GIGABYTE Z170X Gaming 7 LGA 1151 Motherboard Review @ [H]

Hi all. So question about this mobo. I'm running on my current system 2 SSD's (for OS and Games) and an HDD spindle drive (for storage). That drive is also an older one (Western Digital Caviar SE16 640GB SATA drive). Because this drive is so old and the SATA controller for this board only runs AHCI and RAID (and not IDE), will that old drive be even useable on this mobo? Thanks in advance for the answer. Out!
 
My son just purchased this board. Just put it together last night with win 10 and seem pretty nice so far.

Build:

Gigabyte Z170X Gaming 7
6700K proc
noctua D14 cooler
Antec Three Hundred Two case
EVGA 850W modular PSU
2x8GB GSkill Trident Series RAM 3400
Samsung 950 Pro 256 M.2 SSD
EVGA GTX 970 GPU
 
Just had a sata port go dead while playing Diablo. First time something on a motherboard has broken on me. Not impressed Gigabyte.
 
I post the following about this particular mobo due to many user reviews on both Amazon and Newegg both posting the same thing: "My motherboard's onboard audio from Creative is all messed up. I RMA'ed it back to the manufacturer." I did a little digging on this and discovered a couple of things. First before I continue I am believing that all onboard sound problems users have had with this board were when attempting to install the chip into Windows 10.

Now that the disclaimer is out of the way, this is what I've discovered: 1. Creative themselves do not have a driver for the Sound Core 3D onboard sound chip. I checked over their site. While they have drivers for the similar Recon3D chip based sound card my gut tells me that driver is not compatible with this board. 2. When checking Gigabyte's site themselves they have drivers for Windows 10 for the onboard sound but...pay attention to the driver version number. For the Gaming 7 it reads "RC2". I get the feeling many of you know where this is headed. For those that don't, "RC2" stands for "Release Candidate 2". That's right. The driver is a BETA. There is no official WHQL for this onboard chip yet. Knowing Creative it might be a while until we see one. As it is BETA expect issues of some kind.

I would tell anyone who's gonna get this board and use the onboard sound (like I am cause my X-Fi Xtreme Gamer won't fit this board [it's standard old school PCI]) that this is how I'm gonna try to make this work (hopefully it will). 1. Update the mobo's BIOS to the latest version. 2. Install the driver in Windows 10. 3. (here's the kicker) When you install your video card...if your video card has an HD Audio Driver: do not install it! Do a custom install of the video card driver and leave the HD Audio Driver out. If Microsoft (in their infinite wisdom [and me being semi-sarcastic towards Microsoft]) decides to load an HD Audio Driver with your card (those sneaky people) do a clean install of nVIDIA or AMD's driver leaving that driver out.

Why number 3 there is so important is even if you're not using a video card's HD Audio Driver that doesn't mean it won't cause problems if it's left installed and left alone. A lot of these users who RMA'ed their boards I feel probably didn't flash the BIOS (kinda likely) or they left the HD Audio Driver on their video card installed into Windows and assumed it would be okay (a lot more likely). There you have it. Thanks and until next time I am out!

Quick Update: before I go, just checked the Win 7 driver for the onboard sound on this board too. It too is RC2. Out!
 
I am including my experience in here to see if anyone can help me. I own the Gaming 7 board and in and of itself, I am pleased with it. I have a I7-6700k that I am running in it and 4 x 8GB of DDR4 2400 speed G Skill ram. I did start with 2 x 8GB though and upgraded one month after I initially did the build.

Ok, the problem: I randomly am getting your overclock has failed on restart or starting up at default speeds and non XMP or XMP profiles. Ok, I decided today to do a little bit of investigation and this is what I am finding: No matter the settings, whether auto or fully manual, the settings are ignored and the memory sets itself to whatever it thinks is correct. I have placed the ram in slots one and three and the twrc claims channel 1 as 4 and channel 2 as 3. Now, they are both set to 4 and when I place them in slots 2 and 4, they read twrc as 4.

This problem above occurs whether I set everything to auto or manual. Now, I have also found that different settings are over riding what I place in the manual mode, even though they are not overclocked settings. Needless to say, it is very frustrating and is why I have been having issues for a while now.

All these readings are taking place in the bios although cpu z shows different readings from what the bios says is set. So, what do you guys think, ram, processor or board issue? I guess cutting edge can cut you sometimes and I am starting to wonder if I should have gone with an FX 9590 instead since they are on a stable, mature platform. (Just saying, not trying to start an argument, just kind of feeling regret.) Anyone else have these issues and how did you resolve it? Thanks.

Of course, no tech support is available today. :(
 
Turn XMP off and set everything, including the voltages to manual. For the timings you only need the basic 4 timings. You don't need to set the other shit. If it's not holding the settings, you need to make sure that you don't have EasyTune loading a profile, or the board using a profile that you didn't create or select. That is, what I suspect is happening here. Disable all the GIGABYTE software by going to the run menu, or a command prompt / powershell window and typing msconfig and hitting enter. Go to startup, and then task manager (Windows 10) and then disabling anything there from GIGABYTE.

In the BIOS, you really need to make sure that you aren't using the "Performance Upgrade" setting (auto-overclocking) and that a profile preset isn't being loaded that you may have accidentally created.
 
Dan_D said:
Turn XMP off and set everything, including the voltages to manual. For the timings you only need the basic 4 timings. You don't need to set the other shit. If it's not holding the settings, you need to make sure that you don't have EasyTune loading a profile, or the board using a profile that you didn't create or select. That is, what I suspect is happening here. Disable all the GIGABYTE software by going to the run menu, or a command prompt / powershell window and typing msconfig and hitting enter. Go to startup, and then task manager (Windows 10) and then disabling anything there from GIGABYTE.

In the BIOS, you really need to make sure that you aren't using the "Performance Upgrade" setting (auto-overclocking) and that a profile preset isn't being loaded that you may have accidentally created.
Click to expand...

Thanks, setting the frequency, voltage and main 4 timings manually seems to have fixed it. I have no idea what they have those other settings all over the bios but no explanation of what they do. Not even anything online that I could find.
 
Last edited:
Damn, sure enough, I get home, turn on the computer and now I get an incorrect configuration issue. Really frustrating to say the least especially when it only happens on boot up and always at random times. I am more and more thinking that I have defective hardware or a bad bug on the Gigabyte board.
 
Just pulled the trigger on this board, thanks to the review. I'll edit this post with my results. Hoping for 4.8 or thereabouts with h110 and a 6700k.

Got the newegg package with the trident Z 3400ddr4 and the chip. $689.99 out the door.

Thanks guys, for your thorough review! It is appreciated.
 
sprout2287 said:
Just pulled the trigger on this board, thanks to the review. I'll edit this post with my results. Hoping for 4.8 or thereabouts with h110 and a 6700k.

Got the newegg package with the trident Z 3400ddr4 and the chip. $689.99 out the door.

Thanks guys, for your thorough review! It is appreciated.
Click to expand...

4.8 is a difficult overclock to get IMO. I ended up having to settle for 4.7 with my h110, 6700k and Asus Deluxe board. Maybe if I wasn't using 4 sticks of ram I would be able to get 4.8. I don't know.
 
mls1995 said:
4.8 is a difficult overclock to get IMO. I ended up having to settle for 4.7 with my h110, 6700k and Asus Deluxe board. Maybe if I wasn't using 4 sticks of ram I would be able to get 4.8. I don't know.
Click to expand...

I've only seen 4.8GHz a couple of times and even then I don't know if it would work 24/7. It was on the bleeding edge of what the CPU could do each time.

sprout2287 said:
fingers are crossed. I can live with 4.7, if I have to.
Click to expand...

Good luck. You'll need it.
 
Do you think better cooling would help? I have been thinking about building another loop. Last one I had was in the old 1366 days. You guys ran a pretty beefy loop in your testing. Though, the new rev h110 does do pretty well comparatively.
 
sprout2287 said:
Do you think better cooling would help? I have been thinking about building another loop. Last one I had was in the old 1366 days. You guys ran a pretty beefy loop in your testing. Though, the new rev h110 does do pretty well comparatively.
Click to expand...

For the most part, better cooling always helps. Though sometimes you just hit the wall with what a particular CPU is capable of. My test 6700K can do 4.7GHz all day long at DDR4 2666MHz speeds. 4.7GHz At DDR4 3600MHz? Not so much.
 
Well, it appears that the new cpu may have fixed the issue but, I will not know for sure at least for a couple of days. However, the VCore is higher at default than the other cpu so, I will probably have to do some tweaking to see what is going on. (Load temp at default clocks and auto everything was 81C on the package temp.) I am using an Noctua NH-D15 which is mounted correctly but the voltage gets up to 1.39v at load which is way to high.

Edit: Oh, and I did reset the bios.
 
ManofGod said:
Thanks, setting the frequency, voltage and main 4 timings manually seems to have fixed it. I have no idea what they have those other settings all over the bios but no explanation of what they do. Not even anything online that I could find.
Click to expand...

That's usually all you have to tune. You don't need to go through the pages and pages of other settings. Frankly, I don't know what those do either.
 
Dan_D said:
That's usually all you have to tune. You don't need to go through the pages and pages of other settings. Frankly, I don't know what those do either.
Click to expand...

Turns out that is was the cpu anyways. However, I have not really had any time to really tweak the new cpu but it does work correctly now. :) (Intel RMA.) The only thing is, well I am doing a stress test with Intel Burn Test, the cpu will down clock to 4.4 GHz and then up to 4.6 GHz with each test, very strange. Still, I am pleased that the problem appears to be solved. ($25 rma fee is not too bad for an overnight shipment.)
 
Dan_D said:
For the most part, better cooling always helps. Though sometimes you just hit the wall with what a particular CPU is capable of. My test 6700K can do 4.7GHz all day long at DDR4 2666MHz speeds. 4.7GHz At DDR4 3600MHz? Not so much.
Click to expand...

Makes me even more satisfied with my 6700k that will do 4.7 with 4 ddr4 sticks at 3200MHz
 
ManofGod said:
Well, it appears that the new cpu may have fixed the issue but, I will not know for sure at least for a couple of days. However, the VCore is higher at default than the other cpu so, I will probably have to do some tweaking to see what is going on. (Load temp at default clocks and auto everything was 81C on the package temp.) I am using an Noctua NH-D15 which is mounted correctly but the voltage gets up to 1.39v at load which is way to high.

Edit: Oh, and I did reset the bios.
Click to expand...

Congrats! Glad you at least have a working system now!
 
ManofGod said:
Turns out that is was the cpu anyways. However, I have not really had any time to really tweak the new cpu but it does work correctly now. :) (Intel RMA.) The only thing is, well I am doing a stress test with Intel Burn Test, the cpu will down clock to 4.4 GHz and then up to 4.6 GHz with each test, very strange. Still, I am pleased that the problem appears to be solved. ($25 rma fee is not too bad for an overnight shipment.)
Click to expand...

Intel Burn in Test actually puts harsher work loads on the CPU than actual usage ever would. Burn in test tends to raise the temperatures higher than their normal operating range and this can cause throttling.
 
Dan_D said:
Intel Burn in Test actually puts harsher work loads on the CPU than actual usage ever would. Burn in test tends to raise the temperatures higher than their normal operating range and this can cause throttling.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that is something else I will have to get used to on the Intel platform. On AMD, advanced power management could be disabled but on this Intel platform, I do not see anything similar that can be disabled. (Probably best not to even if I could since it appears that the Intel CPU's cannot hold up to a beating like the AMD ones can.)
 
ManofGod said:
Thanks, that is something else I will have to get used to on the Intel platform. On AMD, advanced power management could be disabled but on this Intel platform, I do not see anything similar that can be disabled. (Probably best not to even if I could since it appears that the Intel CPU's cannot hold up to a beating like the AMD ones can.)
Click to expand...

You can turn off the SpeedStep and thermal protection in the UEFI. As for not holding up to a beating like the AMD CPUs, think again. If anything the Intel CPUs are far more difficult to kill. On the Intel side the platform is far more robust. Intel mandates strict VRD specifications guidelines which must be adhered to in order to get certification for Intel processor compatibility. Because Intel controls the chipset and CPU market to such a degree, motherboard manufacturers have far less control than you'd imagine. Intel mandates microcode updates and specs be met within a tight range. On the AMD side manufacturers can do pretty much what they want to as long as "it works." This is why you have motherboards that have a TDP rating that's too low for some CPUs, while others can handle them fine. On the Intel side, that shit doesn't fly.

The AMD CPUs can "take more" voltage because they are less efficient and require more power to begin with. AMD CPUs have a much higher TDP than their Intel counterparts. (220watt vs. 145watt on the HEDT CPUs) So I'm speaking strictly relative to their stock settings and thermal protection features of each platform.
 
Dan_D said:
You can turn off the SpeedStep and thermal protection in the UEFI. As for not holding up to a beating like the AMD CPUs, think again. If anything the Intel CPUs are far more difficult to kill. On the Intel side the platform is far more robust. Intel mandates strict VRD specifications guidelines which must be adhered to in order to get certification for Intel processor compatibility. Because Intel controls the chipset and CPU market to such a degree, motherboard manufacturers have far less control than you'd imagine. Intel mandates microcode updates and specs be met within a tight range. On the AMD side manufacturers can do pretty much what they want to as long as "it works." This is why you have motherboards that have a TDP rating that's too low for some CPUs, while others can handle them fine. On the Intel side, that shit doesn't fly.

The AMD CPUs can "take more" voltage because they are less efficient and require more power to begin with. AMD CPUs have a much higher TDP than their Intel counterparts. (220watt vs. 145watt on the HEDT CPUs) So I'm speaking strictly relative to their stock settings and thermal protection features of each platform.
Click to expand...

You could be right but, I am strictly speaking of the cpu only, not the platform which, I cannot disagree on that part. Folks have managed to kill the Intel processors with to much voltage well AMD's usually are near impossible to kill. (At least for my observations anyways.) It is a shame that the AMD platform was not more controlled since they had a really good setup back in the Athlon slot A days.

Speed step I would keep on but, I will have to look deeper because I do not recall the thermal protection setting being there. However, it may not make since to disable it anyways if the cpu is not throttling under normal heavy use.
 
ManofGod said:
You could be right but, I am strictly speaking of the cpu only, not the platform which, I cannot disagree on that part. Folks have managed to kill the Intel processors with to much voltage well AMD's usually are near impossible to kill. (At least for my observations anyways.) It is a shame that the AMD platform was not more controlled since they had a really good setup back in the Athlon slot A days.

Speed step I would keep on but, I will have to look deeper because I do not recall the thermal protection setting being there. However, it may not make since to disable it anyways if the cpu is not throttling under normal heavy use.
Click to expand...

I've only ever seen a half dozen or so Intel CPUs that have ever died for any reason. Overclocking included. They are and always have been difficult to kill. I've seen two or three times as many dead AMD CPUs over the years despite having worked with less of them overall.
 
Dan_D said:
I've only ever seen a half dozen or so Intel CPUs that have ever died for any reason. Overclocking included. They are and always have been difficult to kill. I've seen two or three times as many dead AMD CPUs over the years despite having worked with less of them overall.
Click to expand...

That is fine but then again, you probably do tend to push things harder than I do when it comes to overclocking. However, what did you think about leaving the thermal protection enabled for everything but stress testing? Thanks.
 
One wonky thing i have found with my board is that the USB likes to disable itself at POST. Had to reset CMOS (pull the battery) to get it to work again. No keyboard light until I was in windows. I ended up losing the ability to get into the bios when delete was hit. I made sure not to disable legacy USB or anything like that. The clr cmos pins didn't completely clear this setting. I had to pull the psu cable and pop out the battery.

Installing win 7 last night, i had to look up the gigabyte win 7 driver fix too. Apparently the win 7 USB drive I have been using for years does not have adequate drivers to install. Gigabyte's app was easy enough. Install the tool on another machine, plug in USB stick with win7 install on it, and run. Adds whatever is needed. No issues after.

Just a heads up for other that grab this board.
 
Well, it looks like I am going to be doing no more than 4.5 Ghz on this new chip. However, it does run a little faster than the other one at the same speeds since it is working correctly. The annoying thing is, whether LLC is high or auto, I end up with the same exact peak voltage and temps. The processor just does not have a stable, little to no vdroop spot on it.
 
Dan_D said:
I've only ever seen a half dozen or so Intel CPUs that have ever died for any reason. Overclocking included. They are and always have been difficult to kill. I've seen two or three times as many dead AMD CPUs over the years despite having worked with less of them overall.
Click to expand...

I've seen my first intel dead cpu, an i7-4660k. I delidded it, hammer and block method, 2 1/2 years ago. Now, it's totally dead. I suppose the one thing is related to the other.
 
ManofGod said:
That is fine but then again, you probably do tend to push things harder than I do when it comes to overclocking. However, what did you think about leaving the thermal protection enabled for everything but stress testing? Thanks.
Click to expand...

I tend to leave the Thermal protection enabled in most cases. Even on my test bench. The only time I turn if off if when I think a given configuration would be stable without it, and I need the extra headroom on the temps to get there. This is pretty rare outside of testing a brand new CPU I've never worked with before. Once I've got that CPU figured out, I don't need to push my luck with it. Once I learned my current test 6700K could do 4.8GHz @ DDR4 2666MHz or 4.7GHz @ DDR4 3600MHz (only on very few motherboards), I no longer needed to find it's limits.
 
I was able to successfully get to 4.7ghz, on my G170x gaming 7, with the following

Bios: F7g

Win 10 pro

Gskill F4 340016-8GTZ (2x8gb)
XMP profile (@3333, only XMP profile I could select)
CAS 16
tRCD 18
tRP 18
tRAS 38
CR 2

CPU core 1.350v
LLC High (CPUZ reports 1.334 @ idle 1.332 @ load)

Corsair H100i GTX

2x sandisk SSD plus, RAID 0

EVGA GTX 980ti Hybrid

EVGA 800w PSU

Tested with IBT on standard and high, 30 passes
ambient temp is 68f

 
Last edited:
Dan_D This board is reported to have a 12 phase power delivery. Does the Gaming 5 have the same amount of phases as this board? I can see the differences between this and the 5 on the surface but if its the same board under the hood for the most part I may just go grab a 5
 
The Gaming 5 has a better rear port payout, so at least it has that going for it.
 
I ended up going with the Gaming GT over the Gaming 7 because of the sale price. There doesn't really seem to be a lot of information about the differences between the two boards, and maybe I made a mistake not going with the exact board reviewed here, but so far I've had good luck with it. My new 6700k is hitting 4.4GHz with DDR4 2400 memory easily without much tweaking.
 
Well I have had my 6700k running extremely stable for 3 weeks now at 4.6 on my rig below, without too much tweaking.

I'm gonna do some tweaking this weekend & try for 4.7 and 4.8 :D
 
Last edited:
Just starting to gather the components for a new build and was wondering if anyone has found a southbridge waterblock that would fit? I contacted EK in the hopes the the M6F southbridge block would work but they stated it would not.
 
Did someone already use this motherboard under Linux with graphical desktop and knows if the MCDP2800 Chip is also recognized and supported?
So can you use HDIM 2.0 under Linux and bring 4K Resolution to the monitor device via Onboard Intel IGP chip?
 
mls1995 said:
I currently have an Asus Z170 Pro Gaming in an HTPC and also this board (Gigabyte Gaming 7). The Gigabyte is much better built IMO. This is my first Gigabyte board and I'm really impressed with it.

Oh and I started with an Asus Z170 ROG Gene board (which is essentially a mini hero) and the damn thing was DOA.
Click to expand...

Some people reported a sound issue with this board have you noticed anything like that?
 
hakstarr said:
Some people reported a sound issue with this board have you noticed anything like that?
Click to expand...

I ended up swapping the Gigabyte board for an Asus Deluxe. While I had the Gigabyte board I did not have sound issues but I'd recommend asking others.
 
I just got this board for a new build. I got some gskill trident 3200 memory and a 6700k for it. I loaded bios F7 first thing. I then enabled the X.M.P profile for my memory and it seemed to work ok but it didn't change my ddr voltage to 1.35, the bios reports it as 1.2 still under voltages. Also the X.M.P seems to have jacked up my cpu vcore to 1.3. Is this normal? Should I just disable xmp and tweak the memory manually (voltage and the four timings?)

edit: i loaded up beta bios 8d and it fixed the xmp profile settings. I also discovered that you just type in the settings you want, lol. But sometimes a space will toggle settings also. I was able to turn my cpu voltage back to normal and now i am experienting with overclocking a bit. So far this board seems really solid.

edit2: So far I like this board a lot. The onboard SoundBlaster "Recon3D" sounds quite good - that's a nice touch not to have to have a sound card. The addition of the Killer nic - I guess it's fine and I am using it but not sure it's helping a lot. I am not running many of the included Gigabyte software apps, only easytune and the one for the lights. I haven't used easytune really - I would rather OC from the bios. Having control of the lighting from windows is handy though.

Found this about the code, sometimes it's 'bF' and sometimes it's 'A0' - someone contacted Gigabyte and they said the following.
"Our team had checked with the Post code manufacture and this code correspond to the thunderbolt. By default it is enable in the bios and if you are not using any thunderbolt device it will show bF. Once you disable the Thunderbolt option it will be A0 when the OS boots which correspond to IDE initialization and will stay here as the board does not have any IDE controller."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top