# MSI Z170A GAMING M7 (Intel LGA-1151)



## cadaveca (Jul 21, 2015)

Today's the day Intel's latest launches, and here is MSI's Z170A GAMING M7 to help us take a look at what the new platform offers. Taken from the upper echelon of MSI's current GAMING motherboard line-up, the MSI Z170A GAMING M7 is an enthusiast-oriented GAMING product with a host of built-in features for today's gamer.

*Show full review*


----------



## Folterknecht (Aug 5, 2015)

Interesting ... Auto-OC function offering 1.44V for a 14nm CPU 


Nevertheless - nice review.


----------



## Overclocker_2001 (Aug 5, 2015)

well...
power consumption is a bit high.. especially for a 14nm cpu.. hoped for something better

cpu performance is where i hoped, little better than similary clocked haswell
ddr4 have higher latency than ddr3 but came with a good boost in bandwith


about the board...
i really don't like back panel configuration..
who will ever play with iGPU???
ok someone could use 2nd monitor attached to igpu => let's have an hdmi and a dvi/dp
but then cram lot of usb ( 4 usb 2.0, 4 usb 3.0 and a pair of 3.1 )


----------



## GreiverBlade (Aug 5, 2015)

interesting, nonetheless confirming my next move : i skip Skylake 

tho the new MSI gaming mobo still look like a ripoff of a ASUS design (with the VRM heatsink in a slight different orientation)

anyway nice review as usual @cadaveca


----------



## buggalugs (Aug 5, 2015)

First impression of the new platform and I'm not impressed.

Cadaveca at what CPU and memory speed did you run the CPU and memory (aida) tests???

I get those numbers on Z97 (4790K) and 2133Mhz memory,  (around 30-33,000 Mb/s) I thought DDR4 would provide better numbers.

I don't understand why you're praising DDR4 so much? could you elaborate?? I can see in the benchmarks that the Z170 ddr4 board gets better numbers than the Z97 board but you can only compare when running the same memory speed. It sounds like the MSI Z97 board was running 1600Mhz or 1866Mhz??

Other benchmarks don't show much improvement over Z97, I was hoping for rumoured 20% gains but it doesn't look like it.  Not sure if its worth the upgrade for me.

Its good to hear the platform is stable though.....and the MSI board itself is good

Edit: ( I would like to see the Z97 and Z170 platform set to the same CPU and Memory speed, say 4.2Ghz CPU and 2133Mhz memory,  so we can see a real comparison of performance between DDR3 and DDR4)


----------



## pky (Aug 5, 2015)

What a sneaky way to review the 6700K...


----------



## Assimilator (Aug 5, 2015)

Interesting and disappointing at the same time. It's nice that 5GHz is achievable, but holy hell at 1.4V that CPU is gonna burn. Would like to see what the lowest voltage for 5GHz stable is.


----------



## mr2009 (Aug 5, 2015)

buggalugs said:


> First impression of the new platform and I'm not impressed.
> 
> Cadaveca at what CPU and memory speed did you run the CPU and memory (aida) tests???
> 
> ...


Z97 or X79?


----------



## buggalugs (Aug 5, 2015)

mr2009 said:


> Z97 or X79?



Sorry Z97 I mean, I will fix that.

Edit, I just watched a Z170  preview review where the guy said his platform was a nightmare, he had 4 different sets (brands) of DDR4 memory and none of them worked properly.!!

 Wow, just checked its the same motherboard (MSI gaming) as well.


----------



## ShockG (Aug 5, 2015)

buggalugs said:


> Sorry Z97 I mean, I will fix that.
> 
> Edit, I just watched a Z170  preview review where the guy said his platform was a nightmare, he had 4 different sets (brands) of DDR4 memory and none of them worked properly.!!
> 
> Wow, just checked its the same motherboard (MSI gaming) as well.


I agree. At this point, this motherboard is not retail ready.
I've just recieved a newly cocked BIOS that was baked today. As prior to this version there would be no point in doing a review as it would be unreliable.
As it stands this particular motherboard is so so. POST CODE "78", HDMI output PLL not working properly etc...

If this motherboard is getting 9.9, surely the ASUS boards should get 10.5


----------



## Delta6326 (Aug 5, 2015)

Awesome review as always! This was going to be my next board until I saw only 5usb's... I have lots of Peripherals.  I think the Asus Deluxe has a lot more at 3.1 also!
Can you mention what temp the "MotherBoard" kept the CPU Area at...


----------



## souleet (Aug 5, 2015)

Great review!@ Do you think DDR4 memory price will drop soon? MSI is probably up to par with ASUS in terms of marketing but of course they still lack in R&D.


----------



## Farmer Boe (Aug 5, 2015)

buggalugs said:


> First impression of the new platform and I'm not impressed.
> 
> Cadaveca at what CPU and memory speed did you run the CPU and memory (aida) tests???
> 
> ...



This is not really a platform review, it's a mobo review but I understand why you're asking those questions. I think Dave is raving about DDR4 because he likes tuning RAM and DDR4 is the new flavor.

I would also like to see a apples to apples comparison with the same clocks speeds using Z97 and Z170 chipsets. May answer a lot of upgrade questions.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 5, 2015)

Folterknecht said:


> Interesting ... Auto-OC function offering 1.44V for a 14nm CPU
> 
> 
> Nevertheless - nice review.


Starts at 1.3v stock (give or take)... so that makes 1.44v look like nothing. That said, it was rumored not to go over 1.42v from a specific MFG or that would cause degredation... not sure what to believe on that front.


@ Farmer - plenty of reviews did that.. mine at 4.9Ghz, our 6700K CPU review did, and anand really went in bawls deep. Search friend. I it was done. 


Great review dave! Nice to see you back in the saddle!



ShockG said:


> I agree. At this point, this motherboard is not retail ready.
> I've just recieved a newly cocked BIOS that was baked today. As prior to this version there would be no point in doing a review as it would be unreliable.
> As it stands this particular motherboard is so so. POST CODE "78", HDMI output PLL not working properly etc...
> 
> If this motherboard is getting 9.9, surely the ASUS boards should get 10.5


Your sample had issues. Mine didn't have one outside of it not liking my pre-release DDR4 sticks (would not go to XMP1 DDR4 3K). But they confirmed the retail sticks I had worked and showed a screenshot.


----------



## Assimilator (Aug 5, 2015)

Hmmm, I have a massive problem with this review being done on a board that MSI cherry-picked. Is there any guarantee that retail boards will perform like this?


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 5, 2015)

Assimilator said:


> Hmmm, I have a massive problem with this review being done on a board that MSI cherry-picked. Is there any guarantee that retail boards will perform like this?


Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat????????? 

They must have' cherry picked' about 20 boards in that case...

... you can't be serious? This isn't a CPU review or GPU review where that can be called into play with overclocking. And though the FIVR is gone and a robust power delivery area means more to a motherboard with this processor, I can assure you that his results (and mine from my review) will not be any different performance wise. Besides, if you are only talking CPU speed, that is up to the CPU's silicon more so than the board... 'the more you know'


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 5, 2015)

Thanks for the review. May I ask what kind of a low resolution did you use for the game test (Metro) to have such fps numbers? I only get like 10 fps difference between Sandy Bridge and Haswell in any meaningful resolutions (1080p + above), and you even get 5 fps difference between two z97 boards. That 40 fps difference just so huge, I never saw anywhere anything close tbh, or only in SLI configurations where more cpu power really matters.


----------



## horik (Aug 5, 2015)

Where i live you can buy this mobo (249€) and get a Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO for free.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 5, 2015)

buggalugs said:


> Edit: ( I would like to see the Z97 and Z170 platform set to the same CPU and Memory speed, say 4.2Ghz CPU and 2133Mhz memory,  so we can see a real comparison of performance between DDR3 and DDR4)


Each CPU is run with its stock memory speed. 4770K is 1600 MHz DDR3. 6700K is 2133 MHz DDR4.

This is a motherboard review, not a memory or CPU or platform review. Performance is only a consideration if it present a problem, which it doesn't. Future motherboard reviews will have less benchmarks like this, and more for drive interfaces, etc.


ShockG said:


> I agree. At this point, this motherboard is not retail ready.
> I've just recieved a newly cocked BIOS that was baked today. As prior to this version there would be no point in doing a review as it would be unreliable.
> As it stands this particular motherboard is so so. POST CODE "78", HDMI output PLL not working properly etc...
> 
> If this motherboard is getting 9.9, surely the ASUS boards should get 10.5



I didn't have any problems with any of my X99 memory kits, in speeds from 2133 MHz to 3200 MHz, all 4x 4 GB. It can use a BIOS update for going over 3400 MHz, and one is on the way.



Folterknecht said:


> Interesting ... Auto-OC function offering 1.44V for a 14nm CPU
> 
> 
> Nevertheless - nice review.



Stock is 1.24V on my CPU, and I did mention that the board warned me that the voltage was too high. 



GreiverBlade said:


> interesting, nonetheless confirming my next move : i skip Skylake
> 
> tho the new MSI gaming mobo still look like a ripoff of a ASUS design (with the VRM heatsink in a slight different orientation)
> 
> anyway nice review as usual @cadaveca



Meh. I understand why you might think that, but it only is as much as every other board by every other brand.



Ikaruga said:


> Thanks for the review. May I ask what kind of a low resolution did you use for the game test (Metro) to have such fps numbers? I only get like 10 fps difference between Sandy Bridge and Haswell in any meaningful resolutions (1080p + above), and you even get 5 fps difference between two z97 boards. That 40 fps difference just so huge, I never saw anywhere anything close tbh, or only in SLI configurations where more cpu power really matters.


1024x768, so that the FPS is as high as possible. IT can show differences in Turbo profiling and memory timings; I am not reviewing a GPU or 3D performance, just making sure it works.


Honestly guys, motherboard reviews here on TPU for like the past 4-5 years have been exactly the same. I've written them all. Seems like a bit of fanboyism in some posts, from where I sit.



Assimilator said:


> Hmmm, I have a massive problem with this review being done on a board that MSI cherry-picked. Is there any guarantee that retail boards will perform like this?



I get my samples form the same place any other place that receives samples from MSI. I do disclose this board was pre-tested, but if anything was out of the ordinary, believe me, i'd let you know.


----------



## Kissamies (Aug 5, 2015)

Looks fine, but an overclocked Sandy Bridge still kicks ass!

I'm just so tired of this GAMING THIS, GAMING THAT crap on product names..


----------



## GC_PaNzerFIN (Aug 5, 2015)

I agree, MSI has made terrific work in last two years to get in the game pun intended. 

If MSI is already this good, I am just left wondering only one thing: is Asus ROG Z170 board going to be first 10 ever?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 5, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> I agree, MSI has made terrific work in last two years to get in the game pun intended.
> 
> If MSI is already this good, I am just left wondering only one thing: is Asus ROG Z170 board going to be first 10 ever?


I can always find a problem of some sort. 10 is nearly impossible.

ASUS sent me Z170 DELUXE, which is in different price bracket than this MSI board( twice the price, almost), so to me there is no direct comparison, FYI, but you guys can make whatever comparisons you like. 


Delta6326 said:


> Awesome review as always! This was going to be my next board until I saw only 5usb's... I have lots of Peripherals.  I think the Asus Deluxe has a lot more at 3.1 also!
> Can you mention what temp the "MotherBoard" kept the CPU Area at...


at 4.8 GHz and 1.35V, CPU did not exceed 75C. At 1.44V and 5.0 GHz, it topped 85c, but did not reach 90c. Seems cooling is of little importance with these CPUs, and they are much like 2600K, not IVB/Haswell for required cooling I am seeing far lower power consumption both at stock and at load for comparative clocks...5.0 GHz is less power pulled than SNB/IVB and Haswell at same clock, by at least 50W.




souleet said:


> Great review!@ Do you think DDR4 memory price will drop soon? MSI is probably up to par with ASUS in terms of marketing but of course they still lack in R&D.


DDR4 has already dropped in price, and maybe a bit more recently/soon, but to me, current prices are fair. High-end DDR4 is far better than high-end DDR3 as performance scales with the clocks, all the way up. I'll have RipJaws V review up soon which will show some of that.



9700 Pro said:


> Looks fine, but an overclocked Sandy Bridge still kicks ass!
> 
> I'm just so tired of this GAMING THIS, GAMING THAT crap on product names..



Being a college student, I can see that MSI marketing works better than any other brand in that demographic. So while you may be tired of it, it is still working well at bringing in new users, and new enthusiasts. I could not keep track of the number of MSI backpacks and laptops I see at school... almost more than MacBooks.

See, you get these students that are console users, but now need laptop for school...then they see gaming... guess what they buy? It's very effective.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Aug 5, 2015)

it seems that the main benefits of skylake come from the chipset and the overclocking potential. Most pit the 6700k as similar or the same as the performance of the 4790k stock to stock. But the overclocking potential and better chipset seems to be the main boost over haswell/devils canyon. 

So it seems this upgrade path will be more focused on the mainboard than the cpu, kinda like 1156 vs 1366 where an i7 860 on 1156 vs i7 930 on 1366 really came down to budget and board/chipset features. also I guess older 478 pentium 4's vs the later 775 pentium 4's where the cpu's were pretty close and it really came down to chipset/memory.


----------



## ShockG (Aug 5, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Starts at 1.3v stock (give or take)... so that makes 1.44v look like nothing. That said, it was rumored not to go over 1.42v from a specific MFG or that would cause degredation... not sure what to believe on that front.
> 
> 
> @ Farmer - plenty of reviews did that.. mine at 4.9Ghz, our 6700K CPU review did, and anand really went in bawls deep. Search friend. I it was done.
> ...


I don't think this is a sample issue. As I've tried more than one, but not ruling it out of course.
The BIOS which you may receive tomorrow, actually fixes this issue. At present if you turn off HD Audio with BIOS version 130, 132, 142 and 151 (latest) you will get this "78" POST CODE error. On both ES and Retail.
The issue relating to CPU PLL OC and SFR, is fixed on TITAN board, but still present on this motherboard and even the upcoming BIOS is not addressing that. "00" After setting CPU PLL OC.
HDMI display issue, is related again to PLL and operating temperature when using the IGP.
Either way the most complete set of boards right now are all ASUS, by a large margin in fact. But no doubt the others will get there in due time.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 6, 2015)

Interesting.... I will see if I can duplicate the provlem with the current bios.

I can't say I tested shutting the audio off or hdmi. But to to say it's not ready for retail with issues that would seemingly affect so few, I believe is being too critical. Perhaps I don't fully understand the issue.

How did you find these issues? Particularly the disabling audio. What prompted you to do that for a review?

EDIT: Disabling Audio does cause a no boot issue. However, it was a sloooooow boot process, hangs on 79 for a bit, I get a signal on the monitor with no picture, and then it ends up on 99 debug (monitor signal stays on). This is BIOS 142.

EDIT2: I have no issues with manually adjusting OC PLL voltage or SFR... but I am not using the onboard GPU either. Do I have to use the iGPU for this issue to show up?


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 6, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> Honestly guys, motherboard reviews here on TPU for like the past 4-5 years have been exactly the same. I've written them all. Seems like a bit of fanboyism in some posts, from where I sit.


You wrote that after my quote, so I assume you meant it for me. I don't fully understand what did you mean, I saw almost 20% speed increase(!) over Haswell refresh on the "3D performance result" page and that made me really curios, that's all. *I'm definitely not a fanboy of anyone* (and not even a boy anymore for a long time).


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 6, 2015)

Ikaruga said:


> You wrote that after my quote, so I assume you meant it for me. I don't fully understand what did you mean, I saw almost 20% speed increase(!) over Haswell refresh on the "3D performance result" page and that made me really curios, that's all. *I'm definitely not a fanboy of anyone* (and not even a boy anymore for a long time).


Nah, not for you, just in general. Please don't take it anything but.

Metro Last Light is a weird bench for me for sure. Before I used Shogun2, with pretty much equal settings. Resolution is lowered to make the CPU a bottleneck, which makes small changes in CPU performance stand out. Typically this is due to memory timings, but I have also found how Turbo profiles are set to have an impact as well. ASUS, for example, used to automatically enabled max Turbo to all cores, but today, they ask if that is what you want, or if you'd like the default (good for users with stock cooling).

In the end though, as you say, these differences are really small, if even noticeable, to the end user. With this in mind, focusing on performance figures for CPU and memory when it comes down to a motherboard, seems like a waste of time, unless three is a significant difference. So in the future, you'll find AIDA64, Cinebench, and 3DMark as the only "performance benchmarks", and more drive testing (all interfaces; I have to collect drives for this yet), audio, LAN, fan control, Power consumption, and then a look at automated features, like seen with this review. These are the things that boards, offer, so that's what will be tested and shown.

With so much user customization available across the board from all manufacturers, performance differences are a mere tweak away from each other, and to me, are unimportant. To the majority of users, color and price is more important. Some people want more than that, for sure. But things like CPU overclocking... man, this platform, you set vCore, set multi, test, done.



ShockG said:


> Either way the most complete set of boards right now are all ASUS, by a large margin in fact. But no doubt the others will get there in due time.



Yeah, because only offering 3 of the first 4 timings is the way to go. Meanwhile, Corsair releases 13-13-14 ram, and you can't set the second two independently. Yeah. That's complete, all right. You're talking Intel IGP and gaming.

I'll admit, nice find though, and since you did, it'll get fixed. But will ASUS give us the fourth timing? I'm asking for it...


----------



## ShockG (Aug 6, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> Yeah, because only offering 3 of the first 4 timings is the way to go. Meanwhile, Corsair releases 13-13-14 ram, and you can't set the second two independently. Yeah. That's complete, all right. You're talking Intel IGP and gaming.
> 
> I'll admit, nice find though, and since you did, it'll get fixed. But will ASUS give us the fourth timing? I'm asking for it...


That's actually on the MSI motherboard and others as well. You can check it in Command Center or CPU-Z even. 
This is right now by design from INTEL, it may change in updated ME code in future, but as it stands, if you change tRCD or tRP in the primary settings. The IMC will match the higher of the two value. 
That is, if you set 15-16-15-38 for example. What you will end up with is 15-16-16-38. The same goes for setting 15-15-16-38. You will end up with 15-16-16-38. 
There currently isn't a way to set them interdependently and that is why ASUS has removed the setting. You can only set 3 out of the 4 timings.


----------



## ShockG (Aug 6, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Interesting.... I will see if I can duplicate the provlem with the current bios.
> 
> I can't say I tested shutting the audio off or hdmi. But to to say it's not ready for retail with issues that would seemingly affect so few, I believe is being too critical. Perhaps I don't fully understand the issue.
> 
> ...


The PLL will likely affect you if you in the following ways. 
Set SFR to 1.3 or 1.4V then restart, you'll get 00. 
The board auto detects SFR is higher than CPU PLL then hangs. YOu can set CPU PLL first to a high value, then follow it up on the next boot by setting SFR to the required value. 
The issue however is that SFR during POST sets, before PLL so you may still get the "00" issue. 
142 is alright, but 151 seems a bit more stable, but the two issues are still present though.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 6, 2015)

Thanks shock for the follow up. 

Odd that I have a different debug code/end result on the HD Audio bug, ehh? 

Again I'm curious, how the heck did you run into these things? I mean, did you try a discrete sound card so you shut off the audio? Why did you raise the OC PLL/SFR voltages? Even using LN2 that isn't something I touch. The HDMI thing I can see why you hit that...


----------



## buggalugs (Aug 6, 2015)

Anandtech has a full review of this platform, it looks like skylake is at best 5% faster than a 4790K haswell system, and that's with the haswell system running 1600Mhz memory vs 2133Mhz memory on skylake. Some games show Skylake as slower than haswell, but skylake is faster in a few rare synthetic benchmarks. With the same memory speed, that 5% difference would most likely disappear, making it about the same. Of course, you can get much faster DDR4 memory, but memory doesn't seem to make much difference to any tasks, anyway. I just thought there would be an improvement clock for clock, but anyway.

My 4790K does 4.7 @ around 1.25v, Skylake seems to need heaps of volts to reach 4.5Ghz like 1.3-1.4v , and they don't even have the voltage regulator on the CPU anymore.

I'm a bit disappointed.  I think I'll hang on to my 4790K and spend some money on a new monitor instead, like a 4K or maybe Asus 144Hz IPS. Or I can upgrade my 290X to a fury with the money, theres some performance gains there.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 6, 2015)

buggalugs said:


> With the same memory speed, that 5% difference would most likely disappear, making it about the same.


Ehh, I dont think so fried. Look around for reviews that compared apples to apples bugg. You then go on to say memory doesn't make much of a difference?? In my review, I compared the CPUs at 4.9GHz and 2666 memory. The only difference was the timings CL11 vs CL14. I still showed over 6% and that was with using SuperPi 1M/32M which responds well to memory changes (tight timings and speed). If I removed those, I was looking at 8% in the items tested. 



buggalugs said:


> My 4790K does 4.7 @ around 1.25v, Skylake seems to need heaps of volts to reach 4.5Ghz like 1.3-1.4v , and they don't even have the voltage regulator on the CPU anymore.


Remember, they start off around 1.3v (give or take)... so you are really only raising it .15 to get there... about  the same as your 4790K which generally starts off around 1.1v (give or take). I would imagine that without the FIVR, that is part of the reason why the starting voltage is much higher even on a smaller process (just a guess).


----------



## Sasqui (Aug 6, 2015)

Dave, very entertaining read (and good review).  Too bad "Spinal Tap" is copyrighted, it'd make for a great name for a motherboard series, lol.


----------



## Ikaruga (Aug 6, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> Nah, not for you, just in general. Please don't take it anything but.


Thanks, no worries 


cadaveca said:


> Metro Last Light is a weird bench for me for sure. Before I used Shogun2, with pretty much equal settings. Resolution is lowered to make the CPU a bottleneck, which makes small changes in CPU performance stand out. Typically this is due to memory timings, but I have also found how Turbo profiles are set to have an impact as well. ASUS, for example, used to automatically enabled max Turbo to all cores, but today, they ask if that is what you want, or if you'd like the default (good for users with stock cooling).
> 
> In the end though, as you say, these differences are really small, if even noticeable, to the end user. With this in mind, focusing on performance figures for CPU and memory when it comes down to a motherboard, seems like a waste of time, unless three is a significant difference. So in the future, you'll find AIDA64, Cinebench, and 3DMark as the only "performance benchmarks", and more drive testing (all interfaces; I have to collect drives for this yet), audio, LAN, fan control, Power consumption, and then a look at automated features, like seen with this review. These are the things that boards, offer, so that's what will be tested and shown.



I'm sad to hear that you are about to drop real world tests from your reviews, I like low-res tests, I was just curious about the resolution because high ones do not show much difference.



cadaveca said:


> With so much user customization available across the board from all manufacturers, performance differences are a mere tweak away from each other, and to me, are unimportant. To the majority of users, color and price is more important. Some people want more than that, for sure. But things like CPU overclocking... man, this platform, you set vCore, set multi, test, done.


Life got really busy this summer, I did not have time to do a Skylake build yet, but you just made the ich even more serious


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 6, 2015)

ShockG said:


> That's actually on the MSI motherboard and others as well. You can check it in Command Center or CPU-Z even.
> This is right now by design from INTEL, it may change in updated ME code in future, but as it stands, if you change tRCD or tRP in the primary settings. The IMC will match the higher of the two value.
> That is, if you set 15-16-15-38 for example. What you will end up with is 15-16-16-38. The same goes for setting 15-15-16-38. You will end up with 15-16-16-38.
> There currently isn't a way to set them interdependently and that is why ASUS has removed the setting. You can only set 3 out of the 4 timings.


Right, but if ASUS can't fix it yet... I expect them to. They have "OC socket"... and it does nothing.

I am a very sarcastic person, so please, don't take my words for what they mean directly. You called ASUS the most complete. I don't agree. Here they have a "feature" that does...nothing? I'm talking about feelings that are created by the ASUS experience, not what's actually happening. Pretend you don't know squat and have this board and then discover these things.

I am in the process of testing this ASUS board for review now. Started yesterday. I'll leave the rest for the review.





EarthDog said:


> Thanks shock for the follow up.
> 
> Odd that I have a different debug code/end result on the HD Audio bug, ehh?
> 
> Again I'm curious, how the heck did you run into these things? I mean, did you try a discrete sound card so you shut off the audio? Why did you raise the OC PLL/SFR voltages? Even using LN2 that isn't something I touch. The HDMI thing I can see why you hit that...



Wait, you didn't recognize the name? See, this is why I use same UID all over for the last decade+.


----------



## Folterknecht (Aug 6, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> ...
> Stock is 1.24V on my CPU, and I did mention that the board warned me that the voltage was too high.
> ...



I m of the opinion motherboard companies shouldnt offer these "insane" voltages as auto OC option.
The whole auto-OC topic is problematic, because it attracts those users who have no idea what they are doing. And offering voltages that high is asking for trouble - I know we dont have long time experience with these chips yet, but I ve serious doubts about 1.44V being good in the long run 24/7 under air. If you offer auto-OC it should be limited to safe settings for air cooling.



cadaveca said:


> ... But things like CPU overclocking... man, this platform, you set vCore, set multi, test, done.
> ...



Dont know what testing you did beside the things you covered in your review, but what I gathered from ~10 reviews I read/watched now, it might be benefical for performance to use also you BCLK/Cache OC with these chips.

I d be interested in a comparison between normal multi-OC (44x 100 MHz) SandyBridge Style and a combination of Multi, BCKL/Cache OC (22x 200). 

Do you know if BCLK-OC will be possible on Z170 with non-K CPUs and Xeons?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 7, 2015)

Yeah, I think high blck might add efficiency, but time will tell. Not sure about how it will work with non-K chips.

But, the point I was trying to make was about how easy it could be.

Point taken about the auto-OC, but given the media presented, and how silly using that 11 setting is, I give MSI a pass here. The whole point was pushing to a ridiculous level, and the board immediately tells you the voltages are too high. Had it done that and not notified you...then we'd be having a different discussion.


----------



## Deleted member 138597 (Aug 7, 2015)

looks like motherboards are the things that'll push 6th Gen more than CPUs . For a person like me that uses Wolfdale, Skylake looks really lucrative than Haswell O_O

But anyway, some mistakes in the review. First in the "Test system" page. It says DDR3 RAMs & not DDR4. Second is in the "CPU performance" test. It says "mounted my Corsair H110 cooler" and not H90 (or was it H110 afterall ?)

And don't you think it's too early and sort of "making less sense" to give it 9.9? I mean CPU haven't been reviewed yet by TPU, nor there are other Z170 boards to compare. Comparing M7 against X99 or Z97 doesn't actually tell the real deal you know. Maybe 9.7 or 9.6 should have been a better and a safer score. What do you say @cadaveca?

EDIT: Oh and were you stable at 5GHz?


----------



## AsRock (Aug 7, 2015)

I missed this review, i really think you should of noted in the title that it was a review .

Nice review btw.


----------



## haswrong (Aug 7, 2015)

is it possible to run x16 + x4 pci-e config? (graphics + ssd)

edit: ok, skylake has 16 pcie lanes, not 20 as i previously thought. im taking my question back.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 7, 2015)

Shamonto Hasan Easha said:


> looks like motherboards are the things that'll push 6th Gen more than CPUs . For a person like me that uses Wolfdale, Skylake looks really lucrative than Haswell O_O
> 
> But anyway, some mistakes in the review. First in the "Test system" page. It says DDR3 RAMs & not DDR4. Second is in the "CPU performance" test. It says "mounted my Corsair H110 cooler" and not H90 (or was it H110 afterall ?)
> 
> ...


stable enough to run 3DMark. 100% stable, no.

You know we have an editor, right? LOL. BUt yeah, typos...I'll fix them. And no, no change to score. I do have other boards. I've have the GAMING M7 for nearly a month now, and have put it through the paces.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 7, 2015)

Oh......I forgot to mention, and not sure if Dave did in the review (apologies if you did), but If you want to use W7 on here, be sure to enable an option in the bios under advanced (I will post a screenshot at home) that talks about W7 and USB. Otherwise, you will not have a mouse in windows, nor upon installation of windows. However, if you use W10, it works just fine. 

ASUS and EVGA really screwed the pooch and do not have that option. You are essentially forced to slipstream drivers into an install... or use W10.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 7, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Oh......I forgot to mention, and not sure if Dave did in the review (apologies if you did), but If you want to use W7 on here, be sure to enable an option in the bios under advanced (I will post a screenshot at home) that talks about W7 and USB. Otherwise, you will not have a mouse in windows, nor upon installation of windows. However, if you use W10, it works just fine.
> 
> ASUS and EVGA really screwed the pooch and do not have that option. You are essentially forced to slipstream drivers into an install... or use W10.


Yep, and the same applies for Win8, too.  And yes, I did the review. LuLz.

It's been some time that these problems have been an issue.. the same happens with X99 at times too, depending on how the USB is wired. No driver for the controller on the install disk = no USB devices.


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 7, 2015)

Heh, must have been lost in translation from Canadian English (ehh?) to USA English... hahaha!



> I forgot to *mention*, and not sure if Dave did *in* the review (apologies if you did),



I did not ask if you did the review, but mentioned what I was saying IN the reivew.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 7, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Heh, must have been lost in translation from Canadian English (ehh?) to USA English... hahaha!
> 
> 
> 
> I did not ask if you did the review, but mentioned what I was saying IN the reivew.


Sheesh, my bad, and no, I didn't mention it. I used WIn10 for the review, but I did test out Win7, Win8, and Win 8.1 installs as well, since our cooler reviewer wants this board for his test bench, but needed certain features.


----------



## Delta6326 (Aug 7, 2015)

@cadaveca do you have a Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7? I'm debating this MSI and the Gigabyte.

Going to have 2x m.2 Samsung EVO's and need atleast 4+ usb's


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 7, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> Sheesh, my bad, and no, I didn't mention it. I used WIn10 for the review, but I did test out Win7, Win8, and Win 8.1 installs as well, since our cooler reviewer wants this board for his test bench, but needed certain features.


Yeah, that bios option in this board really makes me feel like ASUS and EVGA screwed the pooch big time. Having to slipstream USB drives into an install disk is a PITA. BIG plus there for this board and W7 users...


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 7, 2015)

Delta6326 said:


> @cadaveca do you have a Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming 7? I'm debating this MSI and the Gigabyte.
> 
> Going to have 2x m.2 Samsung EVO's and need atleast 4+ usb's


Gigabyte is sending me a board, probably GAMING G1. I have a tracking number, but not a board yet.


----------



## Delta6326 (Aug 8, 2015)

@cadaveca I was looking and couldn't tell in the fan page if the fans are NOT PWN but 3pin can you still adjust them via the software with voltage control or something? Looking to get these would have them connected in groups of 3 front 2 front, 2 CPU, 1 back, do you think they can support enough juice from the fan headers or only 2 per header?

I also like the MSI M5 Looks like a M7 killer if you don't need a few "gimmicky features" and I/O cover.
And the G45 is the same as the M5 with only no Covers on the Audio chips and slightly different heatsink
M5






G45


----------



## beccahoo (Aug 11, 2015)

Hi!
Thanks for the review and for everyone's comment.

Could you guys help me choose between and specify why?
A) Asus Z170 Pro Gaming Socket LGA1151 ATX Motherboard - 
http://www.centrecom.com.au/asus-z170-pro-gaming-socket-lga1151-atx-motherboard-ddr4
B) MSI Z170A Gaming Pro LGA1151 ATX Motherboard - DDR4
http://www.centrecom.com.au/msi-z170a-gaming-pro-lga1151-atx-motherboard-ddr4

I have a friend who says MSI makes excellent motherboards and asus is known for graphics cards. Price point these two boards are the same and I don't want to spend more than the $279.

I plan to get back to gaming and have decided to buy either the i5 skylark or the i7..skipping gen 4 since it's more pricey than 6th gen skylark!

Thanks for your help! I am going to the shops in 12 hours!


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 11, 2015)

Same stuff different piles man... grab the cheaper one if they both fit your needs features wise as that is the only difference most people will know. 

Skylark, lol, these CPUs are not old Buicks... . Its called SkyLAKE.


----------



## inversion (Aug 16, 2015)

I installed Win 7 on the MSI Z170A Gaming Pro motherboard. My Win 7 install disc did not recognize the USB 2.0 or USB 3.0 ports on this motherboard so in order to install Win 7, i had to use an old keyboard with a PS/2 connecter to get through the install process. Once Win 7 was installed, I installed the USB Drivers from the motherboard cd and could then plug my USB mouse and USB keyboard back in. I then upgraded to Win10 with no problems.​
My motherboard is not the exact model as this review, but they are similar and this thread is the only one i've seen mentioning the no USB issue with Win 7 installs. I hope this helps.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 16, 2015)

inversion said:


> I installed Win 7 on the MSI Z170A Gaming Pro motherboard. My Win 7 install disc did not recognize the USB 2.0 or USB 3.0 ports on this motherboard so in order to install Win 7, i had to use an old keyboard with a PS/2 connecter to get through the install process. Once Win 7 was installed, I installed the USB Drivers from the motherboard cd and could then plug my USB mouse and USB keyboard back in. I then upgraded to Win10 with no problems.​
> My motherboard is not the exact model as this review, but they are similar and this thread is the only one i've seen mentioning the no USB issue with Win 7 installs. I hope this helps.



There is a switch in BIOS for WIn7.8 install that would have made the process easier for you. Some other brands do not have this, but I know for sure that this board does. So amybe check your own BIOS to see if it is there?

Screenshot:


----------



## inversion (Aug 16, 2015)

cadaveca said:


> There is a switch in BIOS for WIn7.8 install that would have made the process easier for you. Some other brands do not have this, but I know for sure that this board does. So amybe check your own BIOS to see if it is there?
> 
> Screenshot:


Thanks cadaveca! Will note this in case I need to reinstall Win 7. Sux those options are disabled as the default.


----------

