Help me decide between ASRock and Gigabyte AMD board

I've narrowed my search to: ASRock AB350 Pro4: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/AB350 Pro4/

ASRock X470 Taichi: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X470%20Taichi/index.us.asp#Specification

Gigabyte X370 K7: https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/GA-AX370-Gaming-K7-rev-10#kf

Gigabyte X470 AORUS GAMING 7 WIFI : https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/X470-AORUS-GAMING-7-WIFI-rev-10#kf

My build will be a Ryzen 5 1600X 3.6 GHz 6 core. It will be a light workstation and video editing machine.

My criteria for deciding is:
The ASRock AB350 is fairly basic, but still mostly meets my basic needs and is on sale now where I live. It's not quite as endowed with ports though as the X370

I've never used the bios or fan controls in either board. I only have experience with Asus. Would love to hear from anyone who has recently used the bios in both ASRock and Gigabyte, and which they preferred.

:EDITED: linked to the wrong boards.

Those X399 board are for Threadripper, not a Ryzen 5. Completely different socket and not compatible.

Thanks for pointing that out.

From everything I've read and heard, the ASUS Crosshair VII is the way to go, and given the amount of additional features it comes with as it is, I'd be surprised if ECC isn't on one of them. If it isn't, I'd almost be surprised if getting it added to the BIOS wouldn't be too hard if you asked Elmor nicely (ASUS employee who frequents Overclockers.net forums). Might be overkill for your situation but it's peace of mind and future-proofing to the extreme

THAT being said, if it really is not anything you are willing to consider, then from what else I've seen and heard, the Gigabytes these days are decent in terms of build quality but rubbish when it comes to BIOS, and their features are less than stellar.
ASRock has come from being a "wouldn't ever consider" vendor to a "proud to own" one, which is honestly not something I can ever have imagined I'd hear myself saying... lmao When it comes to AM4 boards, the Taichi seems to be the one to go with when it came to the X370, second only to the Crosshair. And I can only imagine it, once again, is the case with the X470 Taichi.

Looks like the memory specs for the Asus ROG Crosshair VII Hero say non-ECC: https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VII-HERO/specifications/

I get the feeling you've probably already tracked down and read this review over at HardwareCanucks.

I just finished reading it and it seemed to confirm what I was expecting to find, so I suggest reading it too.

But to quote a key part of the conclusion:
I'm not sure to what degree you're after to use the ECC for, but sounds like the motherboards will probably all be supporting ECC in basic form, alas, it won't be utilized to Server Standards and do all the things you may be after. If all you're after are "correcting most soft-errors (1bit)", then you're no doubt fine. If you're after the computer halting operation when it encounters an uncorrectable (2bit) error... you're no doubt SOL, and may need to look to Threadripper given they're actual server chips.

Also I found it rather curious on ASUS's specifications that they had an * after the memory portion, but the only reference to an * was above the memory and said to reference the CPU Support list, which we know Ryzen has ECC support enabled (albeit unvalidated by AMD)

I think for the 1600X all of the X470 boards are overkill unless you wanted one for specific features and I'm not sure if any of them support ecc.

Personally I would avoid ecc on Ryzen because support from the board manufacturers for it seems poor, if I absolutely needed ecc I would look into threadripper. That's not to say it can't be done, just that I don't think it's worth it.

If your dead set on ecc I would look at x370 or b350 boards from Asrock or Asus that specify ecc support, pay attention to the QVL lists for the memory, and make sure BIOS updates haven't broken ecc support on that board.

The boards I linked to are explicitly specified on ASRock's and Gigabyte's websites as having ECC memory support. I've been reading the ASRock support forums and other forums and there seems to be some complaints about the B350 and X370 boards regarding ECC. For some people they can't seem to enable ECC, while others can. I haven't seen any complaints about X470 boards yet, but that may be because they're newer. However, I did read one complaint about Threadripper and ECC but that was almost a year ago. I don't have a need for threadripper, and don't want a hot 180W CPU in my rig.The X470 boards have more and better features (e.g. M.2 heatsink, higher quality onboard sound codecs, etc). This, plus lack of ECC complaints so far, is why I decided to look at the X470 boards. I'm also still interested in the more plain ASRock AB350 Pro4 board.

Peat Moss said:

I don't have a need for threadripper, and don't want a hot 180W CPU in my rig.The X470 boards have more and better features (e.g. M.2 heatsink, higher quality onboard sound codecs, etc). This, plus lack of ECC complaints so far, is why I decided to look at the X470 boards. I'm also still interested in the more plain ASRock AB350 Pro4 board.

Click to expand...

I can appreciate not having a need for TR, given we're not sure exactly what your goals for the system even are... lol That being said, if you're worried about power draw, the TR doesn't seem to be really drawing a whole hell of a lot in comparison to an Ryzen 7 1800X for example, though the 1950X and 1920X both seem to be within a very small margain of each other. So as such I would suspect the 1900X would also be coming in around the same, which is kinda interesting. Which when following up on finding that curiosity I've finally tracked down a single website who has provided power consumption for both Ryzen and TR (therefore, directly comparable results due to the same testing method).

Granted, there's a 100W higher consumption when going to the TR (even when idling), but it's really not bad, considering!



If it's TEMPS you're worried about, well the 180W TDP is a bit shocking when compared to a Ryzen 5, no denying, but it's not like TR is some sort of furnace, thankfully!

I'd provide something for comparison from the Ryzen side but, surprisingly and sadly, on the sites that provide temps on TR they don't provide temps for Ryze, not even [H]! Or in Tom's case, not ones that we can directly compare since they displayed the Tctrl reading. But, if you take their 78C and subtract the +20C offset, you are left with 58C which is....

(Keep in mind that you need to be paying attention to the purple "Tdie" line, not the red "Tctrl" as that is the offset-temperature to keep fans in check, so not what it's really operating at.)
... Which is right in line with what TR hits at stock settings!


Anyways, as I said, you know better what you need than I do. I'm just here to try and provide what info I have and the opinions I have formed. So I can appreciate not having a need for, or even desire for, any of the things that comes with Threadripper, which most importantly is the increased cost of it. Yet, if ECC is insanely important to what you'll be doing then it may be prudent to actually call the board makers to verify, not just DIMM support but the extent of which the ECC is supported, inquiring about both Ryzen and Threadripper. And at the end of the day, if ECC is super super important, well you may need to consider just getting the cheapest EPYC chip and motherboard....

The first power consumption charts make no sense. Why is the Ryzen 5 1600X listed twice? (i.e. 57W, 73W idle....158W, 203W load )

_"Granted, there's a 100W higher consumption when going to the TR (even when idling), but it's really not bad, considering!"_ Um...yes it is. "Considering" what, exactly?

_"well the 180W TDP is a bit shocking when compared to a Ryzen 5, no denying,but it's not like TR is some sort of furnace, thankfully!"_ Yes, it is shocking, and yes, comparatively speaking, it IS like a furnace.

One of the reasons why I don't need or want a TR is precisely what you've proved, that the power and heat are way beyond the 1600X. It would mean having to buy a more expensive cooler, bigger PSU, more fans, etc.

Call the board makers? They don't even always know. That's actually what a lot of the complaints have been about.

Peat Moss said:

The first power consumption charts make no sense. Why is the Ryzen 5 1600X listed twice? (i.e. 57W, 73W idle....158W, 203W load )

Click to expand...

Logic would dictate that the second one is the Overclocked load and the first one is the Stock clocks, meaning it was simply mis-labeled on the chart. It's a common mistake you see on reviews. lol I mean it's obviously not going to be only drawing 57W at 3.95GHz when the stock one is drawing 73W

Um...yes it is. "Considering" what, exactly?

Click to expand...

Considering it has TWO fully functioning Ryzen dies active under the hood, but I'll gladly admit that I, too, goofed on my reading on the Ryzen chart. I took the bottom 1700 Overclocked as being the 1700X Stock, and so I was coming from a perspective of 238W load for a 1700X, to 313W load for the 1950X. Thus, I was under the impression it was only another ~70W increase for the TR having a complete additional die active. Alas, that's not the case and so we can sorta disregard my power draw argument entirely.

Yes, it is shocking, and yes, comparatively speaking, it IS like a furnace.

Click to expand...

If the ambient temp is static between the two tests then it isn't. Sadly they do not provide that metric on their TR test. However, and interesting point is that the Ryzen test has a custom water cooling setup, and the TR is just an off the shelf AOI setup, but both run at about 60C under the same load. (Their Ryzen test being 78C, - 20C due to being an 1800X, = 58C)

One of the reasons why I don't need or want a TR is precisely what you've proved, that the power and heat are way beyond the 1600X. It would mean having to buy a more expensive cooler, bigger PSU, more fans, etc.

Click to expand...

As I said, I have absolutely no clue what your workload is going to be for the system, so a bunch of my suggestions are based purely on speculation. As such, I presumed you were already going to be getting a ~600W PSU, so going up to 700-750W wouldn't really be a big price jump. Though I admit, cooling does offset a bit. For example the LiquidMaster Lite AIOs are really good and really cheap, and $40-50, but the Enermax that [H] gave praise is $115 :\ For some reason I thought they were only $80. Wouldn't need anymore fans, though.

Call the board makers? They don't even always know. That's actually what a lot of the complaints have been about.

Click to expand...

*shrug* dude.
Your choices are:
-Poll tons of website forums and gather lots of partial data in hopes of being able to form a complete, and more importantly, accurate picture.
-Call the manufacturers and ask to be transferred to a supervisor in the sales department, in hopes of getting on the horn with someone who has been employed long enough to have a clue.
-Buy a bunch of different boards and memory kits for Ryzen where ECC isn't even remotely a priority feature but generally is still electrically-connected on boards, in hopes of being able to create a functioning combo, which also has functioning ECC.

Otherwise, it's Threadripper, since AMD openly supports ECC on it.

I wash my hands of it though. I was only trying to help by trying to break it down for why TR wouldn't be a horrible consideration.

AMD openly supports ECC in almost all their Ryzen processors.

Peat Moss said:

AMD openly supports ECC in almost all their Ryzen processors.

Click to expand...

There is another person here on this forum which was looking at the same thing I don't think that he managed to find a motherboard which supports ECC for Ryzen.
Think it was drescherjm

https://hardforum.com/threads/x470-ecc-support.1960005/#post-1043623606

I may get the ASUS Prime X470-Pro depending on stock. The top Gigabyte board (X470 AORUS GAMING 7 WIFI) is also a consideration but I have no use for the wifi.

Peat Moss said:

AMD openly supports ECC in almost all their Ryzen processors.

Click to expand...

I dunno man, that's a real stretch IMO. To say they "support ECC in almost all their Ryzen processors" to me implies that they offer an open guarantee to it; thus, would accept an RMA if you couldn't get it working. On the flip-side, they have openly stated that the Ryzen is capable of ECC, but that for Ryzen they "are not validating the functionality of ECC" on those parts, it's up to the board makers, and as a result it'll be hit-or-miss. That was all on the first page of the Hardware Canucks article I linked, as Lisa seemed really quick to respond positively, despite clearly not being 100% of the picture:


That being said, if a board is designed "to specifications" for ECC, I have absolute confidence that Ryzen will handle it without issue. At the end of the day though, from what I've seen AMD only supports ECC on Threadripper and EPYC. However, whether or not the "Ryzen Pro" models are validated, I can't say as I've not read up on that product line at all.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here... Hoping for the best, preparing you for the worst.

drescherjm said:

I may get the ASUS Prime X470-Pro depending on stock. The top Gigabyte board (X470 AORUS GAMING 7 WIFI) is also a consideration but I have no use for the wifi.

Click to expand...

After nearly 6 hours of driving accross PA, I got the ASUS Prime Pro and the 2700 for ~415 +tax. I looked at RAM but MC only had DDR4 2400 16 GB EUDIMMS. I wanted DDR4 2666 8GB EDIMMS

Maybe 'support' is not quite the right word. AMD does enable ECC on most of their Ryzen processors.

I haven't come across any evidence they actively and officially support ECC for threadripper.

"Quad channel DDR4 with support for ECC for reliable throughput."
https://www.amd.com/en/products/ryzen-threadripper

After looking more carefully at reviews of the boards I mentioned I have narrowed it down to the ASRock X470 Taichi or the Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7. I've also decided to upgrade my choice of CPU to a 2nd gen Ryzen 5 2600X.

I like the Gigabyte's massive VRM heatsinks, as well as the use of a Sabre ess DAC, but the M.2 heatsink seems flimsy. Also, apparently there's a lot of needless sponsored junk settings in the UEFI.

The ASRock Taichi has HDMI out (which the Gigabyte doesn't) and has a comparatively more basic UEFI. It's also a bit less expensive.

Hmmm....

Threadripper officially supports ECC unbuffered dimms and you can go as high as the IMC + B-dies are capable of.

Epyc is ECC registered rimms (department of redundancy department) but locked speeds based on configuration, fully populated with biggest modules can be as low as 1866, though up to at least 256GB at 2666 is possible so its actually pretty good for a server part. Still a little sad because B-die is available in rimms too, I bet those 32 cores would love a faster fabric.

AM4 consumer does not intentionally disable it but no validation from AMD. Ryzen 1xxx confirmed on good board/ram/bios combos, 2xxx probably good. 2xxxG is weird, seems like it requires extra bios effort no one is doing so far, not even my usual favorite Asrock.


All of these cases require the motherboard OEM to put the right hooks in the bios and not fuck it up. I believe the default TR AGESA/etc code platform from AMD has it and the vendors can probably get specific support if they run into problems making that function work on TR. On AM4 they probably get an official /shrug but likely unofficial engineer help, especially with Ryzen in general being AMD's proud baby.

PS fuck intel, ECC should've just been the god damn normal setup ages ago. Literally every other bus in your computer has some form of encoding and correction built into it.

Peat Moss said:

After looking more carefully at reviews of the boards I mentioned I have narrowed it down to the ASRock X470 Taichi or the Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7. I've also decided to upgrade my choice of CPU to a 2nd gen Ryzen 5 2600X.

I like the Gigabyte's massive VRM heatsinks, as well as the use of a Sabre ess DAC, but the M.2 heatsink seems flimsy. Also, apparently there's a lot of needless sponsored junk settings in the UEFI.

The ASRock Taichi has HDMI out (which the Gigabyte doesn't) and has a comparatively more basic UEFI. It's also a bit less expensive.

Hmmm....

Click to expand...

Taichi is a great motherboard, rock solid since day one.