The EVGA X299 FTW K Motherboard Review: Dual U.2 Ports
by Joe Shields on January 29, 2018 8:45 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
- Intel
- Killer
- EVGA
- X299
- Basin Falls
- Skylake-X
- Kaby Lake-X
Overclocking
Experience with the EVGA X299 FTW K
The board does not come with any automatic overclocking presets or abilities, however, when left on auto, it will adjust the Vcore voltage via the VID for the clock speed. This tends to overvolt things a bit, and that was the case here. Leaving the voltage on auto and setting 4.5 GHz yielded almost 1.3V which is too much for the clock speed and failed our testing. Although the BIOS was missing some features like LLC to prevent Vdroop, the board really didn't have much at all to begin with. The other major options missing, power limits, also didn't appear to affect our overclock, In the end, we landed right around where the other boards did with 1.23V @ 4.5 GHz.
The major overclocking options are under one section, and in this case, one page worth so there is no jumping around required for an average ambient overclock. Options like the CPU multiplier, BCLK, and Voltages for multiple domains are all found in the same section.
As far as DRAM goes, the board had no issues with either the DDR4-2666 set or the DDR4-3200 set. It was 'set XMP and go', just how we like it. We were able to overclock past the XMP settings of our 3200 sticks and reached DDR4-3600 speeds. The E-Leet utility worked without issue for the majority of my testing. Though once we set the memory multiplier manually, it would not apply any settings, including only voltage, or even a lower CPU multiplier.
We did not run into any thermal issues on the VRM on this board in stock or overclocked form. The maximum VRM temperature E-Leet read was 55C during a longer duration stress test of OCCT.
Overclocking Methodology
Our standard overclocking methodology is as follows. We select the automatic overclock options and test for stability with POV-Ray and OCCT to simulate high-end workloads. These stability tests aim to catch any immediate causes for memory or CPU errors.
For manual overclocks, based on the information gathered from the previous testing, starts off at a nominal voltage and CPU multiplier, and the multiplier is increased until the stability tests are failed. The CPU voltage is increased gradually until the stability tests are passed, and the process repeated until the motherboard reduces the multiplier automatically (due to safety protocol) or the CPU temperature reaches a stupidly high level (90ºC+). Our test bed is not in a case, which should push overclocks higher with fresher (cooler) air.
Overclocking Results
The EVGA FTW K topped out at 4.5 GHz along with the other boards tested as expected. The voltage to reach the clock speeds were all within a small variance so nothing out of the ordinary there. But again, we read from software, so there is a built-in variance already. With no LLC setting in sight, we did not see any vdroop and voltages stayed remarkably stable as we have seen with all boards reviewed so far. At the top overclock of 4.5 GHz and 1.23V, the system pulled 295W from the wall which is the lowest peak power of any board tested so far, although the board still applies an automatic -3 AVX offset.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
EricZBA - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link
1. It would have been nice to get an explanation in the first page of what the heck a U.2 port is2. Motherboard / CPU are swapped in the "Manual overclocking results" graph on page 1
Joe Shields - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link
Eric,Sorry about that. Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.2
Thanks for the correction on the results.
JackNSally - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link
Can you test with a better CPU cooler? All of your X299 overclocking results are thermally limited. This doesn't show the board limits, just the coolers limits.Joe Shields - Monday, January 29, 2018 - link
I see what you are saying. Do understand however, in the vast majority of cases, users will be thermally limited by the CPU before the board regardless.The problem comes with how effective, or not, adding more radiator really is considering how effective the interior TIM is. The test CPU (the new one) was still thermally limited with a 3x120 custom loop (CPU only) and a better block (Kryos NEXT). IIRC, I was able to run around 100 more MHz out of that than the Corsair AIO used in the test system. In order to reap those benefits fully, we would need to delid the CPU and go a lot bigger on the radiator before most boards would stop the overclock. With delidding, we are really getting into a world where not many users would do it unless they are benching competitively which these would not be the weapon of choice in the first place. These are '24/7' overclocks with reasonable cooling solutions and warrantied CPUs.
bug77 - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link
Maybe add a paragraph summarizing all that to reviews, then?oRAirwolf - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link
USB type C motherboard headers should be standard equipment by now. I don't know why they would put 2 U.2 connectors on this motherboard but not a single USB type C header.My last motherboard was an EVGA x99 FTW K and it was a really nice motherboard. I liked the layout and the 2 slot spacing between GPUs. I am using an asrock z370 professional gaming i7 now and it only has single slot spacing between GPUs. There was definitely a noticeable increase in temperature going from 2 slot spacing to 1 slot spacing with SLI 1080 TI's. About 5-10 C. My only complaint with the x99 FTW K, besides using Killer networking, was that EVGA basically makes no motherboard software. While it doesn't see a lot of use, I like having utilities like fan curve and overclocking control. I know I can use things like speed fan and Intel extreme tuning utility...and I did, however, I was a bit let down by EVGAs lack of in house software.
Xajel - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link
U.2 is crap, while it's good for NVMe 2.5" SSD drives (well, it's the only solution now). but I really hate how bulky it is, and the fact that the drive still need dedicated power pins.For any new technology for 2.5" & 3.5" SSD's ( SATA or NVMe ) I wish the cable to be small, compact, not so thick or hard cables, preferably reversible and can carry a minimum amount of power so a regular SSD can be powered also by the same cable. any more advance drive can have a separate power.
Drazick - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link
At last real support for 2.5" drives with NVME.The M.2 solution is good for laptops.
For desktop we need something better with less heat issues.
drajitshnew - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link
Hi, could you please highlight the point at which an extra long screw is required. Also, list the specification of the required screw.Also , from the photographs is seems that the heat pipe from the power delivery is impinging on the 1 st memory slot. Could add a photo to clarify that?
drajitshnew - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link
hi, it seems with the listed config for the 44 lane CPU it requires 60 lanes?!x16/x8/x8/x16=48 lanes and m2=4+ 2*U2=8, Could you clarify that?