Board Features

The ASUS ROG Strix B550-F Gaming is an ATX motherboard which slots into the mid-range of the AM4 market. It combines a solid feature set with dual PCIe M.2 slots, including one capable of supporting PCIe 4.0 x4 drives, while the other is wired to PCIe 3.0 x4. In addition to this is six SATA ports with support for RAID 0, 1, and 10 arrays. Offering a marked improvement over B450 models in regards to memory performance, the B550-F Gaming Wi-Fi supports DDR4-5100 with a maximum capacity of up to 128 GB across four memory slots. For networking, there's a good quality Intel pairing which includes an I225-V 2.5 GbE Ethernet controller, with an AX200 Wi-Fi 6 module which also allows the use of BT 5.0 devices. The boards PCIe configuration includes a top full-length PCIe 4.0 x16 slot, a full-length PCIe 3.0 x4 slot, and three PCIe 3.0 x1 slots.

ASUS ROG Strix B550-F Gaming Wi-Fi ATX Motherboard
Warranty Period 3 Years
Product Page Link
Price $210
Size ATX
CPU Interface AM4
Chipset AMD B550
Memory Slots (DDR4) Four DDR4
Supporting 128 GB
Dual Channel
Up to DDR4-5100
Video Outputs 1 x HDMI 2.1
1 x DisplayPort 1.2
Network Connectivity Intel I225-V 2.5 GbE
Intel AX200 Wi-Fi 6
Onboard Audio SupremeFX S1200A
PCIe Slots for Graphics (from CPU) 1 x PCIe 4.0 x16
PCIe Slots for Other (from PCH) 1 x PCIe 3.0 x4
3 x PCIe 3.0 x1
Onboard SATA Six, RAID 0/1/10 (B550)
Onboard M.2 1 x PCIe 4.0 x4
1 x PCIe 3.0 x4
USB 3.1 (10 Gbps) 1 x Type-A Rear Panel 
1 x Type-C Rear Panel
USB 3.0 (5 Gbps) 4 x Type-A Rear Panel
1 x Type-A Header (2 x ports)
USB 2.0 2 x Type-A Rear Panel
2 x Type-A Header (4 x ports)
Power Connectors 1 x 24-pin ATX
1 x 8pin CPU
1 x 4pin CPU
Fan Headers 1 x CPU (4-pin)
1 x CPU Opt (4-pin)
1 x AIO Pump (4-pin)
3 x System (4-pin)
IO Panel 4 x USB 3.1 G1 Type-A
1 x USB 3.1 G2 Type-A
1 x USB 3.1 G2 Type-C
2 x USB 2.0 Type-A
1 x Network RJ45 2.5 G (Intel)
5 x 3.5mm Audio Jacks (SupremeFX)
2 x Intel AX200 Antenna Ports
1 x USB BIOS Flashback Button
1 x DisplayPort 1.2 Output
1 x HDMI 2.1 Output

Touching on rear panel connectivity, ASUS has included two USB 3.2 G2 ports including a Type-C and Type-A port, as well as four USB 3.2 G1 Type-A and two USB 2.0 ports. For users looking to use compatible Ryzen APUs, there's an HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.2 output pairing, while there's also a USB BIOS Flashback button which allows users to easily update the board's firmware. The onboard audio is taken care of by a SupremeFX S1200A HD audio codec with five 3.5 mm audio jacks and a single S/PDIF optical output. Users can add to the boards USB with an additional four USB 2.0 ports made available via two front panel headers, as well as a single USB 3.2 G1 Type-A header which adds two more Type-A ports. 

Test Bed

As per our testing policy, we take a high-end CPU suitable for the motherboard that was released during the socket’s initial launch and equip the system with a suitable amount of memory running at the processor maximum supported frequency. This is also typically run at JEDEC subtimings where possible. It is noted that some users are not keen on this policy, stating that sometimes the maximum supported frequency is quite low, or faster memory is available at a similar price, or that the JEDEC speeds can be prohibitive for performance. While these comments make sense, ultimately very few users apply memory profiles (either XMP or other) as they require interaction with the BIOS, and most users will fall back on JEDEC supported speeds - this includes home users as well as industry who might want to shave off a cent or two from the cost or stay within the margins set by the manufacturer. Where possible, we will extend out testing to include faster memory modules either at the same time as the review or a later date.

While we have been able to measure audio performance from previous Z370 motherboards, the task has been made even harder with the roll-out of the Z390 chipset and none of the boards tested so far has played ball. It seems all USB support for Windows 7 is now extinct so until we can find a reliable way of measuring audio performance on Windows 10 or until a workaround can be found, audio testing will have to be done at a later date.

Test Setup
Processor AMD Ryzen 3700X, 65W, $329 
8 Cores, 16 Threads, 3.6 GHz (4.4 GHz Turbo)
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B550-F Gaming Wi-Fi (BIOS 0608)
Cooling ID-Cooling Auraflow 240 mm AIO
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower Grand 1200W Gold PSU
Memory 2x8GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 16-16-16-36 2T
Video Card ASUS GTX 980 STRIX (1178/1279 Boost)
Hard Drive Crucial MX300 1TB
Case Open Benchtable BC1.1 (Silver)
Operating System Windows 10 1909

Readers of our motherboard review section will have noted the trend in modern motherboards to implement a form of MultiCore Enhancement / Acceleration / Turbo (read our report here) on their motherboards. This does several things, including better benchmark results at stock settings (not entirely needed if overclocking is an end-user goal) at the expense of heat and temperature. It also gives, in essence, an automatic overclock which may be against what the user wants. Our testing methodology is ‘out-of-the-box’, with the latest public BIOS installed and XMP enabled, and thus subject to the whims of this feature. It is ultimately up to the motherboard manufacturer to take this risk – and manufacturers taking risks in the setup is something they do on every product (think C-state settings, USB priority, DPC Latency / monitoring priority, overriding memory sub-timings at JEDEC). Processor speed change is part of that risk, and ultimately if no overclocking is planned, some motherboards will affect how fast that shiny new processor goes and can be an important factor in the system build.

Hardware Providers for CPU and Motherboard Reviews
Sapphire RX 460 Nitro MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X OC Crucial MX200 +
MX500 SSDs
Corsair AX860i +
AX1200i PSUs
G.Skill RipjawsV,
SniperX, FlareX
Crucial Ballistix


BIOS And Software System Performance
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Death666Angel - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    So, single players games aren't a thing anymore? I game, but I don't play multiplayer modes or games.
  • ZipSpeed - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    I dunno, I'm not a competitive gamer by any means and I've been playing online via Wi-Fi for years with no issue. Maybe I'm just less sensitive to the variation because I honestly can't tell the difference wired and wireless.
  • PeachNCream - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    I haven't noticed a substantial difference, but there is a lot of hair splitting going on out there and it is well supported by marketing departments at hardware companies that want to land sales from people. Higher refresh rates, faster mouse polling, overclocking to gain like 2% more performance, Killer NICs that claim to give your game's data packets priority over other packets and so forth all appeal to people that feel like buying all of those things will make them more competitive so they get to teabag someone's corpse more often and feel proud of themselves when their only accomplishment in life is being at or around the top of a leader board. It's sad, but male competitiveness easy to exploit because the individual experiencing it is typically blind to it and will not think rationally about it. Why else to obese men purchase large pickup trucks or glitter bomb glowing computers except to feel empowered in some small way? The WiFi versus wired ethernet thing is just one more way to proclaim you feel superior to someone that doesn't care enough to throw a twisted pair cable across a room or two.
  • CardiWAP - Tuesday, August 11, 2020 - link

    Absolute rubbish.
    Play any fighting game and you can tell right away when somebody is on Wi-Fi. Same thing in shooters.
    Wi-Fi really is awful for anything requiring quick action.

    Fighting games are based on frames and you have to be aware at every single moment of the frame data of moves.
    Any added latency, jitter or any hiccup and the things you thought should have worked (and would have worked in a low latency wired connection) doesn't anymore. You drop a combo, you fail to punish a move, you fail to party and you die.
    This particular example that is familiar to me can be extended to any online game requiring quick action, reflexes and constant known data and behavior.

    Not using WiFi in these online games is not about anything you've described. It's just about having the best online experience - meaning one closest to offline. And you obviously wreak havoc playing on WiFi it might also be a question of respect for people playing with/against you.

    The part about high refresh rate monitor is as misinformed and far-fetched as the Wi-Fi one.
    You simply need to drag a simple window in your favourite OS and switch between 60Hz and 144Hz to understand the wonders of the smoothness in high framerate gaming.
    Moreover, the switch to flat screen panels really was in some instances a regression that is somewhat mitigated with high refresh rate panels (in the blur department).

    Overclocking has been a core part of PC gaming for decades so I won't even bother going further than this.

    You might have a leg to stand on regarding Killer NICs and their drivers but they don't jack up the price of the motherboards they are in so it doesn't matter anyway.
  • MrVibrato - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    I didn't know that you spell ISP like "WiFI" in your corner of the world. ;-P
  • Gastec - Sunday, January 3, 2021 - link

    WiFi "kills" more than just gaming performances, it's slower than Ethernet cable connection for everything. A WiFi connection between the computer and the router is useful in certain situations but we can't deny that there is a consistent propaganda campaign to convince the consumers to switch from Ethernet to wireless connections, for a good price of course. The more you buy, the more we profit, after all! :)
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    "USB 3.0 (5 Gbps) 2 x Type-A Header (2 x ports)"

    Type A headers are 2 ports, each so this should either be 1x header, or 4x ports.
  • Ryan Smith - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    Thanks Dan. That's indeed 1 header.
  • mooninite - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    What about a test network performance? The I225-V has two bad revisions (v1 & v2) and there is no known way to know what version you will buy. A benchmark could confirm it.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, July 22, 2020 - link

    If they're not making it explicit in the specsheet any test Gavin did would be of limited value since there would be nothing stopping Asus from having a silicon lottery where not all production runs use the same version of the controller.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now