GIGABYTE AX370 Gaming K7 AM4 Motherboard Review @ [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
54,429
GIGABYTE AX370 Gaming K7 AM4 Motherboard Review

GIGABYTE’s AX370 Gaming K7 is in many ways the motherboard the AX370 Gaming 5 should have been. GIGABYTE has a habit of creating multiple SKUs with differences that are so minor that one can’t help but wonder why two separate models exist when they are almost indistinguishable from one another.
 
Nice review seems like a very good board. Very nice to see that Gigabyte has tried to address some of the memory issues with the EZOT.

About the DPC latency issue is that with both Nvidia and AMD videocards (I saw you only tested with Nvidia)?
 
I know these motherboard manufacturers have some wacky stuff going on. I just seen the Asus X370 CH6 Extreme edition. I looked at the specs and its identical to the Hero version, except it has some sort of special backplate cover.

And they want $350 for it. So a $70 dollar backplate you get . WTF
 
Motley said:
I know these motherboard manufacturers have some wacky stuff going on. I just seen the Asus X370 CH6 Extreme edition. I looked at the specs and its identical to the Hero version, except it has some sort of special backplate cover.

And they want $350 for it. So a $70 dollar backplate you get . WTF
Click to expand...


asus crosshair extreme vs hero differences:

extreme comes with 802.11AC wireless hero doesn't.
extreme has LED lit audio jacks
extreme has 2xM.2 socket 3 while the hero only has 1
extreme has the aura lighting feature crap, hero doesn't.
hero has 8 USB 3.0 gen 1 ports on the back panel extreme has 6(due to pre-installed wifi antenna jacks)
hero has an M.2 wifi slot on the backpanel extreme doesn't for obvious reasons.
extreme has extra radiator fan headers, hero doesn't.
extreme comes with way more accessories as well.

there's your 70 dollar difference..

pretty sure there were a few other things as well but the order in which things are placed are different for each boards spec page and i got sick of switching back and forth between tabs to find things.
 
Extreme versus hero is easy enough to spot the differences, M.2 being the most obvious. But I spent probably an hour trying to figure out the difference between the k5 and k7, and all I could really find was the the k7 claiming 3400 ddr4 support, while the k5 tops out at 3200. Thanks to this review, I now know it is do to that B-clock generator.

As a general rule however, none of the x370 boards do a good job differentiating themselves.
 
Another great review. Glad seeing the platform maturing and working better. Also having the M.2 pcie lanes having a more direct access by CPU frees up the chipset from having to compete or having contentions with a fast M2 drive. Personally I like Gigabytes software that comes in mini app like applications, allowing to load what one wants. To me ASUS software is somewhat bloated with most stuff I would not use. As for OCing I too prefer just using the bios vice software as well. The price looks outstanding for this board as well.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
Nice review seems like a very good board. Very nice to see that Gigabyte has tried to address some of the memory issues with the EZOT.

About the DPC latency issue is that with both Nvidia and AMD videocards (I saw you only tested with Nvidia)?
Click to expand...

Seems like HPET is the culprit for high DPC latency.
I can not post the link, but a google shearch with the words ryzen hpet dpc latency will show the link.

Thank you for the review [H]ard|OCP!
 
Last edited:
Nice review, my gaming 5 gets very hot also, in the NZXT s340 elite it is a challenge to keep it cool.
 
noko said:
Another great review. Glad seeing the platform maturing and working better. Also having the M.2 pcie lanes having a more direct access by CPU frees up the chipset from having to compete or having contentions with a fast M2 drive. Personally I like Gigabytes software that comes in mini app like applications, allowing to load what one wants. To me ASUS software is somewhat bloated with most stuff I would not use. As for OCing I too prefer just using the bios vice software as well. The price looks outstanding for this board as well.
Click to expand...

Regarding M.2 going straight to the CPU, it doesn't make any difference in my testing across all the platforms with a single M.2 drive. At least, not on any drive I've tried it with. RAID 0 is another matter entirely, but that's a mess as well considering you can't create a bootable NVMe RAID array on either X299 or X399.
 
dook43 said:
Why are some CH6 tests listed with 2933 RAM and some with 3200 RAM?
Click to expand...
That is a mistake on mine and Dan_D parts. We will get it corrected going forward. All tests were run on this board with 3200MHz RAM.
 
Curious how much OC'ing the ram to 3200 affected performance. (Charts they stated everything was run at 2133Mhz Stock setting)
 
shad0w4life said:
Curious how much OC'ing the ram to 3200 affected performance. (Charts they stated everything was run at 2133Mhz Stock setting)
Click to expand...

Subsystem testing was run at stock settings. The benchmarks are run at the settings shown in the graphs.
 
This is the board I went with. Was up in the air over it or a Tai-chi. Dual BIOS and reported easy out of box high RAM performance swayed me (and it is my go to brand).
Nice review crew. One question is the blender results. The K5 seems so far back compared to the K7 and ROG that I have to think there is some sort of error there. That is a massive difference for a board that is virtually dead even in every other bench.
 
funkydmunky said:
This is the board I went with. Was up in the air over it or a Tai-chi. Dual BIOS and reported easy out of box high RAM performance swayed me (and it is my go to brand).
Nice review crew. One question is the blender results. The K5 seems so far back compared to the K7 and ROG that I have to think there is some sort of error there. That is a massive difference for a board that is virtually dead even in every other bench.
Click to expand...

We've seen a few oddiites on the benchmarks here and there. The results can shift dramatically with different UEFI versions depending on the underlying AGESA code. Generally I'd say not to sweat benchmark results because they don't matter. I still say that, but keep in mind that your mileage may vary a lot by the UEFI you use.
 
I find the "K7" in the name to be somewhat amusing/puzzling.

It just makes me think of the original Athlon.
 
Anyone have a good link to a tutorial on tightening the RAM timings on this or any other X370 board?
Highly tweaked RAM seems to matter more then CPU clock for this platform.
 
Quick question: Did you guys run into an issue with the USB drivers in Windows 10? As in are they supposed to be marked as Microsoft or really really from AMD? Reason why is I'm trying to determine if my USB issues (ports shutting down) are board or driver related. I currently switched one of the hubs in Windows to a Windows 7 driver after looking up the issue but...that doesn't seem right. I mean it works at the moment but I want to be 100% sure.
 
I have not had any USB ports issues in Windows 10 with any AM4 or socket TR4 motherboards.
 
Hmm. I smell an issue with my board then. I'll check some more (especially USB 2.0 devices).
 
BTW, drivers from the vendor may be marked as "Microsoft" if those drivers were submitted to Microsoft during the OS'es development or the development of OS updates such as service packs. That's what the default Windows drivers for a given piece of hardware tend to look like.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1624603/rog-crosshair-vi-overclocking-thread/20660#post_26178558

Be ware that this thread is littered with optimized timings for single rank and dual rank nearly all for Samsung B die. That first post by the Stilt is just the start.
Click to expand...
OMG! They need to learn to break their threads down. Once your in the 1000's of posts, unless it is topical, WTF!
I do appreciate the link, thank you, and I hope? to gain some info there, but wow, needle in a hay stack.
Break your threads down folks. For posterity sake. :)
 
The one thing that did stand out is that this board runs very hot. I measured temperatures on the power components...
Click to expand...
So the heatsinks, while mounted properly, have a poor design?
I get that impression from many motherboards. Heatsink design is more looks than function.
 
Olle P said:
So the heatsinks, while mounted properly, have a poor design?
I get that impression from many motherboards. Heatsink design is more looks than function.
Click to expand...

They usually all perform about the same, or rather one one end of the spectrum or the other. For the mainstream segment boards it's usually around 110F or so and the worst ones get upwards of about 123F give or take a few degrees. The HEDT segment is much worse with some of those hitting the high 130's and the low 140's. I try to check the temperatures on review boards but I don't always remember to measure the MOSFET cooler temps.
 
I found that the sink on the K5 wasn't terrible (plenty of surface area) but airflow around it was the biggest issue (large flat surfaces plus a shroud don't make it easy for air to get around). Heatpipes may have helped a bit (looks like they considered them and then left them out of the final design due to cost), but probably not much.
 
Nimisys said:
Extreme versus hero is easy enough to spot the differences, M.2 being the most obvious. But I spent probably an hour trying to figure out the difference between the k5 and k7, and all I could really find was the the k7 claiming 3400 ddr4 support, while the k5 tops out at 3200. Thanks to this review, I now know it is do to that B-clock generator.

As a general rule however, none of the x370 boards do a good job differentiating themselves.
Click to expand...
The K5 has a clock generator. I'm going to assume you meant the gaming 5, since the article doesn't compare the K5. I hate all the motherboard manufacturers for changing just one letter in their product names for differentiation. It's bad enough they don't describe their product features well, then people confuse them when describing them to others...
 
Nobu said:
The K5 has a clock generator. I'm going to assume you meant the gaming 5, since the article doesn't compare the K5. I hate all the motherboard manufacturers for changing just one letter in their product names for differentiation. It's bad enough they don't describe their product features well, then people confuse them when describing them to others...
Click to expand...
you are right the Gaming 5. as far as i can tell from the spec comparison, the only difference is the oc ram support of 3600 (k7) vs 3200 (g5). the K5 is actually under-specced from the G5, missing the killer NIC and extended Audio Codecs. it is confusing as hell. http://www.gigabyte.us/Comparison/Result/2?pids=6167,6228,6242
 
It is confusing. The K5 is a different beast. The Gaming 5 and Gaming K7 are the two that are virtually identical. The only difference is the clock generator and the color of the heat sinks and plastic cladding on the motherboard. There are also one or two BIOS differences to. That said, I think the K7 is absolutely worth it over the Gaming 5 as those differences really changed how I felt about the board.
 
Dan_D said:
It is confusing. The K5 is a different beast. The Gaming 5 and Gaming K7 are the two that are virtually identical. The only difference is the clock generator and the color of the heat sinks and plastic cladding on the motherboard. There are also one or two BIOS differences to. That said, I think the K7 is absolutely worth it over the Gaming 5 as those differences really changed how I felt about the board.
Click to expand...
what's weird is that i can't find anything on their site mentioning the clock generator. unless i blew past it, it's not listed on the item page or on their comparison page i posted. looking at their comparison page, you really are left wondering why to get the K7 over the G5, when they otherwise identical. Good job to you and Kyle for finding the significant difference between the two
 
Nimisys said:
what's weird is that i can't find anything on their site mentioning the clock generator. unless i blew past it, it's not listed on the item page or on their comparison page i posted. looking at their comparison page, you really are left wondering why to get the K7 over the G5, when they otherwise identical. Good job to you and Kyle for finding the significant difference between the two
Click to expand...

Their product overview page lists it as "Turbo B-Clock" or something like that.
 
you are right, though they don't list in their comparison page. ridiculous.
 
Dan_D said:
It is confusing. The K5 is a different beast. The Gaming 5 and Gaming K7 are the two that are virtually identical. The only difference is the clock generator and the color of the heat sinks and plastic cladding on the motherboard. There are also one or two BIOS differences to. That said, I think the K7 is absolutely worth it over the Gaming 5 as those differences really changed how I felt about the board.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would have gotten the 5 or k7 if I had known just how much was missing (from the bios mostly, but also some hardware overclocking features like llc, and a physical switch for the bios). The k5 is a good board, but not really a good overclocking board.
 
This is new. On the Gigabyte K7 page, "AORUS is offering a tested and proven platform that ensures proper compatibility with profiles up to 4133MHz and beyond."
That is quite the advancement. CL vs. pure clock, I don't know which will plays out best. Either way it ramps Ryzen performance.
IMO I think latency wins.
 
funkydmunky said:
This is new. On the Gigabyte K7 page, "AORUS is offering a tested and proven platform that ensures proper compatibility with profiles up to 4133MHz and beyond."
That is quite the advancement. CL vs. pure clock, I don't know which will plays out best. Either way it ramps Ryzen performance.
IMO I think latency wins.
Click to expand...

Well if that was on 1 core with 1 dimm that is very expensive. I have seen some posts about people having trouble with 3600 mhz some doubting AM4 can go beyond that (practical solution)
 
Dan_D said:
It is confusing. The K5 is a different beast. The Gaming 5 and Gaming K7 are the two that are virtually identical. The only difference is the clock generator and the color of the heat sinks and plastic cladding on the motherboard. There are also one or two BIOS differences to. That said, I think the K7 is absolutely worth it over the Gaming 5 as those differences really changed how I felt about the board.
Click to expand...
Almost all of the UEFI BIOS differences you noticed between the Gaming 5 & K7 (pretty much everything except those related to the external BCLK generator) are due to your experiences with the G-5 having been with BIOS & AGESA versions dramatically out of date by this point. With both boards updated to the latest BIOS (F9a iirc) with AGESA 1.0.0.6b the available options and layout are practically identical outside the BCLK stuff. (I have the 5, my friend has the K7) This includes all the advanced memory sub-timing settings and other things you noticed were different.
It's the next Gigabyte AM4 model down that has the severely gimped UEFI BIOS vs the 5/K7; this being the X370 Gaming K5. Despite having the X370 chipset, it's missing nearly all of the "enthusiast" BIOS settings present on the other 2, and even many "basic" settings/features are AWOL. It's like they simply took the power phase design & BIOS from their B350 boards and plopped them on a gutted version of their X370 board design, simply for kicks and with next to no changes.
That the even further down X370 K3 lacks all these options as well doesn't bother me nearly as much though. This because with it's much cheaper build/price and differentiated design (not misleadingly nigh identical to it's VASTLY superior equipped/feature & setting laden older brothers), it at-least makes some sense as a product (essentially a nicer B350 board, but with the X370 chipset instead & therefore SLI/mGPU support).
 
Last edited:
Cooe said:
Almost all of the UEFI BIOS differences you noticed between the Gaming 5 & K7 (pretty much everything except those related to the external BCLK generator) are due to your experiences with the G-5 having been with BIOS & AGESA versions dramatically out of date by this point. With both boards updated to the latest BIOS (F9a iirc) with AGESA 1.0.0.6b the available options and layout are practically identical outside the BCLK stuff. (I have the 5, my friend has the K7) This includes all the advanced memory sub-timing settings and other things you noticed were different. It's the next Gigabyte AM4 model down that has the severely gimped UEFI BIOS vs the 5/K7; this being the X370 Gaming K5. Despite having the X370 chipset, it's missing nearly all of the "enthusiast" BIOS settings present on the other 2, and even many "basic" settings/features are AWOL. It's like they simply took the power phase design & BIOS from their B350 boards and plopped them on a "cheap" X370 board instead, just for kicks with next to no changes.
Click to expand...

That's good to hear. I knew the BCLK stuff would be an issue because the BCLK isn't adjustable on the Gaming 5 and it is on the K7. Secondly, I did notice and mentioned the memory settings that weren't present on the earlier board. I did the Gaming 5 article first, so naturally those settings weren't there.
 
Dan_D said:
That's good to hear. I knew the BCLK stuff would be an issue because the BCLK isn't adjustable on the Gaming 5 and it is on the K7. Secondly, I did notice and mentioned the memory settings that weren't present on the earlier board. I did the Gaming 5 article first, so naturally those settings weren't there.
Click to expand...
Haha yeah, that's what I was trying to say. They were missing cause you guys ended up reviewing the Gaming 5 during all the Ryzen 7 launch madness way back in March iirc (I remember cause I read every review I could find while I waited for my board to ship; was up and running March 13th). Thankfully as you experienced with the K7, Gigabyte's flagship X370 BIOS (5/K7; exc. the BCLK settings) is much, MUCH more fully featured at this point (though still far from Intel equivalents) than it was at launch.
The major problem now, is that this now relatively comprehensive BIOS is still limited solely to their 2, top-end AM4 boards. You lose such a massive TON of BIOS features & settings dropping from the 5 down to the K5 despite both using the same X370 chipset (meaning important settings you'll actually use/need; not a single potentially useful, but realistically minor difference like the external BCLK generator on the K7 and not the 5), that between the immensely better equipped/enthusiast ready 5 and the much cheaper K3, it practically single-handedly ruins it's largely admiral hardware & design.
In actuality, the K5's basic layout and current gen "Aorus" design (Z270/AM4) are just about the only things that it actually has in common with it's elder brothers. In most other ways it's just a dressed up K3 in "Aorus garb" with some better minor components & features (and the K3's pretty much one of their B350 board's, but w/ an X370 chipset slapped on instead)). For some people, the K7's added BCLK generator isn't worth he extra $20 it costs ($210 vs $190), for others, it is. On the other hand, the $30 it takes to go from the $160 K5 to the $190 5 is NEVER, EVER worth skipping; FAR more then the small $ gap would ever suggest, but he complete opposite is true of the atm, also $30 gap from the K3 to K5 though. That's almost never worth doing; either get the K3 if you really need cheap X370 board ($130 atm) and put that $30 towards something else, jump up to the 5 or K7, pick a B350 model, or look at other brands.
 
Last edited:
Cooe said:
Haha yeah, that's what I was trying to say. They were missing cause you guys ended up reviewing the Gaming 5 during all the Ryzen 7 launch madness way back in March iirc (I remember cause I read every review I could find while I waited for my board to ship; was up and running March 13th). Thankfully as you experienced with the K7, Gigabyte's flagship X370 BIOS (5/K7; exc. the BCLK settings) is much, MUCH more fully featured at this point (though still far from Intel equivalents) than it was at launch.
The major problem now, is that this now relatively comprehensive BIOS is still limited solely to their 2, top-end AM4 boards. You lose such a massive TON of BIOS features & settings dropping from the 5 down to the K5 despite both using the same X370 chipset (meaning important settings you'll actually use/need; not a single potentially useful, but realistically minor difference like the external BCLK generator on the K7 and not the 5), that between the immensely better equipped/enthusiast ready 5 and the much cheaper K3, it practically single-handedly ruins it's largely admiral hardware & design.
Click to expand...
Yes it sounds to me as if Gigabyte, and a few others, should have simplified their line-ups. Too many boards. Why when such a new platform require so much work from the bios teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cooe
like this
funkydmunky said:
Yes it sounds to me as if Gigabyte, and a few others, should have simplified their line-ups. Too many boards. Why when such a new platform require so much work from the bios teams.
Click to expand...
This this, 1000x this. With the K3 $30 cheaper these days, the K5 serves absolutely NO POINT for any target audience aside from "willing to spend $30 extra bucks pretty much solely for aesthetical reasons, but at the same time, totally unwilling to pay another $30 more for a dramatically improved board & BIOS from top to bottom crowd", but I'm not quite sure such a person even actually exists.
Boards like this (seemingly designed to appeal to completely non-existent/ridiculous market segments rather than the other way around) are sadly a dime a dozen on AM4. (Cheaper socket, much cheaper chipset's w/ OC'ing support (esp B350 vs Z270), AMD's less stringent certification/licensing system, and all on one explodingly popular platform = a market utterly swamped with mobo models, many of which are nigh identical outside very minute differences; which yup, that's sure not confusing at all -_- ...).
Don't get me wrong, the 5 & K7 situation is definitely excessive as well, but honestly doesn't bother me 1/2 as much as that totally bonkers K3 > K5 <<< 5 nonsense; at least those 2 ever so slightly different variants of GB's flagship X370 design, both serve a legit (if niche) purpose/target audience (aka those for who'd rather save $20 than have BCLK OC'ing, + those who simply prefer it's black on white vs white on black color. Then vice versa).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top