams "give me a big Cadillac sized board". If you're running multi-GPU, they will have to be blower cards. I have two R9 290's that are non-blower and they simply run too hot close together even with a single width slot of breathing room.
I can see some Nvidia 970 or 980's working well. Given this form factor, I would go large Nvidia card 970/980 and a 750 for PhysX. And this makes more sense on Haswell minus -E.
The single slot GPU market is crap. You're going to spend $270 on a board only, and then buy some $80 video cards?
If I'm buying an -E, I'm buying for cores, memory slots, storage ports, and PCIe lanes. All that requires mobo real estate. For me uATX Haswell-E has to be at the bottom of the price spectrum.
This board is a niche within a niche. I predict mail-in rebates.
X99 mATX is interesting, however I would much prefer a mini-itx implementation. I just don't find mATX to be small enough to justify the limitations it imposes. X99 with a gtx 980 in my ncase m1 case with water cooling would be a fantastic little machine!
If your thinking about buying that junk, go check out the reviews at Newegg on the full size X99 Gaming G1. Everybody complaining about USB (AND MORE) problems and 2 months later Gigabyte still hasn't fixed it.
so much dislike for the smaller form factor.. If I were to build a system today, (and DDR4 prices were reasonable..) I'd use a board like this /w 2 970s and a 6core CPU. Games are starting to utilize more cores these days.. and down the road a dual core simply won't cut it (hi dragon age inquisition) But, we all use our computers for more than just gaming.. especially those posting to this site so that's a given. I like building setups based around Matx builds or smaller so something like this would be up my ally.
Wish they'd included the Creative sound chip though..
I don't know why they didn't choose m.2 pcie gen 3 x 4 interface.. I really wanted to buy this board, but the ASrock x99m has a gen3 m.2 and this doesn't. In other words, it wont help me with a proposed SLI + m.2 gen3 setup in the future.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
31 Comments
Back to Article
Donkey2008 - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Nice little board for a portable LAN gaming desktop.SirKnobsworth - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
What's the use case for a uATX X99 gaming motherboard? The only time X99/Haswell-E will show a major improvement in gaming is for 3+ graphics card setups, which doesn't leave you with many options on uATX. I suppose you could stuff two R295x2s in there, but that's about it...Death666Angel - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Hm, maybe people want to take advantage of the 2 to 4 extra cores of Haswell-E compared to Haswell?SirKnobsworth - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
They won't provide a benefit for nearly any games though. I'm sure there are use cases outside of gaming, but this does have "gaming" in the product name.LukaP - Monday, November 24, 2014 - link
Umm... a portable/small footprint workstation... having an 8core monster and a quadro in a mATX case is awesomealiquis - Monday, December 8, 2014 - link
Gaming mostly mean "it comes with stupid Killer NIC", possibly also "come with stupid Creative sound chip" oh and maybe "extra heat sinks or different color schemes.)Meaker10 - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Those who want sli/xfire and pci-e gen 3 storage.thefivetheory - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
This. 2+ video cards at x16 AND an XP941? Pretty compelling for the enthusiast crowd.SirKnobsworth - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
That won't work here without single slot graphics cards though. The M.2 slot is PCIe 2.0 x2ddriver - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
So you don't assume this board can be used for anything else besides gaming? After all, it does say "gaming" on the box LOL.I would totally use that board for a small but powerful workstation. Slap in an 8 core chip, two GPUs for compute and you are there.
ShieTar - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
I would personally assume that many if not most workstation buyers will be looking for 8 slots for RAM.And two Dual-Slot GPUs, assuming that your small enclosure starts where the board ends, might be quiet starved of fresh air supply.
Go ATX, give them an additional slot of space in between, and you should get much less noise all for the price of the about ~3 inch of office space.
ddriver - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
"I would personally assume that many if not most workstation buyers will be looking for 8 slots for RAM."Not really, 32 gigs of ram is ample for a workstation. More ram is needed for servers.
As for cooling, I already run a uATX workstation, water cooled, 2x 240x120 rads on both ends of the chassis. Runs quite cool, even with considerable overclocking.
dgingeri - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Exactly what I was thinking. It's like the old x79 Alienware Area 51, where they used microATX. It was an annoying design with too many restrictions, and no airflow for dual video card setups, and they've done the same thing to the new x99 version, but with some strange "Triad case" design. It still only takes two video cards, but at least they left some space between them this time.X99 is for lots of I/O for three or four video cards, or at least two video cards with some airflow space for them. To put it in microATX and say it is for gaming is just asinine. This is NOT a gaming board. Gaming doesn't make use of the extra cores, and that is the only reason to use this board.
Perhaps it could be used for workstation type work where the extra cores would be of some use, but even there, you'd have to have very specific uses with the barest number of cards. Professional dual GPU work couldn't be done with this board. There's not enough space between the cards for proper airflow. They'd be constantly thermally throttling down.
crimsonson - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
X99 allows you to use 6 or 8 core without resorting to Xeon chipset. You can build an video/photo/After Effects computer with X99 and a 1 fast GPU using mATX. Not sure why you assume it has to be at least 2 GPUs. Not all work needs a workstation with dedicated GPUs for compute or render.ShieTar - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Sure, but on average, how often do you pack your workstation into the back of your moms car and have her drive you to a many Video/Photo/After Effects LAN-Party? I just don't see what you really gain when building a workstation on µ-ATX instead of ATX. Sure its possible to use this board, but that's not the exact point.And with Photo and Video Resolutions still increasing, it seems like you might be interested in another 4 RAM slots in a year or three.
DCide - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
If you do live video production this form factor is fantastic. To answer your question, every week. Every week I'm packing up two low-profile X99 powerhouses and taking them somewhere. When I had less power I was significantly limited in what I could do.I used the ASRock board because it was available at launch time. This has 4 regular slots vs. only 3 on the ASRock, but the ASRock has 2 good NICs on-board.
SirKnobsworth - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Is there any functional or cost difference between X99 and the Xeon chipsets?dgingeri - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
The C612 chipset (the Xeon version of the X99) is exactly the same chip, however, firmware in the C612 allows for the use of Registered and ECC memory (something that has nothing to do with the chipset) above the features of the X99.Registered memory comes in a lot larger sizes than unbuffered memory. A Xeon in an X99 board would only be able to address 128GB of memory, while a Xeon in a C612 board can address 512GB of memory.
ECC also corrects or prevents many memory errors that might pop up. Many of the unexplainable errors or crashes you experience are likely memory errors that ECC would prevent. It makes for a far more stable system.
Ktracho - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link
According to Gigabyte's website, this board supports use of registered DIMMs, just not the ECC functionality, so it doesn't look like it's seriously crippled in terms of how much memory you can install.Antronman - Sunday, November 30, 2014 - link
Not quite true.X99 still supports ECC.
The C612 chipset is really something only for servers that need over 128GBs of RAM (as aforementioned), and dual CPUs, as C612 supports dual CPUs.
dgingeri - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link
Oh, and the cost difference is about double: $26 for the X99 and $54 for the C612.Samus - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
itx?eanazag - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link
I don't totally get the Haswell-E micro ATX board form factor. Everything about Haswell-E screams "give me a big Cadillac sized board". If you're running multi-GPU, they will have to be blower cards. I have two R9 290's that are non-blower and they simply run too hot close together even with a single width slot of breathing room.I can see some Nvidia 970 or 980's working well. Given this form factor, I would go large Nvidia card 970/980 and a 750 for PhysX. And this makes more sense on Haswell minus -E.
The single slot GPU market is crap. You're going to spend $270 on a board only, and then buy some $80 video cards?
If I'm buying an -E, I'm buying for cores, memory slots, storage ports, and PCIe lanes. All that requires mobo real estate. For me uATX Haswell-E has to be at the bottom of the price spectrum.
This board is a niche within a niche. I predict mail-in rebates.
aliquis - Monday, December 8, 2014 - link
Does it have to be for gaming?And on what ground is the 3+ graphics card claim anyway? More PCI-express lanes? Would it really affect performance even with three graphics cards?
Or to push the limit on the processor and number of cores rather than the graphics cards capability?
asmian - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
Killer nic? Stopped reading right there. Plus SATA Express which is going nowhere, huge wasted connectors on such a small board.bleomycin - Wednesday, November 19, 2014 - link
X99 mATX is interesting, however I would much prefer a mini-itx implementation. I just don't find mATX to be small enough to justify the limitations it imposes. X99 with a gtx 980 in my ncase m1 case with water cooling would be a fantastic little machine!Antronman - Sunday, November 30, 2014 - link
With an mATX, you could a Revodrive 350 to that build. Or a soundcard of your choice.If you're going pro, you can SLI a couple of K4200s, or Have a K5200 or K6000 and a Fusion-iO PCIe storage drive.
For your information... - Thursday, November 20, 2014 - link
If your thinking about buying that junk, go check out the reviews at Newegg on the full size X99 Gaming G1. Everybody complaining about USB (AND MORE) problems and 2 months later Gigabyte still hasn't fixed it.Antronman - Sunday, November 30, 2014 - link
Now we just need to wait for the Rampage V Gene so there's a real mATX X99 motherboard you can buy.just4U - Tuesday, December 2, 2014 - link
so much dislike for the smaller form factor.. If I were to build a system today, (and DDR4 prices were reasonable..) I'd use a board like this /w 2 970s and a 6core CPU. Games are starting to utilize more cores these days.. and down the road a dual core simply won't cut it (hi dragon age inquisition) But, we all use our computers for more than just gaming.. especially those posting to this site so that's a given. I like building setups based around Matx builds or smaller so something like this would be up my ally.Wish they'd included the Creative sound chip though..
dyep89 - Sunday, December 28, 2014 - link
I don't know why they didn't choose m.2 pcie gen 3 x 4 interface.. I really wanted to buy this board, but the ASrock x99m has a gen3 m.2 and this doesn't. In other words, it wont help me with a proposed SLI + m.2 gen3 setup in the future.