[Overclockers.com]

EVGA has been a player in the motherboard game for quite some time now. With Intel's release of the Sandy Bridge-E CPU's came with it another chipset, Patsburg (X79). They have again brought to the table its usual lineup for this platform, the SLI (E775), FTW (E777), and the Classified (E779). Today we will look at the formidable FTW and see how it stacks up in the crowded X79 motherboard landscape.

... Return to article to continue reading.

[EarthDog]

A Special thanks goes out to Hokie who had the board initially and took all these incredible pictures.

Thanks!

[Brolloks]

Nice review Joe, I share your sentiments around the X79 boards being not run-ready, except for the RIVE (and MSI Xpower II) I tried most of them have issue out of the box.

The sooner Ivy Bridge come out and replace the SB platform the better, especially on the E version

[EarthDog]

It is the diamond in the rough, thats for sure. This board though with the 32 bios ran quite well... I hope to take it cold soon and break that 5.3Ghz mark...

[hokiealumnus]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

A Special thanks goes out to Hokie who had the board initially and took all these incredible pictures.

Thanks!

You're quite welcome. It was fun to do, this is a great looking board.

Great review!

[hokiealumnus]

Also, for anyone looking to purchase this one, EVGA just emailed and said BIOS 33 adds an OCP setting, so they continue to improve.

[EarthDog]

Thats good news... In initial bios they had some odd settings (as in nomenclature, something about 1/8A and 1/8W) but after the initial shipping bios, it disappeared.

[eduncan911]

Not being the troll, but speaker of the truth...

This board is awesome for CPU overclocking. Though others have pushed the Asus RIVE just a hair higher than this EVGA X79 FTW. As Joe mentions the 12 phases is well beyond what the 99% can even come close to using.

But this review missed out on a serious design flaw in EVGA's X79 motherboards - all of them. It is that they only support 32 lanes of PCI-E bandwidth, not the 40 lanes that all other X79 boards support (even the cheap $210 ones!). As a matter of fact, it seems this review completely skipped over any type of GPU performance with this board.

Here's the thread we have going over at EVGA:

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1369428&high=

In short, this board supports only the following configuration:

x16
x16 - x16
x16 - x8 - x8 (*design flaw)
x8 - x8 - x8 - x8 (*design flaw)

All other X79 platforms support:

x16
x16 - x16
x16 - x16 - x8
x16 - x8 - x8 - x8

Why is this a problem? For the 99% out there that have 2 or even 3 GPUs, this won't phase them what so ever. Even with the latency of the X58 chipsets of the PCI-E buses removed in the Sandy Bridge P67/Z68 chipsets, and now the X79, it's faster than we've seen before!

Yeah, they are fine with 3 or even 4 GPUs with their single montior and this board. Absolutely great game play!

Well, it's those 0.05% of people out there with 3 displays that are all pissed off here with EVGA. It is proven at Toms Hardware (and now with the X79) that "Only super-high resolutions are affected by x8 lanes". Well, guess what those of us with 3 monitors with 2D Vision and 3D Vision Surround have? A resolution of nearly twice that of the 30" large displays: 5760x1080 resolutions.

I'm still in the middle of building my X79 Asus RIVE system, of which I will test once and for all the difference of x16-x16-x8 and x16-x8-x8 by installing a dummy card in the 4th slot to downgrade the 2nd x16 slot to x8. I suspect this is where my 'stuttering' came from during high frame rates in the system I had (3-way 580s on X58 platform, x16-x8-x8). I'll also test x16-x16 and x16-x8 modes as well.

Also, it seems this review skipped over some of the other issues with this board, such as the placement of those dip switches in regards to a large dual-slot GPU that would block those dip switches, making it hard to get to. And the fact that this board is overly priced compared to what little you get.


And lastly, EVGA had QA issues with these boards being shipped with no CPU cover, which voids the warranty. After removing the shrinkwrap to inspect my X79 for the missing CPU cover, and returning it unopened (only the shrinkwrap removed), I was promptly charged a $60 "restocking fee" as well - for removing the shrink wrapping of the outside of the box, to make sure the motherboard did not have THEIR QA flaw!

Yeah, EVGA left a bad taste in my mouth for the first, and last, motherboard I bought of theirs. I am posting to make sure others are aware as well. EVGA is a great American company and I'll continue to buy into their GPUs.

[Eldonko]

Nice job on the review m8. Looks like a lot of issues with it, similar to what I saw when I reviewed P67 FTW. They still havent figured out how to get USB 3.0 to work on that board!

Still using that old black BIOS, tri-sli doesnt work as it should, bios issues galore. $300 maybe but $400? Havent tested myself but what from what Ive read and seen in reviews it wouldnt be getting an award from me.

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by eduncan911

Not being the troll, but speaker of the truth...

This board is awesome for CPU overclocking. Though others have pushed the Asus RIVE just a hair higher than this EVGA X79 FTW. As Joe mentions the 12 phases is well beyond what the 99% can even come close to using.

But this review missed out on a serious design flaw in EVGA's X79 motherboards - all of them. It is that they only support 32 lanes of PCI-E bandwidth, not the 40 lanes that all other X79 boards support (even the cheap $210 ones!). As a matter of fact, it seems this review completely skipped over any type of GPU performance with this board.

Here's the thread we have going over at EVGA:

http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1369428&high=

In short, this board supports only the following configuration:

x16
x16 - x16
x16 - x8 - x8 (*design flaw)
x8 - x8 - x8 - x8 (*design flaw)

All other X79 platforms support:

x16
x16 - x16
x16 - x16 - x8
x16 - x8 - x8 - x8

Why is this a problem? For the 99% out there that have 2 or even 3 GPUs, this won't phase them what so ever. Even with the latency of the X58 chipsets of the PCI-E buses removed in the Sandy Bridge P67/Z68 chipsets, and now the X79, it's faster than we've seen before!

Yeah, they are fine with 3 or even 4 GPUs with their single montior and this board. Absolutely great game play!

Well, it's those 0.05% of people out there with 3 displays that are all pissed off here with EVGA. It is proven at Toms Hardware (and now with the X79) that "Only super-high resolutions are affected by x8 lanes". Well, guess what those of us with 3 monitors with 2D Vision and 3D Vision Surround have? A resolution of nearly twice that of the 30" large displays: 5760x1080 resolutions.

I'm still in the middle of building my X79 Asus RIVE system, of which I will test once and for all the difference of x16-x16-x8 and x16-x8-x8 by installing a dummy card in the 4th slot to downgrade the 2nd x16 slot to x8. I suspect this is where my 'stuttering' came from during high frame rates in the system I had (3-way 580s on X58 platform, x16-x8-x8). I'll also test x16-x16 and x16-x8 modes as well.

Also, it seems this review skipped over some of the other issues with this board, such as the placement of those dip switches in regards to a large dual-slot GPU that would block those dip switches, making it hard to get to. And the fact that this board is overly priced compared to what little you get.


And lastly, EVGA had QA issues with these boards being shipped with no CPU cover, which voids the warranty. After removing the shrinkwrap to inspect my X79 for the missing CPU cover, and returning it unopened (only the shrinkwrap removed), I was promptly charged a $60 "restocking fee" as well - for removing the shrink wrapping of the outside of the box, to make sure the motherboard did not have THEIR QA flaw!

Yeah, EVGA left a bad taste in my mouth for the first, and last, motherboard I bought of theirs. I am posting to make sure others are aware as well. EVGA is a great American company and I'll continue to buy into their GPUs.

*Overclockers.com, at this point in time, does not review GPU performance on motherboards. Does any site do this?

*The issue you found is significant for a rare few and is an apparent oversight on my part. I did not see that thread at Evga, but now in thinking about it, I remember something you posted here. I recall you saying they lied about their setup but it was clear on the website (again IIRC) and at newegg that there were only the 32 lanes available for w/e reason. So though you may be correct, EVGA didnt mislead anyone it seems by the listed specs. The CSR you dealt with however, is another story. So I understand the frustration your personally have.

The part that I am most disappointed in is the lack of an explanation from EVGA on why it isnt utilizing all lanes.

*A GPU of any size (does not matter if dual/tri sized would be partially on top of the DIP switches. Its length covers it not width as a single slot cooler would cover it just the same a dual/triple. Which, for the record, only the 5th switch has something on top of it. That said, I had no trouble reaching it with a screwdriver with a full sized GPU on it, which with my hands, I had to do anyway to switch them around as they are pretty small. Other companies use larger switches and they are easier to flip and better positioned. It was essentially a non issue to me however. I can see how some would want larger switches.

*As far as the QA problems and no CPU cover, this didnt happen with my sample, nor have I seen a mention of it on forums. I didnt look for it either... and maybe I should have. Maybe. This seems like an oversight with QA I suppose, but who knows how many people it happened to? My sample arrived OK. Sorry you got charged for that, it doesnt seem right and I certainly would have fought that issue. Its been a while since I bought any mobo through a store.. I had no idea they shrink wrapped boards.

* The bios is now fixed, so how I can fault them outside of what was mentioned several times in the article? Every other company outside of maybe Asus and the RIVE had significant bios/board issues too and were dinged accordingly for it. This was no different than the rest IMO.


Thank you for your frank input on the article and heads up on the PCIe shortcomings for this series board.

[eduncan911]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

*Overclockers.com, at this point in time, does not review GPU performance on motherboards. Does any site do this?

Excellent point.

Originally Posted by EarthDog

*The issue you found is significant for a rare few and is an apparent oversight on my part. I did not see that thread at Evga, but now in thinking about it, I remember something you posted here. I recall you saying they lied about their setup but it was clear on the website (again IIRC) and at newegg that there were only the 32 lanes available for w/e reason. So though you may be correct, EVGA didnt mislead anyone it seems by the listed specs. The CSR you dealt with however, is another story. So I understand the frustration your personally have.

The part that I am most disappointed in is the lack of an explanation from EVGA on why it isnt utilizing all lanes.

They state it was the design of the product.

I'm hoping their next LGA2011 socket that supports the Ivy Bridge-E chipset will support all 40+ lanes.

Originally Posted by EarthDog

*A GPU of any size (does not matter if dual/tri sized would be partially on top of the DIP switches. Its length covers it not width as a single slot cooler would cover it just the same a dual/triple. Which, for the record, only the 5th switch has something on top of it. That said, I had no trouble reaching it with a screwdriver with a full sized GPU on it, which with my hands, I had to do anyway to switch them around as they are pretty small. Other companies use larger switches and they are easier to flip and better positioned. It was essentially a non issue to me however. I can see how some would want larger switches.

Yeah, try to reach them in my tight non-EATX case that squeezes in an EATX motherboard.

Originally Posted by EarthDog

*As far as the QA problems and no CPU cover, this didnt happen with my sample, nor have I seen a mention of it on forums. I didnt look for it either... and maybe I should have. Maybe. This seems like an oversight with QA I suppose, but who knows how many people it happened to?

It seemed to only the first batch or two that they shipped.

Originally Posted by EarthDog

My sample arrived OK. Sorry you got charged for that, it doesnt seem right and I certainly would have fought that issue. Its been a while since I bought any mobo through a store.. I had no idea they shrink wrapped boards.

As of this moment, EVGA has contacted me and resolved the issue completely. Yeah, their support does rule over any company I've used.

They have put my faith back into their customer service after the past 3 months in a black hole. I will be buying EVGA again, as their customer service rules. (Is that a 180 or what?!?!)

[EarthDog]

It seemed to only the first batch or two that they shipped.

I just read the thread you linked... not sure how you came to that conclusion (batches) with the information there, but, I digress. Oh well.....lets move on. Thanks again for pointing out the actual configuration of this motherboard vs Intel available lanes on the CPU.

[IJAHman]

Great review as always!

[horse head]

This review is not a real honest one.

The conclusion also tells me that the reviewer was trying to make the EVGA X79 MB look good, when in fact it is a poorly developed MB that has many problems and could never come close to competing with ASUS, Gigabyte, ASRock, and MSi.

Have reason to believe this review was setup by EVGA (Maybe EVGA through a little money at someone?). Why? EVGA is having serious issues when it comes to MB sales. Someone needs to tell EVGA if they want to increase sales, then they should make an MB that actually works right.

The EVGA X79 MBs are having all kind of weird reliability problems. Way too many! Just visit the EVGA forums and see all the problems the EVGA X79 line-up of MBs have. EVGA even shipped MBs with missing parts and QC tags still attached to them, some even came with bent pins.

It would be gratefully appreciated if Overclock.com removed the EVGA X79 review and replaced it with a more honest one. Because there is know way a good reviewer would recommend the EVGA X79 MBs in there current form/function-able state!

[EarthDog]

This review is not a real honest one.

The conclusion also tells me that the reviewer was trying to make the EVGA X79 MB look good, when in fact it is a poorly develop MB that has many problems and could never come close to competing with ASUS, Gigabyte, ASRock, and MSi.

Have reason to believe this review was setup by EVGA (Maybe EVGA through a little money at someone?). Why? EVGA is having serious issues when it comes to MB sales. Someone needs to tell EVGA if they want to increase sales, and then they should make an MB that actually works right.

The EVGA X79 MBs are having all kind of weird reliability problems. Way too many! Just visit the EVGA forums and see all the problems the EVGA X79 line-up of MBs have. EVGA even ship MBs with missing parts and QC tags still attached to them, some even came with bent pins.

It would be gratefully appreciated if Overclock.com removed the EVGA X79 review and replaced it with a more honest one. Because there is know way a good reviewer would recommend the EVGA X79 MBs in there current form/function-able state!

Horsehead... Thank you for your input. I am the author.

This review was in no way setup by EVGA outside of them sending us the motherboard to review, which is how ALL sites receive samples. I was completely honest in my assessment of the product and noted multiple problems with their PREVIOUS bios versions throughout the review.

In no way what-so-ever was this influenced by the vendor. I stand 100% behind my assertion that with the latest bios release (32 and on) the board is stable and I experienced no problems outside of memory incompatibility (which happens with some sticks on all boards - for example, my Asrock Extreme4-M wouldnt run my quad ch sticks but ran my dual ch).

I have seen some issues with boards at the EVGA site when writing the review. However I did not see a trend that wasnt fixed with a new bios (lots of memory issues like I reported) or reliability issues. I will also mention I saw issues with Asrock boards, and Giga boards at their website too. No board is perfect and as is the norm, people go to forums for help with problems so you will always see more issues with boards on forums.

Im sorry you are soured with these motherboards/EVGA. I will tell you in no way will this review be pulled as I stand behind my results and experience 100%.

Thank you again for your input.

EDIT: Let me share something with you in regards to MSI and and a Giga board. I had a Gigabyte UD7 die on me during testing. Have you seen gigabyte's recall on their bios's to fix that issue (which at the time wasnt known as an issue)? Did you know we had a MSI X79 board that NEVER worked after weeks of trying and bios updates? So lets not hold up other vendors up on a pedestal as they have issues as well.

[hokiealumnus]

I'm not going to comment on the rest of your post, the author did that already, but this...

Originally Posted by horse head

Have reason to believe this review was setup by EVGA (Maybe EVGA through a little money at someone?).

...needs to be addressed. You need to come up with some sort of proof or something to back up your claim or you need to move on and troll somewhere else. This is insulting to the author and to this site (which, by the way, is Overclockers.com, not Overclock.com).

When you can properly say the name of our web site and speak without making baseless accusations, feel free to come back and post. You can complain about the quality of the review if you feel the urge. You can state your opinion on the board (it's plain to see you have an axe to grind), no problem. However, you may not come here accusing our authors of taking payouts.

Come on man, listen to yourself. You really think EVGA would attempt to pay off a person/site to say moderately decent things about their motherboard? Perhaps you have a good recommendation where I can get some quality tin foil hats too? What if the same were said about you? Perhaps you were paid by another manufacturer to come and say that about the EVGA review. To any person with half a brain that sounds absurd, implausible and just plain ridiculous...which, sir, is exactly how you sound.

[horse head]

EarthDog...


There is no difference between quad channel memory kits and dual channel memory kits. Hopefully you’re not one of those people that think you have to buy a 4 stick (Quad) pack over 2 dual or singles! Also, memory compatibility problems are normal (Not all memory options available will work in all MBs). EVGA's MBs have more than memory compatibility.

Also, the new EVGA BIOS that was just released has quite a few problems and has brought up a new USB surge problem and you still have to disable onboard options or not use those ports to get the MB stable.

See, Gigabyte, MSi, and others have had problems, but they fixed them. EVGA has done nothing but release half baked UEFI BIOS updates that just break something else.

EVGA's x79 MB problems are continuous. ASRock, Gigabyte, and MSi problems are not continuous. Why don't you look around and see what the 1# X79 MB recommendations are from people and other review sites.

The simple fact is your review is really bad. It is no better than a simple manufactures review of a new product.

It is clear the EVGA X79 MBs are not ready for the main-stream and should be put on hold to the problems are solved.

To make matters worse, EVGA will charge a restocking fee if you wish to return a defected MB. Even after receiving 3 MBs that all had the same problems and could not be solved by EVGA.

EVGA is a nickel and dime company, they will blood you dry and kick you to the curve when you ask for a real solution, other than RMA’ing an MB every time a problem arises.

Why didn’t EVGA send x79 MBs to a more than one site that would do a more in-depth review of the MB? ASUS, Gigabyte, ASRock, MSi and other seem to have no problem sending out multiple test samples and they do it before or at launch.

Guess no one told you that ASRock supersedes EVGA in sales by hundreds in the MB market. Wonder why that is…

Face it, EVGA knows they got a brick! The ultimate paperweight is here, the EVGA X79 MB…

[hokiealumnus]

Like I said (and is painfully obvious), you have an axe to grind. We get it, you don't like EVGA. You had bad experience(s) and want to tell the world. Fine, you've shared your two cents. You disagree with the review. You think the board is a fail, he does not. It's a disagreement, quit harping on it. Now that you've had your say, please cease insulting the reviewer.

I also deleted your response to my post, which continues to accuse of payoffs.

You've said your piece. Move on before you get yourself in trouble.

[Brolloks]

Horse Head. I am really baffled at how/why you are lashing out at the reviewer here, in fact you are attacking all the reviewers and the site as a whole. Not sure what your real gripe is but you are one sad individual.

[EarthDog]

There is no difference between quad channel memory kits and dual channel memory kits. Hopefully you’re not one of those people that think you have to buy a 4 stick (Quad) pack over 2 dual or singles! Also, memory compatibility problems are normal (Not all memory options available will work in all MBs). EVGA's MBs have more than memory compatibility.

You missed the point. I was just noting memory incompatibility....across that EVGA board and others.

Also, the new EVGA BIOS that was just released has quite a few problems and has brought up a new USB surge problem and you still have disable onboard options or not use those ports to get the MB stable.

I dont. And I use USB2 and USB3 devices... plugged in at 4.8Ghz for testing! With a USB KB/Mouse even! No signs of the ports dropping or spiking on this specific FTW.

See, Gigabyte, MSi, and others have had problems, but they fixed them. EVGA has done nothing but release half baked UEFI BIOS updates that just break something else.

Again, it fixed the problems I had.

EVGA's x79 MB problems are continuous. ASRock, Gigabyte, and MSi problems are not continuous. Why don't you look around and see what the 1# X79 MB recommendations are from people and other review sites.

I did not mention that this was a preferred board over the same, just approved.

The simple fact is your review is really bad. It is know better than a simple manufactures review of a new product.

First, its 'no' not 'know' . Second, I and many others disagree with your opinion on this review. Some did not like the price for what you get and I understand that. All I know is after a couple of bios' the board works 100% for me. No bad USB ports, no overclocking issues (matched my giga!)...just a single memory compatibility problem, which again, is across all boards in some form or another.

It is clear the EVGA X79 MBs are not ready for the main-stream and should be put on hold to the problems are solved.

My sample and the bios I used is. That is my testing not what others have experienced. Its not a bios recall like gigabyte which is a WAY worse issue IMO. Or a board that NEVER worked and STILL doesnt work (its not even on the market anymore that I can see in fact).

To make matters worse, EVGA will charge a restocking fee if you wish to return a defected MB. Even after receiving 3 MBs that all had the same problems and could not be solved by EVGA.

Now we finally have something we agree upon. EVGA shouldnt charge a restocking fee for a borked mobo. I see eduncan had a similar issue, but what is peculiar about that is no motherboards I know of are wrapped in shrink wrap when new so that story doesnt make sense.

EVGA is a nickel and dime company, they will blood you dry and kick you to the curve when you ask for a real solution, other than RMA’ing an MB every time a problem arises.

Not sure what to say here. I have never had to RMA an EVGA motherboard, they all worked fine.

Why didn’t EVGA send x79 MBs to a more than one site that would do a more in-depth review of the MB? ASUS, Gigabyte, ASRock, MSi and other seem to have no problem sending out multiple test samples and they do it before or at launch.

I cant help that we have a good relationship with EVGA due to meeting the people at CES (which a lot of sites do), and having enough traffic to warrant them seeding us a board. Im not sure why other sites didnt get one. But again I assure you that I, scratch that, WE at overclockers.com are not shills for ANY vendor. If I was you, I wouldnt mention that again without any proof... at this point I am considering your words slander/libel since its wholey unsupported.

Guess no one told you that ASRock supersedes EVGA in sales by hundreds in the MB market. Wonder why that is…

I guess I could care less about who is selling more boards. The fact is Asrock NOW makes some quality boards, and most of them are cheaper than the others. Most people worth a lick also dont NEED a board like this in the first place. Least we forget that they have around 6 boards in their lineup one of which starts UNDER $200...So its a cheap in to a very expensive platform.

Face it, EVGA knows they got a brick! The ultimate paperweight is here, the EVGA X79 MB.

You are entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine...at least however, I have support for my assertions. I have no problems standing 100% behind the results I achieved and experience I had with the board.


EDIT: Crap team.. sorry, I didnt see the replies come in as I was drafting this...